Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Council Actions 10-29-01 WkSes
R O~4NOKE CITY CO UNCIL W~ORK SESSION OCTOBER 29, 2001 12:15 P. M. EMERGENCY OPERA TIONS CENTER CONFERENCE ROOM AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL 1. Call to Order--Roll Call. 0 0 Designation of Neighborhood for Concentrated Improvements. Wildlife Management. Discussion of Major Initiatives in the Outlook Roanoke Plan. 0 First Street Bridge Elmwood Park (future use) E-Town Jefferson Center area Church Avenue infrastructure Other items I1B 0 0 6 IIIm 0 0 ~m 0 0 0 ~ 0 1'Wildlife lnformtion'publlc~a~on ~N0,~99,1 ~.~'~. i; ~.~" - ~- ' ~ · ~:,~ ~._.....--. Deer ::Management .Plan. ~- ~--.,' , --: . ~ . ~, . :~.~. ,, , : .., - ... Wildlife DivisiOn virginia Department. Of. Game and-inland Fisheries 58 WILDLIFE INFORMATION PUBLICATION No. 99-1 ,'lawless" (1), more deer kill illegally than legally in Halifax (1), and illegal activity common and accepted practice (Page) (1), stress ethics (1), and have cased gun law statewide (1) Education Comments In general education comments.----Need to promote food value of deer (1) Appendix IX. Draft proactive strategies text for addressing urban deer management issues. Application For the VDGIF to actively participate in suburban/urban deer management problems and/or authorize depopulation activities, a written request from the local governing body to the Department will be required. This would include, but not necessarily be limited to, County Boards of Supervisors, City Councils or their Managers, Homeowner Associations and/or Community organizations. Pursuant to receiving a written request for assistance with urban/suburban deer management, the Department will assign the local District Wildlife Biologist as the Department's official contact/spokesman. This staff member will be responsible for all Department responsibilities and duties related to the citizen's task force (CTF). Methodology Suggested Approach.----To address suburban/urban deer problems, a local citizen's task force (CTF) is suggested. The CTF's responsibility is to recommend a deer population objective and the management option/strategies required to achieve the population objective. Additionally, the CTF should develop a time line for implementation of any recommended management action and identify the parties responsible for implementation of the recommendations. Developing, administering, and funding the CTF will be the obligation of the local governing body. CTF meetings should be administered by an independent, trained facilitator. All community stakeholders, not to include government officials, should be included. One representative should represent each stakeholder group. The Department will assign a local Wildlife Biologist to serve as a liaison/technical advisor to the CTF. Department staff will not serve as an active CTF member. In many cases, it may be desirable and/or necessary to initiate a random survey to determine the local public's knowledge of deer ecology and the community's perception of the current deer population and attitudes towards different deer management options. Population Objectives 1. Increase Population 2. Stabilize Population 3. Decrease Population Management Options Lethal 1. Regulated hunting 2. Trap and kill 3. Sharpshooters VIRGINIA DEER MANAGEMENT PLAN 59 Nonlethal 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Allow nature to take its course (status quo) Trap and transfer Abatement techniques (fencing and repellents) Fertility control Supplemental feeding Predator reintroduction The following outline identifies the suggested steps to resolve an urban deer management issue using a Citizen Task Force (CTF): Suggested CTF approach for urban/suburban deer management in Virginia 1. Select stakeholder groups, facilitator, and technical advisors. 2. Send out invitation letters and background information to CTF members and technical advisors. 3. Initial CTF meeting: background and issue identification. 4. Send meeting notice and minutes. 5. Second CTF meeting: prioritize issues and gather additional information. 6. Send meetings notice and minutes. 7. Third and subsequent CTF meetings: build consensus on issues and work towards recommendations on population objective and management option(s). 8. Send meetings notice and minutes. 9. CTF recommendations finalized and officially forwarded to governing entity. 10. Recommen~dations implemented (if approved by governing entity). 11. Monitor/evaluate management recommendations implemented (revise recommendations by consensus as needed). Adapted from: Stout, R. J. and B. A. Knuth. 1994. Evaluation of a citizen task force approach to resolve suburban deer management issues. Hum. Dimensions Res. Unit Publ. 94-3, Dep. Nat. Resour., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, N.Y. 164pp. Appendix X. Management of urban deer populations with contraceptives: practicality and agency concerns. Acknowledgement Management of urban deer populations with contraceptives: practicality and agency concerns was co-authored by Robert J. Warren and Lisa M. White, of the Daniel B. Warnell School of Forest Resources, The University of Georgia, and William R. Lance, Wildlife Laboratories, Inc. Originally presented at the Urban Deer Management Symposium held at the 55th Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference, this article was published in 1995. The citation is as follows: Warren, R. J., L. M. White, and W. R. Lance. 1995. Management of urban deer populations with contraceptives: practicality and agency concerns. Pages 164-170 in J. B. McAninch, ed. Urban deer: a manageable resource? Proc. of the 1993 Symp. North Central Sect., Wildl. Soc., St Louis, MO. Outlook Roanoke Update September 2001 Comments, 'observations and suggestions by: E. Duane Howard October 29, 2001 A Vision for the Next Five Years (Page 5) "The new Carilion Biomedical Institute that will extend from the Roanoke river and Victory Stadium site all the way to Elm" That theme should be followed with unimpeded greenway through Elmwood Park and Martin Luther King, Jr., Plaza aH the way to Franklin Rd., without Bullitt Ave. cutting it into and the resulting loss of precious green space. Initiatives (Page 6) "Roanoke has been successful in building on its strengths and fmd ways of bringing individual, locally based efforts together to create a whole that is greater than the sum of its two parts" Then why split Elmwood into two parts, the greater sum of two parts, bringing traffic through this established green space, does not in anyway promote greater strengths in a successful downtown renewal. Frameworks (Page 7) "We recommend improving and creating a series of fi'amework which will inter- connect more effectively the parts of downtown. Continue the process of enhancing the pedestrian experience on the streets of downtown." Cutting Bullitt Avenue through Eimwood Park disconnects the flow of green space bringing people from the Biomed park, employees and patients, headed toward the Market area, Center in the Square, Restaurants and to do business High Technology Businesses "Creating a 24 hour city" The *Star* attraction of a vibrant 24 hour city should include 24 hour access to one of our greatest attractions. This can be achieved through security patrol and other means. Under new guide lines just passed by the newly formed Homeland Security Task Force, Government aide may be available to cover part, if not, ali of the added expense for providing for security. The Planning Process, Overview (Page 10) "The issues addressed in the plan include the lack of a flexible first-class library, limited public open space,vacant storefronts, etc. and disconnected places and" Again we see the word DISCONNECT used once again in its negative connotation! Disconnecting Elmwood Park with a road through it, based on this plan, is a step backwards of the over all promotion of this plan that promotes CONNECTING, not disconnecting as in extending Bullitt Ave. Summary of Interviews and Focus Groups (Page 13) "Their visions included a new central library, a first-class park, improved connections to the neighborhoods and the mountains" Here again, we see First Class Park and connections in the same sentence! Another example of why we should not disconnect Elmwood Park with a road. III Good Things/Bad Things (Page 14) "Strengths", "History", "Heritage of Norfolk Southern RR" With Elmwood Park being one of the five major components of this plan we need to capitalize and promote the rich history of Elmwood and its historical significance tied to downtown Roanoke. The railroad terminus secured their in 1881 should all be tied into the historical background of the Railroad and Roanoke. Elmwood Park Initiative (Page 30) "Major additions and renovations were made to the park in the 1980s, including the successful creation of a festival performance area and a LINK, the Magnolia Walk, to the Market Square." That was a $750,000.00 project and we now are going to BREAK that LINK? The extension of Bullitt Avenue would do that! With Elmwoods re-development, a plan should be to take advantage and promote its historical tie into the railroad, (as noted by the present State Marker already on the site) The plan should note the site of the original home which became our first library, the contributions of the prominent occupants of Emwood and their contributions to the building of early downtown. The The Mayor's monument and the historic flag pole are two other often over looked historical sites within Elmwood. The plan should capitalize on Eimwoods rich historical past by using it as an economical tool to attract visitors, tourist and residents CONNECTING it to all of our former historical sites. The Market, Center in the Square, (History Museum) Hotel Roanoke, Rail Walk to the Transportation Museum, Jefferson Center, just as we now use some of these former great landmarks from our past to our economical advantage, so should Elmwood be used with its future renovation. North and East Side Development Sites (Page 31 ) "We recommend extending Bullitt Avenue to Williamson Road, thereby further defining the park and connecting it to the downtown network" One can see the premise of this thought and potential future need for down- town traffic flow. But, don't act on the, "if we build it they will come", let the developement around the park materialize first, then evaluate traffice flow, patterns and congestion and then if extending Bullitt Avenue is absolutely essential to the economical well being of downtown, then and only then consider extending it. Page 31, (7) "Once the park and its relationship to streets is improved," Viewed as a contradictory statement. Slicing the park with a road does not improve its relationship to streets. Page 31, (8) "While in the greater interest of developing a world-class park, the design of the Bullitt Ave. extension should be sensitive to the impact which it will have upon the existing Magnolia Walk and could be sealed off to through traffic during performances or festivals." What is being said here? Its okay to cut off my leg, just be sensitive about it: Why disrupt traffic flow patterns when we have so many events that would require the road to be closed. If ever the phrase, "if it ain't broke, why fix it" applied, it is certainly in this case. The plan makes its own argument for not extending Builitt Avenue! Page 32, Bottom, Option B "On the fu'st and second floor of a new office tower on the motel site." In reference to relocating the library. By relocating the library and opening up more green space in Elmwood Park would truly be in the right direction of a world class park. This would further enhance the plans over all goals of providing for green space in a vibrant downtown, providing for residents, workers, tourist, to use this park on the level of greatness as Central Park is to New York City. "A walk through the Eimwood Park of the future, should be an educational walk through our past" Roanoke, Virginia Outlook Roanoke Update Prepared by u R B A N D E S I G N A S S 0 C I A T E S FINAL DRAFT Prepared for Downtown Roanoke, Inc. September 2ooi Table of Contents Acknowledgements Outlook Roanoke: The First Five Years and its Impacts Executive Summary t A Vision for the Next Five Years The Planning Process Overview Summary of Interviews and Focus Groups Good Things / Bad Things Market Strategies Economic Development Strategies n Residential Strategies Retail and Entertainment Strategies I7 The Master Plan A Bundle of Strategies 27 Initiative ~Ireas and Opportunities Elmwood Park Initiative Il Church Avenue Initiative IIi E-To~vn Initiative The Market Initiative v Jefferson Center Initiative 29 Frameworks Streets n Trails Transit & Parking 46 Appendices Otnder separate cover) Residential, Retail & Entertainment Market Strategies, New Jersey State Building Code (available from DRI, Inc. under seperate cover), A Study on the Relationship of 2-Way Streets to Healthy Retail, and 1997 Jefferson Center Area Master Plan Outlook Roanoke Update Acknowledgements Steering Committee Evelyn Bethel Mike Brennan David Diaz Elizabeth Doughty Billie DiMeglio Elaine Frantz Maryellen Goodlatte Susan Jennings Evelyn Lander Vernice Law Robert Manetta Mark McConnel Tom McKeon Bob Micheaux Debbie Moses Chris Muse Elizabeth Neu Christine Proflit Richard Rife Jim Sears Bill Skeen Tony Stavola Katherine Strickland Michael YValdvogel Mike ~,Varner Organizational Support City of Roanoke Downtown Roanoke, Inc. Roanoke Higher Education Center Patrick Henry Hotel BB&T of Virginia ConsultantTeam Urban Design Associates Hill Studio, P.c. Nottingham and Associates, Inc. Zimmerman/Volk Associates, Inc. Financial support provided by: City of Roanoke, Virginia Ralph Smith Mayor Darlene Burcham City &lanager Downtown Roanoke, Inc. Maryellen Goodlatte Chair Matt Kennell President Foreword Outlook Roanoke Update Outlook Roanoke: The First Five Years and Its Impacts The Roanoke Hig&~r Education Center 'rue ou'rl. OO~: ~o^r~o~e Master Plan developed in 1997 set tbrth a series of initiatives for developing and reinvigorating Downtown Roanoke. As we prepare for the next phase of Downtown development initiatives with this Master Plan Update, it seems appropriate to take a moment to acknowledge the progress that's been made to date on the efforts proposed in the original plan. These fall within six overall categories. Rebuilding Gateways The proposed improvements on Williamson Road, between Campbell Avenue and Franklin Road, have been completed, as have the improvements to the Second Street Bridge. Reconnectin9 City Streets The linear rail walk between Market Street and First Street has been completed as far as InSystems and will eventually extend to the Virginia Museum of Transportation. The Williamson Road Bridge has been reconstructed and improved to provide better pedestrian access between downtown and the Civic Center. Two-way traffic has been implemented along the entire length of Salem Avenue and on Campbell Avenue from Second Street west. . ~ ; ~ x , s , ..... ' , ~ Outlook Roanoke Update Defining City Places District logos are being used on maps and publications. Future plans call for street signs that will define the Rail, Market, and Jefferson (Jefferson Center to Jefferson Street) districts for pedes- trian and vehicular traffic. The Rail District The Roanoke Higher Education Center, located in the GOB North Building, is meeting with great success. Over 2,600 students are enrolled in classes offered by 16 institutions of higher learning and workforce training. A Seattle's Best Caf~ is also located in the building. In the for- mer GOB South Building, 87 market- rate apartments are currently under construction with occupancy planned ~br spring, 2002. A new 370-space parking deck is under construction on the site of the N &'~V Records Building adjacent to GOB South. This garage will be com- pleted in November, 2001. The tbrmer N &¥V Passenger Station is now owned by Center in the Square and plans are underway for it to house an O. Winston Link Gallery and Regional Visitors Cen- ter. The City of Roanoke has also desig- nated this building as the site tbr a future passenger rail terminal. InSystems has moved its U.S. head- quarters into a former grocery warehouse on the eastern end of Warehouse Row. This headquarters employs approxi- mately 100 technology workers. Downtown Living Six additional upper story apartments have been completed in the downtown core. New dormitory space for Mill Mountain Theatre actors has been cre- ated in the former Shenandoah Hotel building. A formerly vacant 20-unit apartment building has been extensively renovated and is fully leased at market rates at the intersection of Elm Avenue and First Street. Regional Marketing and Community Investment The regional Economic Development Coalition, tbunded by DRI, is an ad hoc group pursuing a regional strategy for economic development - meeting regu- larly and marketing the region in a coor- dinated manner. Outlook Roanoke Update Executive Summary Outlook Roanoke U~odate I A Vision for the Next Five Years A .vision for Elmwood Park riVE YEARS AGO, during the Outlook Roanoke planning process, participants told us that the Market was a great success and was in fact perceived by many to be Downtown Roanoke. But, the energy and vitality of the Market stopped at Jefferson Street. The goal at that time was to emend the vitality beyond Jefferson. During this Master Plan Update process, the mes- sage we've received has been the same. The Market is the strong area and it has extended north across the tracks to the Roanoke Higher Education Center, but the vitality still stops at Jefferson Street. Therefore, Jefferson has become the focus of this Update. It is the north-south connection that links many of the key parts of downtown: The new Carillon Biomedical Institute that will extend from the Roanoke river and Victory Stadium site all the way to Elm Avenue; The library and Elmwood Park; Church Avenue, the most pedestrian-oriented east-west street that links the Market and Williamson Road with City Hall and Jefferson Center; Campbell and Salem Avenues and the tracks with their collections of underutilized, but useful, buildings; and The Higher Education Center north of the tracks. Following a brief synopsis of the planning process, this Update presents the market strategies which emerged from the research and the charrette and details the bundle of strategies that provide the fbundation fbr the initiatives proposed in this Master Plan Update. Outlook Roanoke U,~date Five initiative areas have been identi- fied. Three of these initiatives straddle Jefferson; the other two are placed on linkages to it. They all build on Jefferson Street's potential as a means of linking separate efforts into a coherent strategy for revitalizing the areas west of Jefferson and integrating them with the Market. Initiatives Roanoke has been successfial in building on its strengths and finding ways of bringing individual, locally based effbrts together to create a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. The Market is a case in point. Building on its architec- tural character and its traditional role as a center for food, the Market became the anchor for a wide range of new uses that bundle restaurants, entertainment, and arts activities into a driving force that can support sustainable economic develop- ment in downtown Roanoke. This Update uses that same bundling concept to create a series of fbcal points around which a number of different activities and developments can be organized. Private effbrts, along with public improvements and public/private partnerships have been formulated into five primary initiatives: Elmwood Park Initiative Church Avenue Initiative 3 E-Town Initiative at The Market Initiative $ Jefferson Center Initiative Architectural Character The goal of new development is to rebuild the urban fabric of downtown Roanoke and to create safe and attractive streets and public spaces. The perspective sketches illustrating the initiatives should serve as a guideline for the design of these new buildings. The architectural character of the buildings is based on tra- ditional buildings in downtown Roanoke in order to provide harmony between new and old and to ensure attractive public spaces. The buildings all have a large proportion of their facades as win- dows, including box windows and bays, which are essential to providing sate and congenial urban spaces. Although build- ing heights vary, they are no less than three stories and no more than ten. Building Codes and Revitalization Several of the initiatives include the adaptive re-use of vacant downtown buildings and the vacant upper floors of commercial buildings. Although Roanoke has adopted BOCA, a code which includes provisions fbr construc- tion in historic structures, there is still a need to encourage more flexibility in code interpretation, especially as pertains to encouraging better use of second and third stories. We recommend that the City investigate how codes in other localities have been successfial in doing so, particularly the New Jersey State Code (included in the Appendices to this Update), as part of an efibrt to encourage the re-use of these buildings. Outlook Roanoke Update Frameworks In order to support each of these initia- fives, we recommend improving and cre- ating a series of frameworks which will interconnect more ef[~ctively the parts of downtown. The frameworks are designed to: Continue the process of enhancing the pedestrian experience on the streets of downtown. · Support and extend the system of bikeways and trails that link the parts of downtown to each other, to neigh- borhoods, and to the region's remark- able recreational amenities. · Link the key uses of downtown to parking and to each other via a trol- ley or shuttle system. · Initiate a parking management and development strategy. An Entrepreneurial Planning Strategy These initiatives and the frameworks were developed in response to changing market conditions and opportunities. Downtown Housing In the past five years, there has been a revival of downtowns across the nation, with downtown housing as the key to revitalization. Changes in life style and demographics have resulted in a demand fbr apartments and condominiums in active downtowns with easy access to restaurants, entertainment, shopping, cultural flcilifies, and work. The presence of high quality housing creates a reassur- ing image of security and stability, which in turn encourages the development of retail and cultural activities. Since Out- look Roanoke, construction has begun on over 100 new or renovated housing units. Plan of the Five Primary Initiatives Outlook Roanoke Update In downtown there is a clear market for two times that amount, if the appropriate environment can be created and housing with character can be provided. HighTechnology Businesses In order to encourage the development of high technology businesses, Roanoke will need a more dynamic and vital downtown with the amenities that young, highly-trained professionals exTect in their working environment. Roanoke is well situated to encourage start-up companies with its ability to draw graduates of Virginia Tech. The City's proximity to the mountains and its recreational resources also contribute to its attractiveness for dynamic, young entrepreneurs. But the central planning issue is to create the twenty-tbur-hour, seven-day atmosphere in downtown that is part of the successful recruiting of such businesses. Retail Although it is not feasible to attract many national retailers to Roanoke, the strength of the City has been its unique local and regional businesses. Once again, the character and quality of the environment downtown is key to encour- aging the development of more of these types of businesses. Civic and Cultural Facilities The Higher Education Center has been so successful that it will clearly need to expand in the near future. It, too, can be part of what attracts new businesses to downtown. The Downtown Library needs to be improved. The 1970s addi- tion has not been useful to the library and a new thcility is needed. Integrating cultural facilities will continue to be an essential component in creating a dynamic downtown; the Center in the Square programs remain a major part of those ongoing efforts. , :~ ~ x x :~ : x x ..... ~ : · Outlook Roanoke Update The 'Planning Process ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ · , x ~ ..... ~ · Outlaok Roanoke Update Overview Plan illustrating aarrent extents of Downtown Roanoke IN SEPTEMBER 2000, Downtown Roanoke, Inc.(DRI) and the City of Roanoke commissioned Urban Design Associates (UDA) to update the Outlook Roanoke Report. The Master Plan will act as a t~amework for decision making, a framework in which to seek and evaluate development proposals ibr proj- ects that will make downtown Roanoke an even better place to live and work. The issues addressed in the plan include the lack of a flexible first-class library, limited public open space, vacant storefronts, tattered edges, and disconnected places and neigh- borhoods. All recommendations were coordinated with the ongoing comprehensive and neighborhood planning processes, and will be integrated with the Vision 2001 process. The UDA team consisted of Urban Design Associates (team leader and urban design), Hill Studio (landscape archi- tecture), Nottingham and Associates (retail and entertainment market strategy), and Zimmerman/Volk Associates (residential market strategy). In addition, the City retained a parking con- sultant to analyze present and thture parking demand. Repre- sentatives from DRI served, along with the Steering Committee, as the project team, directing the work of the UDA team. IO ~ ~ x ~ , ~ · ~ x ~ ..... ~ · Outlook RoanokeUzodate Citizen Involvement Citizen participation, central to the plan- ning process, was strong and included focus group meetings with neighborhood interests, interviews with stakeholders, and a public meeting. A two-day design charrette, held in DRI's meeting room, gave definition to the process. That process consisted of three steps: Data Gathering and Analysis; Alternatives; and the Final Plan. Step I: Data Gatherin9 and Analysis The UDA team began with a two-day trip to Roanoke in October 2000 to meet with the project team and to interview individuals and groups. One-day trips for additional interviews followed in November, December, and January. At the same time, updated data was collected on land use, zoning, plans, market research, and transportation. The products generated during Step I were base drawings and UDA X-RayTM analysis drawings. During this first phase of the Update Planning Process, the UDA Consultant Team attended meetings with residents of the Belmont Fallon and Old South- west neighborhoods as well as with of the Gainsboro neighborhood to dis- cuss commonalities between the neigh- borhood master planning processes and the downtown update. \Vork should continue to t~)cus upon these commonalities as the neighbor- hoods complete their individual master plans. In those meetings, the participants requested that the primary expressions of linkages between the neighborhoods and downtown include improvements to the appearance of underpasses and streetscapes as well as ef~brts to infill edge parking lots with new development, especially along main approaches to downtown. Step I1: Alternatives This step fbrmed the heart of the study. The design charrette was held during the third week of February. The week started with a major public meeting at the Roanoke Higher Education Center. Fol- low-up meetings were also held that week with the Steering Committee and other community stakeholders. The UDA team then developed urban design initiatives based on this local input. These initiatives were later refined and will be presented by the team at the sec- ond public meeting. Step Ilk Final Plan Based on input and feedback from the public and steering committee meetings, the UDA team prepared a draft plan tbr review and comment. This plan, upon adoption by the City, will be the updated blueprint ~br revitalization in downtown Roanoke. Outlook Roanoke Update I1 Summary of Interviews and Focus Groups IN THE FALL OF 2000, the UDA team conducted interviews and focus group meetings. Focus group topics included: · Technology Opportunities · Art Museum/IMAX · Commercial/Entertainment/Retail Markets · Library · Jefferson Center/Cotton Mill/YMCA · Neighborhoods · Residential Market · Carillon Biomedical Institute (CBI) · Parking and Transportation Participants in all meetings were asked the same three questions. · What are the strengths of downtown Roanoke? · What are the weaknesses of downtown Roanoke? · What is your vision ~br the future? The assets participants sited most frequently were the strength and character of the Market, unique retail, great restaurants, strong institutions, emerging tech businesses, proximity to CBI, close-in neighborhoods, and the mountains. I2 Elmwood Park Library as it exists today The liabilities they identified included the lack of a flexible park and library, the barrier created by the rails, one-way traffic on Campbell Avenue, transient and vagrancy issues, stores clos- ing early, underutilized and vacant store- fronts, and surface parking lots. Their visions included a new central library, a first-class park, improved connections to the neighborhoods and the mountains, more rehabilitated and infill housing, flexible office space, more diverse nightlife, and retail west of Jefferson. During the February workshop, UDA met with the same groups and held a public meeting. Each group was asked to respond to the array of design alterna- fives being considered. The top priorities were concentrated in five initiative areas: · Elmwood Park · Church Avenue · E-Town · The Market · Jefferson Center For a full summary of the priority initiatives and opportunities, please refer to the Initiative Areas and Opportunities section of this Master Plan Update. x3 Outlook Roanoke Update III Good Things/Bad Things Summary Plan of Good Thingu/Bad Things Discussion THE GOOD THINGS AND BAD THINGS in downtown Roanoke were identified by participants in the public meeting held on 17 February 2001. Each member of the audience was given six red and six green dots to place on a map of the city with green symbolizing good and red symbolizing bad. The illustration below represents a summary of the many maps that were crafted. In addition, participants were asked the same three ques- tions that were asked in the focus group meetings: \Vhat are the strengths of downtown Roanoke?; ~Vhat are the weak- nesses of downtown Roanoke?; and What is your vision ibr the fiature? The tbllowing list is a summary of the most common responses: Strengths History · Heritage of Norfolk Southern RR · Hotel Roanoke: Historical / modern · Historic neighborhoods · Rich older building stock Transit · Easy access to downtown · Potential Amtrak service · Bus transfer center · Walkable: can walk anywhere downtown I4 Update Amenities · Views of surrounding landscape · Potential green way connection to river · Mounted patrol/feeling of safety · Pedestrian and family-friendly · Farmers market · Center in the Square / museum pres- ence · Higher Education Center · Retail downtown/Orvis stores · Great restaurants · Bars / entertainment / festivals Liabilities General · Uncertainty as to what new identity is beyond railsoad industry · Nothing to replace traditional image of Nortblk & Southern RR · Transit Center bus barn: location, vagrancy, and cleanliness issues · No green way connection to down- town/joggers running in streets · Stores close too early/downtown empty and dead on Sundays · Transient and vagrancy issues, pigeons · No entertainment center fbr families / singles · No theaters / cultural home tbr cele- bration of ethnicity, etc. · 1950s and later architectural heritage dire · Parking lots occupy key corners downtown · Lack of outdoor dining, grocer/ pharmacy downtown · Nothing to keep young people here other than their jobs · Lack ofyoung people downtown Barriers Difficult to access downtown without a vehicle · Division of rail tracks · Public transit lacking in some dis- tricts and beyond city limits Street Layout · Limited access to thewest · Not enough on-street parking/to many fire lanes · Not allowed to park on both sides of Jefferson during day · One-way traffic on Campbell · Poor lighting Library Issues · Library disconnected from down- town core · Library cramped, not multifaceted: internet / cultural activities lacking, need to rework Elm~vood Park I5 Outlook Roanoke U,~date Vision Transit · Link downtown to perimeter areas · Amtrak station as a bridge @ First Street · Bike trails / green way link to river, funicular up mountain · Access and use of rivers, resolution of floodplane w/habitat · LRT out Williamson to Valley View Road and airport · Identifi/east / west gateways, grand Franklin round-about · Jefferson as Main Street Roanoke Institutions and Open Space · NewCentral Library · Build upon Higher Education Cen- ter success · Urban feeling Bio-Medical campus · More cultural attractions peppered throughout downtown · Exploit the natural Retail / Office / Economic Development · Twenty-tbur-hour-a-day downtown a. rea · Establish a new identity fbr Roanoke · Invest in market: policing, paint, clean-up, 24-hour acti',4ty · Create a high-tech district around warehouse row, wire city · Accelerator space fbr business start-ups, affbrdable housing · New downtown grocery, higher end retail, artist galleries · Riverfront development, environ- mental conference and learning center Residential / Other · More downtown housing: affordable and upscale · MLxed-use, high end residential / grocery or retail space · Improved zoning supportive of growth and reuse · Preserve our sense of place · Move fbrward, but still keep our identity · Increase the general economy of the area x6 Outlook Roanoke Update I7 Market Strategies Outlook Roanoke Update Economic Development Strategies Existing Warehouse Row Buildings 'tH E c~T¥ oF RO^~OKE is the 'center' of the Roanoke Valley. Downtown Roanoke is home to many of the communiD,'s most important civic institutions and a neighborhood whose considerable potential for economic development can serve as a stimulus to economic development both within the City. and throughout the entire Roanoke region. In turn, Roanoke can benefit directly and indirectly from all economic development activity that takes place within the region, whether it occurs downtown or elsewhere. Roanoke Valley's extended regional trade area comprises up to 400,000 people. Downtown Roanoke has an existing base that links the Roanoke Valley as a whole to the 'New Econ- omy.' Already the region's most robust employment center - especially for upscale jobs - downtown Roanoke can build on its installed commercial, institutional, and civic base to attract additional business development in the district. Transforming downtown Roanoke into a mixed-use district that includes res- idential and commercial activity supplemented by strong civic institutions and visitor destinations will create a vibrant neigh- borhood that can serve as a hub for the entire region. i8 Outlook Roanoke Update Marketed as a multi-thceted destina- tion, downtown Roanoke has significant drawing power. Tourism can supplement downtown's emerging residential base, thus generating additional consumer spending downtown. With appropriate linkages, the Biomedical Center can become another source of consumer rev- enue to the neighborhood. 'Bricks and mortar' projects and 'programming' are of equal importance tbr strategic activation of downtown Roanoke. For these economic develop- ment initiatives to succeed, public-pri- vate partnerships must be ~brged and broad-based community support engaged to create and champion innova- tive solutions to the challenges. x9 Eye-level view of the proposed redesign of Elmwood Park Ontlook Roanoke Update II Residential Strategies DEVELOPING COHESIVE RESIDENTIAL market strategies for the downtown area was an integral part of Outlook Roanoke's Master Plan activities. A study conducted by Zimmerman/Volk Associates, Inc. (a Clinton, New Jersey based firm specializing in research and strategic analysis), in combination with input gathered during the charrette, formed the basis for the downtown housing strategies contained in the Master Plan. These strategies propose that new market-rate housing units tbr lease and tbr sale - both new construction and adaptive re-use of existing buildings - be developed in downtown Roanoke. The target area lbr downtown housing development extends north/south from Shenandoah Avenue to Elm Avenue and east/west from Interstate $81 to Sixth Street. Target Market Analysis vs. Conventional Supply/Demand Forecasts Conventional supply/demand forecasts typically rely on trend analyses to make their projections. Because they are based on supply-side dynamics and baseline demographic projections, the technique does not adequately take into consideration the effect that fundamental market place changes can have on con- sumer preferences. 2O Existing GOB South Building Outlook Roanoke Uj~date New housing initiatives in the down- town area, because they will represent a fundamental change in how that urban space is perceived, can have significant impact on settlement patterns, particu- larly when the new housing is specifically targeted to match the preferences and economic capabilities of the draw area households. For that reason, the residential mar- ket analysis conducted tbr Outlook Roanoke utilized a target market analysis to determine the depth and breadth of the potential market derived from the housing preferences and socioeconomic characteristics of households in the defined draw area. The method consid- ered not only basic demographic charac- teristics - such as income and age - it also incorporated less t?equently ana- lyzed attributes such as mobility rates, lifestyle patterns, and compatibility issues. Downtown Residential Strategies In order to retain the existing downtown households and attract new ones, a com- bination of strategies have been devel- oped: I Preservation of the Built Environ- ment - Relies on the restoration, repositioning and/or adaptive re-use of existing buildings. 2 New Residential Construction- Introduces housing types not cur- rently available or under-represented in the downtown. 3 Mixed-Use Development - Includes a residential component within mLxed-use buildings, either adaptive re-use or new construction. '~Vhether the housing will be new or adaptive re-use of existing buildings, the ibllowing four criteria were employed in identii~ing the most advantageous sites for downtown housing development: Advantageous Adjacency- Select locations which make use of the potential synergies between proposed housing initiatives and existing or proposed adjacent developments (commercial, retail, or residential) to maximize the opportunities and sup- port ~br each. 2 Building and/or Land Availability- Transform under-utilized or vacant parcels within the downtown area into new infill housing. 3 Potential for Expansion - Locate housing initiatives such that when they are complete, the adjacent or nearby buildings and/or land are, or could become, available. Ensure that they are appropriate for the continu- ation or extension of the neighbor- hood either through adaptive re-use or new construction. Select and sup- port those initiatives that can serve as catalysts for additional residential development in surrounding areas. 4 Anchors/Linkage - View each hous- ing initiative as an integral part of an overall urban strategy in order to 2! ~ · ~ ..... ~ .... ~ · Outlook Roanoke Update build critical mass of both housing and related non-residential uses. Use 'anchor' locations to establish the potential tbr economic activity in an underutilized area. Use 'linkage' loca- tions to build on the strength of two or more established, but isolated locations. Market Demographics The residential market study identified the tbllowing groups as the most promis- ing targets tbr downtown housing in Roanoke: · Young professional singles and cou- ples who prefer to live within walk- ing distance of where they work are likely to comprise approximately halt' of the primly market tbr new down- town housing. These single and two- person households are an eclectic mLx of affluent professionals, small busi- ness owners, middle-to upper-man- agement, ofrice and retail employees, 'knowledge workers,' and medical and hospital statt~ Older suburban couples seeking an urban living environment as a lite style choice comprise approximately one-third of the potential market tbr new downtown housing. These empty-nest and retiree households have lived in suburban neighbor- hoods tbr most of their lives and a significant number may well move downtown after their last child leaves home. 22 New Housing Prototype · , , ~ ~, ~ .... , Outlook Roanoke Update Cosmopolitan families and tradition- alists - typically people who grew up in or near an urban center and prefer it to a suburban alternative - consti- tute the balance. While there are t~wer households that fall within this category, they are typically comprised of well-educated, outdoor- oriented thmilies and individuals. A significant number of these house- holds are dual-income professionals in high-tech fields. HousingTypes and Preference, Results of the Zimmerman/Volk Associ- ates residential market study suggest that, based on target market propensities and compatibilities, that a full range of housing types - from multi-family to single-family detached units - would be attractive to prospective residents. How- ever, the study also notes that the devel- opment costs, limited size of available parcels, and the goal to introduce as many new housing units within down- town as possible, preclude development of single-family detached units in down- town. Based on this, higher-density housing types are considered to be more advantageous to achieving the overall objectives of the Outlook Roanoke Master Plan. Housing preferences identified by the study results indicate that the annual market potential tbr newly created, mar- ket-rate, multi-family or single-family attached units in downtown Roanoke is distributed among three basic types as follows: Rental apartments/lofts For-sale apartments/lofts Townhouses 59% 22% 19% Total 100o,6 For more details regarding downtown housing market potential and building/ unit types and preferences, refer to Zim- merman/Volk Associates' Pre-Charrette Memorandum, Residential Market Potential, Downtown Roanoke, Novem- ber 3, 2000 contained in the Appendices to this Update. 23 ' .... , - - , x Outlook Roanoke Update III Retail and Entertainment Strategies DOWNTOWN ROANOKE IS ~. natural crossroads for local resi- dents, workers, and tourists. It is a place where the Old Econ- omy intersects the New Economy in ways that present opportunities f~)r economic development in the area. Because it is a unique venue in the Roanoke Valley, the district is a choice location for cultivating specialized niche retail, dining and entertainment opportunities. No other place in the Valley can compete with downtown as a multi-purpose/multi-constituent destination. A concentration of specialty retailing already exists within the historic market area and extends outward from it f})r approximately two to three blocks. Virtually all of the current retailers are local entrepreneurs with the exception of Orvis which maintains a presence as a fhnction of having its distribu- tion center in the Roanoke Valley. The Market provides a strong, recreational, 'destination' shopping venue for both area residents and tourists seeking specialized goods - primarily in the gift, specialty apparel, and home dficor categories. Retailing located on Jefferson Street and side streets else- where in downtown tends to serve the convenience needs of the daytime workforce. Fink's Jewelers and Davidson's are exceptions; these destination retailers operate their flagship stores in downtown as part of their long-term histories in the community. 24 City Market Building as it exists today Outlook Roanoke Update Because there are no department stores in the area, downtown Roanoke serves more as a destination fbr recre- ational shopping than for comparison shopping. Comparison shoppers natu- rally gravitate to the area's malls and large strip centers. Downtown's niche as a site fbr dining is more pronounced than its retailing niche. Most ofdowntown's existing casual and fine dining establishments are clustered in and around Market Square. This concentration of restaurants pro- rides a nucleus for commercial revitaliza- tion. Future retail development can benefit by the sustained traffic that restaurants can draw into downtown. Expanding the appeal and merchan- dising content of the Market Square area is the most direct strategy fbr solidifi/ing downtown Roanoke's role as a retail/ dining/entertainment niche. Specific rec- ommendations include: · Build on the strengths of downtown as a specialty, destination shopping area rather than seeking large-scale retail development of comparison goods shopping which would, in all likelihood, be unable to compete with the existing large malls that are within five to ten minutes of down- town and which dominate compari- son shopping in the area. · Expand on the successful foundation of restaurants and venues already in place downtown, particularly in the Market Square area. These represent a strong market niche. Radiate these outward from the Market onto the adjacent streets to take advantage of existing buildings and parking. · Continue to focus retail solicitation efforts on the immediate vicinity of Market Square utilizing merchandis- 25 Railside Linear Walk .......... Outlook Roanoke Update ing themes that would successfully differentiate downtown shopping from suburban shopping destinations (e.g., antiques, home design, country crafts and collectibles, gilt items, and food-related products). Seek opportunities to establish desti- nation entertainment venues such as a multi-screen cinema complex or a new concept by either the owners of Corned Beef& Company or a national operator (Jillian's or similiar) that would provide a strong, recreational traffic generator for downtown. Create comprehensive entertainment and festival programming, centered in the Market Square area, that is consistent with and of sufficiently high frequency to fuel retail, dining, and entertainment sales and attract longer-term development opportuni- ties. · Utilize the strength of the Jefferson Street corridor as an office address to attract business-related service providers (e.g., printing, courier serv- ices, office supplies, take-out restau- rants, etc.). · Enhance the attractiveness of the proposed mixed-use office and resi- dential E-Town district with retail and fbod service establishments located along XVarehouse Row. · Connect downtown and the new Carilion Biomedical Institute via Jefferson Street in order to capitalize on the spending potential of the employee base expected to develop over time. 26 Outlook Roanoke Update 27 The Master Plan- A Bundle of Strategies ~ , , ~ Outlook Roanoke Update The Master Plan- A Bundle of Strategies THE MASTER PLAN UPDATE relies on a bundle of strategies, working synergistically, to continue to advance the revitaliza- tion of Roanoke that began with the Master Plan in 1997. The current planning process identified five locations for initiatives which combine private development with public improvements and civic and public investment. Each of these initiatives should be implemented when two or more of the individual components of a given initiative are ready to move forward. To be successfi~l, it is also essential that the public spaces which adjoin these individual eflbrts be improved simultaneously with the developments proposed within this Master Plan Update. Eye-level view of proposed Church .4venue improvements Outlook Roanoke U],date 29 Initiative Areas and Opportunities ~ , ..... , Outlook Roanoke Update I Elmwood Park Initiative ELMWOOD P^RK, the only large park in Downtown Roanoke, is located on a high point on Jefferson Street and provides a mag- nificent view of the distant mountains. Major additions and renovations were made to the park in the 1980s, including the successful creation of a festival peHbrmance area and a link, the "Magnolia \Valk", to the Market Square. However, the library and its addition occupy a large portion of the Jefferson Street frontage and block visual access from Jefferson. The remainder of the park is also visually inaccessible, partially due to the location of groves of trees along Elm Avenue, and partially due to the topography. The result is a park which does not fimction well on a day-to-day basis and has t3.iled to realize its full potential as the focus of civic lit~ in Roanoke. Elmwood Park should be developed into a world-class park. As such, it could be the tbcus of a series of private and institutional developments around it. The Elmwood Park Ini- tiative includes the tbllowing elements: Revitalization of the Park There are two alternatives. Ifa new home fbr the Downtown Library is built elsewhere, Elmwood Park can become an open public space with dramatic views to the mountains. The illus- tration shows a pavilion on the high point of the park (1).If the library is rebuilt in the park, we recommend that it be located on the high land close to Elm Avenue (2), thereby opening the rest of the park to both Jefferson Street and Bullitt Avenue. 3° Eye-level view of the profiosed Elmwood Park Outlook Roanoke Update ~/Patrick Henry Hotel This landmark hotel located on one corner of Elmwood Park is a handsome structure well-suited for residential use. Ideally, it would be translbrmed into market-rate apartments with public uses on the ground floor (3). Bullitt Avenue Parkin§ Garar§e Around the edge of this unsightly garage, we recommend building to both mask the garage and create housing fac- ing the park (4). Church Property This important corner could anchor the park with the development of a mixed- use residential building or office structure with a parking deck behind it. It should be set back to ensure a good view bfthe handsome church on the southwest cor- ner of the intersection (5). ~Carilion Hospital Property The Biomedical Institute begins just south of the hospital and is integrated with it. We recommend building a new medical or medical-related facility in the underused front yards of the existing hospital buildings, in order to better define the park and to connect the com- plex to the dty (6). North and East Side Development Sites X,¥e recommend extending Bullitt Avenue to Williamson Road, thereby further defining the park and connecting it to the downtown network (7). Once the park and its relationship to streets is improved, the sites on its north and eastern edges will become prime devel- opment pads (8). While in the greater interest of developing a world-class park, the design of the Bullitt Avenue exten- sion should be sensitive to the impact which it will have upon the existing Magnolia '~¥alk and could be sealed off to through traffic during performances or festivals. kl~/lotel Site This site is large enough to accommo- date structured parking and two develop- ments. Alternatives include an office building and a new library, two office buildings, or an apartment building and an office building. Whatever the uses might be, the buildings should be built to a consistent height with adjacent build- ings to create a strong facade and defini- tion for the park (9). The remaining sites around Elm- wood Paxk are currently parking lots, but should be thought of as development sites with the same design criteria. Existing, Hotel Patrick Henry 31 · . , , , , ., Outlook Roanoke Update Top Eye-level view of proposed new Central Library in Elmv~ood Park 32 Middle Eye-level 'view of Elmwood Park as it appears today Bottom Plan view of a new Central Library in Elmwood Park Option A Overlooking E/mwood Park Option B On tbe first and second flovr of a new offce tower on the motel site Outlook Roanoke U~pdate Top Plan of. Potential Elm~vood Park opportunity sites First-Class Park A lterna tive New Library Site Hotel Patrick Henry New Liner Housing New Housing on Church Property Proposed Medical Office Building Bullitt Ave. Extension Offu'e Development Sites Offce Development Sites 33 Middle Elm~ood Park Existing Conditions Plan Bottom Elmwood Park as it appears today Outlook Roanoke Update Pavilion Above P/an ~ew of a first-class park 1 Pavilion 7 Bullitt~lvenue Extension Middle Eye-level vie~w of a new first-class Elmvaood Park with a pavilion located at center Below Eye-level view of Elm~ood Park as it appears today 34 Outlook Roanoke' U~odate II Church Avenue Initiative CHURCH AVENUE EXTENDS from Williamson Road to the Jef- ferson Center. For much of its length, it is a pedestrian- friendly street. However, there are gaps and empty buildings along it. The Church Avenue Initiative includes a series of public improvements, civic and institutional buildings, and private development opportunities: Jefferson and Church This important intersection includes four potential elements: · ¢ Heironimus Building (1): This former department store has the high ceilings and large bay structure that make it ideal for a number of uses including: loft apartments, high tech offices and 'accelerator' office space, retail uses, or pub- lic facilities such as a Lib~. Its large windows provide visual access from the street which could create an open, accessible environment fbr the Liberty. The building's facade should be restored, including the cornice at the roof line and the ground-floor shopfronts. Uses at the ground floor should be public ones. Any of the alternative uses should add to the quality of life and vitality of this location and thus make a positive impact on both Jefferson Street and Church Avenue. · Parking Lot (2): Parking should be provided in a garage on the south side of the Heironimus building. This new garage will make the Allright lot available for new mLxed- use development opportunities. The plan and perspective drawings illustrate ground-floor retail with apartments or 35 Church .4venue as it apt, e~,~ to,iq Outlook Roano~; U£date condominiums on the upper floors. The large bay and box windows in the illustration create the image of a residential building downtown. · Upper Floors (3):The upper floors of other buildings on Jefferson Street should be renovated tbr residential use, thus adding to the critical mass of downtown residents. · Public Improvements (4):Although Jefferson Street already has trees and street lights, its general character is unappealing to pedestrians and motorists alike. As revitalization eftbrts continue, better pedestrian- scale lights and a standard variety of street trees should be incorporated. Williamson and Church Two development sites anchor this end of Church Avenue. The site on the east side of\Vill- liamson Road terminates the vista of the street. A civic building (5) in that location would provide a visual tbcus fbr Church Avenue, block the view of the expressway, and create a pleas- ant gateway into the Behnont neigh- borhood to the east. Possible uses include a Fire Station to replace historic Fire Station #1 on Church Avenue which is being considered lbr a museum, or a new downtown Library. Initial feedback from the Fire Marshall indicates that this site Above Plan of potential Church Avenue opportunity sites 1 Heironimus Building 2 Proposed Parking Garage 3 ApareatentsAbove 4 Public Improvements 5 New Fire Station 6 Market Site: Proposed Mixed-Use Building 7 l~tail Wrap Facade 8 Loft Housing over Retail Use 9 GrandBuilding: Accelerator Space lO Histerh' Fire Station #1 Below Church Avenue Exbting Conditions Plan 36 · . . Outlook Roanoke Update is also the best location tbr a new Fire Station as regards accommodat- ing the specific service needs of such a facility. The property at the northwest corner of\Villiamson Road and Church Avenue is currently used fbr parking and is an important site fbr completing the Market area. Its frontage on \Villiamson Road makes it appropriate tbr entertainment and commercial uses, hotel, or mixed-use with either office or residential and retail (6). Church between City Hall and First The character of Church Avenue changes abruptly at First Street from a comfort- ably scaled, pedestrian-friendly street to a wider one with less character and scale. The parking garage is the most disrup- tive element. Its deep arcade makes it difficult to see the shopfronts. The street has been widened to eliminate a normal sidewalk and the barren concrete archi- tecture of the building has no features to delight the eye. The cumulative effect is to discourage pedestrian connections to the west. The proposed improvement includes restoring the street to the same cross-section as the block between Jeffer- son and First by eliminating the existing parking lane in favor of a new sidewalk with street trees, and adding a new two- story facade to the face of the garage which would contain ground floor retail. In this way, the ground floor retail space can be expanded and gain better visitability/visability (7). All of these improvements would combine to create a much more pedestrian-friendly connec- tion to City Hall and the neighborhoods beyond. Second and Church A mixed use building of 8000 sgfloor is recommended for the corner of Second Street and Church Avenue on the site of the present parking lot (8). The building would be appropriate for loft housing or apartments, or fbr new office/accelerator space. The ground floor should contain public uses. The building would screen the ramps of the existing Allright park- ing garage ii'om public view. The Grand Building \Ve encourage the development of this building as either loft apartments or as office/accelerator space with retail uses on the ground floor (9). Existing Church Street parking garage 37 , , ' , . . Outlook Roanoke U?dat; Centre/Library Bottom Eye-l~wel view of the Heironimus Building as it appears today 38 Outlook Roanoke U~date III E-Town Initiative THE AREA BOUNDED by Church, Jefferson, the railroad tracks, and Second Street, contains a large number of fine old build- ings with empty upper tloors that are ideally suited to the type of housing and high tech ofrice space identified in the market studies. There are also a number of empty lots and vacant properties which detract ti'om the character of the area, but which provide opportunities tbr new development. The area is immediately adjacent to the Market area and includes a num- ber of residential units even in its present condition, as well as opportunities tbr entertainment and retail activities that would both expand the Market area and provide the amenities which are needed to attract high tech industries. \Ve recommend that this area be extended to the Henry Street area to include the Higher Education Center and to support the eflbrts to rebuild this historic district. The E-Town initiative includes: E-Square The existing parking lot should be transformed into a public square to serve as the center of E-Town. The design could be simple and straightforward with hard surfaces and areas with trees. It should continue to provide parking, but add pedes- trian-scale amenities. It should be designed to be a perform- ance or festival space on weekends when cars are removed. We recommend creating a new north-south street between Camp- bell and XVarehouse Row to connect the space more effectively to Campbell Avenue and to provide frontage of the housing and ofrice buildings (1). 39 E-Square .drea · , . . ~ . Outlook Roanoke Ufidatt YE-Square Lofts On the south side of Salem Avenue, this site is ideal fbr multi-purpose buildings designed as loft buildings that could be used fbr offices, live/work, or residential uses (2). Some parking can be provided onsite, but we recommend that lots and garages in the block between First and Jefferson be reconfigured to provide additional capacity to serve this area. E-Square Townhouses The western edge of E-Square and the proposed new street connecting to Campbell should be lined with town- houses or live/work structures (3). Warehouse Row The buildings are well-suited to high tech offices and are presently under con- sideration fbr adaptive re-use. The resi- dential scale of these buildings will help to create an attractive and secure envi- ronment for businesses (4). \Ve recom- mend the conversion of as many buildings as possible to incubator space. Campbell Avenue Buildings While some upper floor apartments exist in this area, there are still opportunities for more to be created. Building owners should be encouraged to develop the upper floors for residential uses through creative code innovations, an improved parking management program (perhaps a sticker program) and the improvement of public garages in the area. We further recommend additional entertainment and retail uses for the ground floor that would support the twenty-four-hour-a- day, seven-days-a-week activity sought by typical high tech workers (5). ~Grand Building Site Although this building appears to be one building, it is several smaller buildings combined behind a unified facade. There have been several eflbrts to find ways of rehabilitating it for new uses such as apartments or cultural facilities. It is an ideal location for downtown apartments which would best be provided in new construction (6). vFirst Street Bridge The bridge, with its symbolic signifi- cance as a cultural link between historic Gainsboro and downtown, is in great need of repair. Although current stan- dards make it difficult to repair it for continued use as a vehicular thorough- fare, there are concerns about it being simply a pedestrian bridge. \¥ithout through traffic, commercial development on Henry Street is not viable, and the O' 200' 400' Plan of. proposed intpr~vements to Warehouse Ro~, as an anchor far E-Town 1 ProposedE-Square 2 E-SquareLofts 3 E-Square Townhouses 4 Warehouse Row 5 Renovated Can~bell Street Buildings 6 GrandBuilding /l]~art~lents 7 First Street Bridge 8 Henry Street Revival and Higher Education Center Expansion 4© , ' , · . ~ Outlook Roanoke U~odate Above Eye-level ,view of proposed E-Town loft homing and ina~bator space bridge's role in uniting diverse cultures will be diminished. XYe recommend that the proposed elevator be constructed at the south end of the bridge to address accessibility issues, but that the bridge continue to carry vehicles (7). enhanced to provide a public space for the area and a piazza or tbrecourt for the Higher Education Center (8). The most current version of the RNDC master plan for Henry Street is on file at the Department of City Planning. Henry Street and the Higher Education Center ~/The Higher Education Center has succeeded beyond expectations. \Ye recommend building on the success of the Higher Education Center, in coordi- nation with the efforts of the Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corpora- tion (RNDC), to implement the Henry Street Initiative. The Ebony Club should be restored and brought back to useful life. New office construction could be used to rebuild the urban character of Henry Street. Centre Avenue could be Future Phases Once established, E-Town could be extended to the east in the block between Jefferson and First, and to the west toward the Jefferson Center along Campbell. ~RoanokeTimes Alternative Since the design charrette, the Roanoke Times has proposed a 54,000 sq.ft. printing facility to be located parallel to Salem Avenue and south of the proposed E-Square. The main room in the facility will house a state-of-the-art press, while Below Eye-level .view of Warehome Row as it appears today Outlook Roanoke Ur)date additional space will include prepress operations, employee support space, and receiving docks, among other uses. The exterior of the thcility on the Salem Avenue and Second Street sides will be constructed of brick and glass, whereas the First Street and alley sides will be basic masonry construction. The facility will require no additional parking and will handle two to three trucks per day. In terms o£the Outlook Roanoke Update, the Times building will replace the E-Square Lofts Initiative. The pri- mary intent of the proposal was to create visual activity along Salem Avenue, espe- cially at street level. A three- to tbur- story building was envisioned as an architectural element to define the edge of the square. As long as the Times building meets the fbllowing criteria, it will be an acceptable substitution: · Creates interesting visual activity, especially at street level. Includes plenty of windows along Salem Avenue and First Street (similar to the buildings of \Varehouse Row). · Incorporates pedestrian-friendly lighting and landscaping along all public street thcades (at the curb). · Respects of existing residential uses along the south side of the alley and · Rises to a preferred building height of three to four stories along Salem Avenue. 42 Tech Row View of InSystems Technologies and the adjoining buildings of Warehouse Row, whfi'h establish the context for the proposed E-Square Initiatives. , . , ....... , Outlook Roanok,. Update IV The Market Initiative Plan q/'pr~osed Market District tmtumves 1 City Market Building 2 Billy}Ritz 3 IM. dX ti Hotel Site $ Campbell Avenue DOWNTOWN'S MOST CELEBRATED and loved area, the Market continues to be a destination in the region and the center of public litb for the City. However, there is still much to be done. During the planning process, some concerns were raised about evidence of some weakening of the Market area. By incremen- tally reinfbrcing the Market area with additional housing and retail and entertainment uses, the fhture of the Market will be more secure. Elements include: City Market Building The City Market Building continues to be successful, but the top floor remains empty. One possible use would be to make it a demonstration high tech accelerator space. That could be sig- nificant, not because of the amount of space, but because of its potential marketing value for the city. Other uses could include artist's studios, public service space, or a high profile video arcade (1). Billy's Ritz The upper floors of this critically located building are empty. The building and its location make it ideal for downtown housing. It may be possible to link it Center in the Square's IMAX development (2). IMAX This attraction is in the development process and should be coordinated with the other developments suggested for the Market (3). Jefferson and Campbell The parking lot and its adjacent properties could provide a good location for a small-scale downtown boutique hotel. With a restaurant and public spaces on the ground floor, it could provide an effective means of extending the vitality of the Market to the west across Jefferson (4). Two-way streets We recommend that the remainder of Campbell be converted to two-way. A number of studies comparing one- and two-way street systems have documented that two-way streets are safer for pedestrians, enhance retail visibility and, therefore, sales (5). Outlook Roanoke Update V Jefferson Center Initiative JEFFERSON CENTER IS AN important public investment that is expanding and improving. The YMCA is planning a major new building immediately adjacent to it. The Old Southwest neighborhood is a well-organized community and has been actively promoting improvement in the area. The Jefferson Center Initiative should be designed to support those effbrts and to help create an eft~ctive linkage with downtown. Elements of the initiative, many of which coincide with the Jefferson Center Area Master Plan of October 1997 (contained in the appendices to this report), include: New YMCA The YMCA has an ambitious building program with a major new facility planned for tile west side of 5th Street at the end of Church Avenue (1). The plan indicates a public square (6), in t?ont of the new building, to serve as a civic space that would provide an appropriate terminus for Church Avenue. The building should be designed with a formal civic facade on that space. YMCA Site The existing YMCA site provides a number of opportunities. The section of Church Avenue between 5th and 2rd Streets has some good buildings and active uses, but it also has vacant areas. Over time, the frontage along Church Avenue should be re-established to create a strong linkage between downtown and Jefferson Center. Desirable uses for this site would be pub- lic or civic facilities, offices, or residential spaces with public uses on the ground floor (2). Parking should be provided within the structure, but should be on the northern portion of the site, with more active uses lining Church Avenue. Jefferson Center Neighborhood Existing Conditions Plan Outlook Roanoke Update Parking Parking tbr Jefferson Center is provided in a series of surface lots. The increased activity with the YIVICA may create the need tbr parking structures. In either case, the parking should be confined to the center of the development ,area (3). Other development should line 5th and 6th Streets, and Elm Avenue. Cotton Mill This industrial structure is well suited to conversion to either loft apartments, live/work units, or office space (4). Some fbrm of residential development would be the ideal use because the structure is in a residential neighborhood and could create a good relationship between the neighborhood and the public functions at Jefferson Center (and theretbre with downtown). The Cotton Mill may also be appropriate fbr public or institutional uses, but care should be given to the type of use. Cultural and educational pro- grams might be appropriate, but office uses that generate a large number of parking spaces and traffic would not be appropriate. Since the design charrette, Artspace has been identified as a possible devel- opment partner fbr the Cotton Mill. Artspace Projects, Inc. is a non-profit developer and has built studios, work/live, and perfbrmance spaces tbr artists all over the countr): Their projects sustain themselves financially on rents collected from tenants, development of co-op ownerships, and complementary commercial projects. Artspace's vision fbr the Cotton Mill is consistent with the recommendations of the Outlook Plan Update. Their participation also presents an opportunity to complement market-rate housing with a~lbrdable units. Residential Development New residential development along the edges of the Jefferson Center prop- erty, in infill sites along Elm Avenue, should be encouraged (5). The Jefferson Center and the YMCA are amenities that could attract potential residents. Thereibre, new housing in the neighbor- hood should be designed and coordi- nated in conjunction with the efforts for public uses. Plan of pr~osed in~rvuements to Jo~ferson Center and its surroundings 1 New YMCM 2 YMCA Site 3 Parking Garage 4 Cotton Mill 5 Residentiallnfill 6 Proposed Public Square 45 Outlook Roa~tokc U~,L~t; 46 Outlook Roanoke Update Streets AS WAS NOTED IN the first section of the report, many street improvements were implemented in the last five years, such as the two-way traffic along Salem and much of Campbell Avenue. More work remains. In the next five years, Campbell Avenue should be converted to two-way between Second Str'eet and XVilliamson Road, Bullitt Avenue should be extended to \Villiamson Road and the 1st Street Bridge should be repaired and reopened to vehicular and pedestrian traffic. These upgrades support the original Master Plan goal of better connecting ci.ty streets while greatly improving development opportunities on adjacent sites. 47 Bullitt /lvenue as it exists today · . Outlook Roanok; U?dat; 48 , Above Plan of proposed street net~,ork Left Plan of existing street network Outlook Roanoke Update Trails FOR DOWNTOWN ROANOKE TO attract new economy companies the regional trail and greenway network must better link downtown to the mountains. The regional network is one of the area's greatest assets, but severely underutilized as it relates to the business district. A special effort should be made in the next five years to connect the City Market Building and Rail- walk to the regional trail system along the edge of the Gains- boro Neighborhood and CBI. New connections should be designed to accommodate both bike and pedestrian users and trails should take on an urban character as the move through- out downtown. 49 Rail~oalk Outlook Roanoke Update $o POTENTIAL TRAIL LOCATION MAP LICK RUN CORR2]DOR Above Plan of pro~osed Downtown Greenway Network Left Map of proposed Regional Greenway Network Outlook Roanoke Update III Transit & Parking EVERY SUCCESSFUL DOWNTOWN HAS parking challenges and Roanoke is no exception. Preliminary finding in the city's parking study shows that although downtown Roanoke has a surplus of parking spaces, these spaces axe not necessarily located to best serve demand. Most residents identified the area around the Market as an especially challenging place to park at lunch time. As an alternative to building new parking garages we recommend instituting a free parking shuttle from the Civic Center to the CBI campus. The City is already expe- riencing success with a similar concept. The advantages to this approach are that it reduces the number of cars in the down- town, frees up spaces for shoppers, frees employers from paying employee parking and links the Biomedical Institute to down- town in a meaningful way. The shuttle must be launched at exactly the right moment to be successful and that moment may need to wait until the first phase of CBI is completed. Challenges to consider are the need to purchase unique buses and the potential future expansion of both the Civic Center and the facility's parking requirements which may then require the partial or complete relocation of the shuttle parking reservoir. 5I .il Existing Transit Center Outlook Roanoke Update Plan of proposed Transit Network illustrating parking shuttle circuit in red and connnectiom to the regional trail system from downtown, its neighborhhods, and the CBI in green. Major pedestrian and vehicular routes have also been indicated [~ECEIVED CITY CLERKS OFFICE Office of the City Manager '01 NOV14 P4:01 November 7, 2001 Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council: Subject: First Street Bridge I am enclosing, for Council's information, the concept design report for the First Street Bridge. These options were presented to Council at its work session on October 29, 2001. The City has contracted with Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. to study various options for the First Street Bridge. The following is a brief summary from the study: Option 1 Convert existing bridge to pedestrian usage only. This $1,131,000 option was used for the design of the Gainsboro Parking Garage. Option 2 Rehabilitate existing bridge for one-lane vehicular traffic $2,150,000 (one-way or reversible) and pedestrian walkway Option 3 Replace existing bridge with new modern bridge with $3,125,000 two vehicular lanes and pedestrian walkway Option 3A Replace existing bridge with new bridge similar to $3,525,000 existing with two vehicular lanes and pedestrian walkway Option 4 No build and/or bridge closure N/A Funds are currently budgeted to support Option 1; all other options will require additional funding or deferral of other bridge construction or repair projects. Room364 MunicipalSouth 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540)853-2333 FAX(540)853-1138 CityWeb:www. ci.roanoke.va.us The Honorable Mayor and Members of Council November 7, 2001 Page 2 Since this bridge will provide an important connection to downtown and the Henry Street area, I believe it is important to decide upon the preferred option so that the project can proceed. Please contact Phil Schirmer, City Engineer, at 853-2731 if you have any questions about the presented options. Sincerely, City Manager DLB/JGB/bls Enclosure C: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk William M. Hackworth, City Attorney James D. Grisso, Director of Finance