11. Highway 5 Update 1 CITYOF
11.
. CEA,NBASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
1
MEMORANDUM
' TO: Mayor and City Council
Y tY
1 Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director
1 DATE: April 7, 1992
SUBJ: Highway 5 Update Memorandum
1 Staff is continuing to work diligently to pursue the undertaking of a corridor study along
Highway 5, as well as the related issue of obtaining funding under the new highway bill
for Highway 5 improvements consistent with urban design concepts developed by Bill
1 Morrish and his staff. Along these lines, Don and I have had several meetings with staff
of Barton - Aschman and Associates outlining concerns and possible revisions to main line
Highway 5. The City Manager has met with Bill Crawford at MnDOT to discuss this
matter, and Mr. Crawford was unusually supportive of the concept as laid out in the
newsletter prepared by Bill Morrish and his staff. At a subsequent meeting with
MnDOT staff, we were less than satisfied with some of the responses, vis -a -vis a new
1 MnDOT approach to highway construction (or the lack thereof). However, we will
continue to work to move this item forward.
1 During the week of April 1, we held a meeting with Barry Warner of Barton- Aschman
and Associates and Joyce Levine of Camiros, Inc. The purpose of the meeting was to
outline the city's needs relative to the Highway 5 Corridor project to enable these
1 individuals to prepare a proposal for review by the City Council. Barry Warner is the
individual who we have been working with to design streetscape improvements for the
1 section of Highway 5 currently underway. We would expect Barton - Aschman to continue
to provide similar services on a new section of Highway 5, as well as serve as the
engineering component on tasks such as defining the center lines of parallel collector
1 streets, incorporation of sensitive design features such as bridges, and Highway 5 proper
in coordination of drainage elements. Camiros is a relatively new firm to the Twin
Cities area and I doubt many of you are familiar with their work. They are based largely
out of Chicago, but do maintain a local office. We believe that they are uniquely
qualified to deal with the urban design and planning aspects of this study in coordination
with the ongoing participation of Bill Morrish and his staff. Camiros is actively involved
Is
t., PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
1
1 Mayor and City Council
Mr. Don Ashworth
1 April 7, 1992
Page 2
in urban design planning in Sioux City, Iowa; Galena, Illinois; and the City of
Minneapolis, along with several other programs. We expect to have a proposal from
them for your review at the April 27, 1992, City Council meeting.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
( 1
r
PLANNERS'
1
•.••••••••• cr
.. • •......... . •............ .............
tise oo i
•
: 1
Warren
1
Town 1
Center Plan.
Retro 1
the Suburs .
i
By Carlos Macedo Rodrigues, AICP
t
1 INTRODUCTION lords, and in 1991 received the county's
Like many other suburban commercial dis- "Excellence in Planning" award.
2 tricts, the town center area in Warren Town-
ship, in Somerset County, New Jersey, is a BACKGROUND
post -1960s strip commercial development Warren Township is approximately 30 miles
lacking in focus, architectural quality, and west of New York City (see map on page 4). 1
basic streetscape amenities. The area is expe- It is a typical suburban community, with 1
riencing serious pedestrian and vehicle circu- residential subdivisions, corporate office
SPRING lation and safety problems, as well as high parks, and shopping malls interspersed with
retail turnover and poor maintenance. large tracts of agricultural land. Warren's 1
1992 To address these problems, the township 1990 population of 10,830 represents a 26
completed a master plan in 1989, which led percent increase since 1970; during the same
to new zoning and design standards. A visual period, however, its housing stock expanded
preference survey conducted prior to the at double that rate (52 percent), predomi- 1
_ Case Studies adoption of the plan helped to establish a nantly in single - family subdivisions, on one -
published by the "constituency for change" within the com- to one - and -one- half -acre lots.
American munity, including a strong interest in a "his- Warren is part of the rapidly growing 1
Institute of toric village" commercial center. This senti- central New Jersey corridor, an area under
C ed ment remained following the master plan, rapid transition from rural/agricultural to
Plan ✓ i .ers and convinced Warren Township to prepare suburban. The township is flanked by two 1
a Town Center Urban Design Plan in 1990 major east -west routes, U.S. 22 to the south
as a district element of the municipal master and Interstate 78 to the north. Route 22 is an
plan. The township contracted with planner older highway, with significant strip com- 1
Anton Nelessen, who guided the visual pref- mercial development; the newer I -78 is one
erence survey (VPS) and master plan process, of New Jersey's burgeoning "growth corri-
to also oversee the town center plan. This dors," acting as a magnet for considerable
plan has led to new zoning and design stan- development, primarily in corporate office 1
1
1
PLANNERS'
Casebook
...T._ ....., - . •
• is a series of case studies describing _ --- -- � _ � _
A ' .�_ -- ,
I how planners manage a planning process,
•�i _ ` r -
written from the practitioner's perspective. _
It is published in January, April, July, and'` c
October, for members of the American `" y _ -. . G ,,,..4,- ~ -
Institute of Certified Planners, an institute .'E
of the American Planning Association.
g � ._ f if 4 iv: . -s
I For information about AICP membership, . _ -- _. -- x 4 4 • -
contact: ..._ s A "..
Rosemary- Jones - - — _ w r y ' - ' -
Managing Executive Director --'1-` � ,
American Institute of Certified Planners ; ?w -_:a r - j (' `
Washington, DC 20036
1776 Massachusetts Ave., 1\1 W
I t N -
`
-
202- 872 -0611 -_ '
I To comment on this case study, or to � �ti
,1 8
submit a case study, contact the editor:
David 0 Rafter, AICP "' Ill $ '"fir•
Urban d- Regional Studies Institute ,„ '' , Iv'
I Mankato State University
MSU Box 25
Mankato, MN 56002 ler
507 - 389 -1714 • Warren's town center is currently an uninspired collection of parking lots and strip
I 507-389-2980 fax
commercial developments scattered around the intersection of two regional arterials.
EDITORIAL
ADVISORY BOARD facilities. In spite of the current recession, Bethel arterials had already attracted consid-
Michael Brooks, AICP Jay Chatterjee, AICP
major corp orations continue to relocate to erable development, including approximately
ns Crow, ok, AICP the corridor, maintaining support for local 125 housing units, 323,000 square feet of
Patricia Comarell, AICP housing markets. office space, and 270,000 square feet of ,
Jane Downing, AICP
Robert Gray, AICP The town center area comprises approxi- retail /service space in three shopping centers.
Man Hodges. AICP mately 90 acres in southeastern Warren Buildings were scattered and predominantly
Jerome Kaufman, AICP
Allen Lovejoy, AICP Township. Historically known as Warren- single -story, although some two -story struc-
Barbara Lukermann, AICP ville, it is defined by the intersection of tures combined retail and services on the
I Margarita McCoy, AICP Mountain Boulevard/Washington Valley ground floor with offices above. Individual
Steven Preston, AICP
Mitch Rohse. AICP Road and Warrenville /Mt. Bethel Road. buildings and uses were poorly articulated,
Fritz Wagner, AICP Mountain Boulevard is an inter - regional surrounded by surface parking, and with
William Weber, AICP through route. Warrenville /Mt. Bethel Road numerous curb cuts on the major roads. No
I AICP COMMISSION
is a major county roadway, providing access provisions had been made for pedestrian
Sumner Sharpe. AICP between routes 78 and 22. circulation within each commercial develop -
William W BoH dy, AICP As noted before, the study area has devel- ment, or for pedestrian connections Linking
Frank S. Fish, AICP
I
Joanne Garnett, AICP oped since the 1960s in a strip commercial developments. Heavy traffic on the arterials
Margarita McCoy, .AICP fashion. Though the shopping, retail, and createdhazardous conditions forvisitorscross-
Brian F O'Connell. AICP
Lester L. Bolin, AICP civic focus ()Marren Township, it has many ing from one shopping facility to another.
shortcomings as a town center. Difficult Considerable vacant land remained in the
Copyright 1992 by the American Planning pedestrian interconnections, conflicting cir- area and, at the time of the design plan, there
Association. Reprint permission must be
requested in writing from APA. Publishing culation patterns between local and through was considerable development pressure. As a
offices for Planners' Casebook are located at traffic, and inefficient traffic flow between result, there were concerns that, without an
I the American Planning Association's the various commercial areas have led to overall plan, additional development in the
Chicago office (address below)
Paul Thomas, Assistant Editor; glaring functional problems and continuous town center area and in the broader corridor
Dennis McClendon, Designer safety hazards. The lack of appropriate archi- would compound existing problems and re-
' Artn: Postmaster and subscribers
Please send change of address to: tectural, streetscape, and site - design stan- sult in greater deterioration of traffic condt-
dards has created an environment domi- tions.
Subscription Department nated by vast, unlandscaped parking lots and
American Planning Association
1313 E. 60rh Sr. warehouse architecture. In addition, the area Previous Planning Studies
I Chicago, IL 6063' has been plagued by retail turnover and poor Two previous studies, the township master
312 - 955 9100 upkeep. The result is a serious image prob- plan and a traffic study, had indicated the
Please supply both old and new addresses.
lem among the community.
I Printed on recycled paper, including At the time of the town center lan, [he
50 -70% recycled fiber and ® p Carlos Macedo Rodrigues, AICP, is a senior associate at
10% postconsumer waste. Mountain Boulevard and Warrenville/Mt. Nelessen Associates in Princeton, New Jersey
I 2 PLANNERS' CASEBOOK 2
need for changes in the area. Master plan traditional "Main Street," with curbside park- elements, and levels of human activity, are
II
. preparation began in 1988 with the hiring of ing and an emphasis on streetscape, textured assessed. Images are reviewed and compared
( Nelessen, then of Hintz /Nelessen Assoc,- walkways, trees, and decorative lighting. The with others to identify the components or
ates. (Nelessen helped prepare the town cen- study also recommended improvements for characteristics that contribute to their posi-
ter plan in 1990 as principal of A. Nelessen the corridor, and proposed the creation ofa rive or negative ratings (see page 5).
Associates.) The need for a plan specifically TransportationlmprovementDistrict (TID). The purpose of the VPS is to assist a
, addressing the town center area emerged community in evaluating its present-day "1m- I
from the broader master plan discussions, FACTS OF THE CASE age," and to facilitate development ofa "vi-
and the final master plan document, adopted The master plan's assessment of the area, as sion" for the future. Since many of the slides
in November 1989, contained a recommen- well as its planning and design recommenda- reflect the land - development controls that
I
dation in favor of such a plan. The master tions, were significantly influenced by the the community has enforced — including
plan included the community's assessment visual preference survey. The VPS is a plan - zoning and standards for preservation of
of the area obtained through the visual pref- ning technique developed by Nelessen to natural features, landscaping, and civil and
erence survey, and a series of design directives facilitate citizen participation in developing traffic engineering design —the VPS is also
derived therefrom. The document also for- a community consensus over land- develop- an opportunity to assess these controls. In .:
mulated goals for the area, such as limiting ment issues. The survey, which has been used many instances, the results of the VPS have
additional strip commercial development; extensively in New Jersey and elsewhere, been used to guide revisions to local land- I
encouraging infill of existing service and evaluates public responses to projected slides development and design standards.
shopping facilities; preparing redevelopment representing both built and natural environ- In Warren, the VPS was administered at
standards for parking, landscaping, and fa- ments, as seen from the public realm. The a public meeting in May 1988, early in the
cade improvements for commercial build - VPS relies on individuals' intuitive evalua- master planning process. It was widely pub-'
rags; and implementing a sign ordinance. tion of what appears "attractive" or "unat- Iicizedandreceivedgoodpresscoverage .The
Also as part of the master plan studies, the tractive," or feels "right" or "wrong." The VPS was comprised of 240 images, mostly
town commissioned a traffic engineering images are rated by participants on a .scale from Warren. Participants were also given a I
consultant, Garmen Associates ofMonrville, from " -10" to " +10." Repetitive images are 178 - question questionnaire.
New Jersey, to study the area. The study used to test for consistency in the ratings. The Warren VPS was administered to
recognized and quantified the problems with Cumulative scores are then tallied for each more than 450 people, including most ap- '
through traffic, and endorsed the concept of image based on the average (mean) score of pointed and elected officials. This was by far
a two -lane, 25 mph loop road, with on- street all survey participants, and a collective rating the largest turnout ever for a local planning
parking to separate local traffic from through is obtained. event, and it was viewed as a strong indica-
traffic and to relieve the major arterials. This Once the images have been rated, selected tion that the community was concerned
I
loop road, initially suggested in the master visual and spatial characteristics, such as de- about the funire and welcomed the opportu-
plan, was viewed as an approximation of the velopment patterns, densities, types of land nity to participate in the planning process.
use, building form, scale, massing, propor- The VPS revealed a clear appreciation for
I
tion, definition of space, colors, textures, the rural landscape of the community's re-
materials, landscaping, cent past. Stream corridors and long vistas
An axonometric ! *4 streetscape over open fields and meadows, framed by
view illustrates 4 4 - ,• t i, mature vegetation, received the highest rat-
I
how the town ,x - 4 A , • < f " -. 1 t7j• 'r 4 ings (above +7.5). Isolated
center plan ` '
would ,, f. � , Al i�r�il ..' r t o, ii, remake bIt -` ,.. •r • V // ) ' � • .•
the area. A. i, 4 `.1 of e Y f t• ; mow '' V.: r • '4 .. • i . v 4 .. sit• :- '' .2, i .
lf 4_. „"... tl laliNa 4 "9 ...- , cip .., .,t lif A t
1
J N.. ft..* ,r 1:1110 t � ♦ M a w r ,� : #
a te+' " = tl /,„ } S. w• . N 1 2 - .- i >. I. try. - k . i t r .
0 41 ` i Mtit -MMftM �••ttt♦ - "i :M. • i , 1k . 1# t _ �Yr A `1 t •
' ' � t 4 • x 7. 44h "! -- 's 144 . ' '��/i
14g 34, - s ti } t . . -• `, 1
1
-
1
final town center plan. Nelessen's initial ideas
' �, of a town center with a pedestrian scale, a
,. 80� 4� t. - loop road emulating a traditional Main Street, 1
80 parking lot redevelopment, and commercial
� '� y, 95 infili had all been discussed and generally
" .4„ ,,,, 287 , 280 -, accepted. Other concepts, such as housing
y � � above commercial space, had been greeted
I ' `b with considerably less enthusiasm, and
i fi ro spurred lively debate. The objective of the
- _ -' 495 town center plan was to examine these con-
111 . -4:51 ' h ` cepts in detail, to evaluate their implications,
' , N E W and to negotiate an action program with each
',w YORK property owner. -
„ { Th plan was developed in close associa-
` - CITY
' 44 , ; Lion with the planning board and discussed
" � k �` ' 95 Staten at seven public meetings held by the board
./ � - ,,; �. .�::.� ,, i ; '� Island over the summer of 1990. A number of
1 � 287 `, meetings were also held during this period to
` � ; f� discuss technical questions, such as those
dealing with wetlands delineation. A pre -
' Warren Township is some 30 miles west of Manhattan. The Interstate 78 corridor in liminary plan was discussed and publicized.
central New Jersey has been experiencing rapid growth. Property owners were able to assess how the
• proposals would directly affect their inter -
rural structures, or small groups of buildings An analysis of the visual preference for a ests. One of the public meetings was targeted
I on large tracts, were also highly rated. The historic village commercial center suggested at area merchants and property owners, both
top -rated nonresidential image was a white less intensive development, with a more resi- of whom had been notified by mail. Accord -
colonial church in a village setting fronting a dential scale, classical street configurations, ing to the planning board chair, this "very
I village green. High marks for two -lane roads curbside parking, street trees, and sidewalks. successful" meeting was instrumental in ob-
with no curbs, natural vegetation or lawn as Although housing was generally not favored taining the support of these factions, allow -
a shoulder, split -rail or other natural material in the town center area, affordable housing or ing them to voice their fears and reservations
fences, a 35 mph speed limit, and low traffic housing for the elderly was considered ac- directly before the planners.
I volumes reinforced the preference for an ceptable, preferably with small front yards,
open "rural character." In contrast, charac- porches, and rear -yard garages. The Participants
teristics of suburban development, such as The VPS results were so compelling that The planning process had input from three
I sprawling subdivisions, office parks, and strip the local planning board thought it unneces- types of participants. Institutional agents
shopping centers received very low ratings. sary to conduct a second survey specifically included the planning board, the township
The results of the VPS were presented at for the study area. The board considered the committee, and the technical staffofSomerset
I another widely publicized meeting held by VPS a mandate for action, as well as a guide County; public input was provided by area
the planning board during the summer of for change. Although planning officials had merchants, property owners, a senior citizen
1988, and were widely discussed by both the been aware of the study area's functional coalition, and residents; and, finally, the
public and planning officials. Eventually, problems, they did not know how negatively planning professionals included Nelessen,
I they provided guidelines for the community- residents viewed the area. The VPS served as the municipal traffic consultants, and the
wide master planning process. The VPS re- a vehicle for the community to express its municipal planning staff
sults also offered an assessment of the study frustration and disappointment. According The local planning board, as client, was
I area, which consistently received very low to the planning board chair, the VPS was responsible for taking the plan through the
ratings. The responses to the questionnaire instrumental in convincing planning authori- development and approval stages. The board
corroborated these findings. Over four -fifths ties that the area not only "did not work well, chairperson in particular was instrumental in ,
of the responses indicated that the master it did not look well," and that it "could not negotiating the process through long and at
I plan should encourage redevelopment of adequately accommodate either pedestrian times difficult public meetings, as well as in
existing commercial areas to create a "historic or automotive traffic." keeping alive the perception of the VPS
village" commercial center, rather than pro - The master plan was adopted in the fall of results as a popular mandate for redevelop -
I mote additional commercial, retail, and /or 1989, and when work began on the town ment in the corridor. Once the most pressing
office development at new locations; half center plan the following sprtng,it was against traffic concerns had been addressed by means
indicated that the master plan should con- a backdrop of nearly a year and a half of of the loop road concept, the board became 3
I tribute towards creating a town center; and public meetings on the broader master plan largely supportive of the plan, although it
over three - quavers of the responses rejected issues. By then, consensus had been reached remained cautious regarding certain ques-
additional strip commercial development. on many basic concepts that would shape the tions. Some of the concepts Nelessen had
1 4 •CANNERS' CASEBOOK 2 ,
•
•
•
•
•
•
proposed early in the process, such as mixed- •
• Steps in the Visual Preference Survey
II
use buildings with lower cost housing located P y
( above retail, were not accepted, and were • •
dropped from the plan. There was also a •
certain skepticism about the plan's feasibil- • 1 Identify the major issues for the VPS to address, such as the circulation
icy, namely concerning the exactions required • system, the town center, the waterfront, commercial corridors, or new
I
of developers during implementation. How- • residential development.
ever, this was progressively dispelled by fa- • 2 Conduct a photographic survey of the area to document the major issues.
vorable.reactionsfrom the development com- • 3 Select appropriate images from the photographic survey, and contrast
I
munity. On the other hand, due to inexperi- • them with images from other locations depicting alternative solutions.
ence in negotiating with developers, there • 4 Host one or more well - publicized public meetings. Explain the
were also concerns that proposed increases in • methodology and have the audience evaluate the images.
floor area ratios (FARs) and other incentives •
would "give too much away." • S Process the group evaluations and arrange the images by score.
The township committee, the local gov- • 6 Analyze the images with the highest and lowest scores and identify the
erning body, comprises the mayor and four major components or characteristics which contribute to ratings.
I
•
elected officials. In terms of land -use deci- • 7 Present the results, using contrasting images where applicable.
sions, the Warren Township Committee had •
a conservative history, and it showed great • I
reluctance to endorse any proposals that • 11 would change the prevailing pattern ofdevel- • 1 ;
. opment. Responding to public pressure, the • _
committee opposed any kind of multifamily • I
housing. It also felt uncomfortable with the • -
more dynamic public - private partnership • r
required to implement this type of plan. • t. . � , ` � 1
In New Jersey, counties exert little plan- • s k i . !11�! &fit
ning influence, with jurisdiction limited to • -- f. —,b :.
k. county roads and drainage issues. However, -
since the two major arterials in this case were • I
•
county roads, it was critical to reach an
agreement with the county. Once the con- •
cept of the loop road had been formulated • I
and discussed in detail, and once the county's •
traffic consultants had subscribed to it the •
county staff became generally supportive of • I
•
the plan in its entirety.
• Losers and winners: Strip commercial areas like the one above fared poorly in
Merchants and property owners were • the visual preference survey; the audience gave much higher marks to tree -lined
well represented at the various public meet- • traditional commercial streets 1&e the one below.
I
ings. This group was concerned with the •
community's negative image. The business •' :,•_ ,..,-
community initially expressed reservations • - f %"' t .
- about the loop road concept, fearing it would 41 I. ` _ A. ' ■ = °
I
divencustomer traffic from the district There • ` . y ' ` � :
were also concerns over the development • N 7 .= .
potential of remaining vacant land and the •r " ` I
extent of mandatory contributions towards •`
offsite improvements. However, once it be r E '
came clear that increases in the development �" _ � ; t k' _ y +
• „ T
• potential were recommended, to offset the • _ ”` — , ' _ ,,r,`""" '
exactions, the business community became • _ -" + . —"?" ...:....,
largely supportive. This was confirmed by • °"' " - art_
the level of interest, in the form of develop- _ _, • e R.- - :+� _ • + °"'� _ _- -- -
mentapplications, expressed after the plan's • • . $ — - " I
( adoption. • y __ _�
•
Citizen participation was always high, _
both at the VPS session, where it peaked, and • ▪ _ . I
•
. •
•
• PLANNIRS' CASEBOOK 2 5
•
1
`, —, ,; ;I — . ,
i 0 • r - 1 o . ::' ,, , Single -and Two - Family Residences •
i ,� 1----' - _ - - irmem Senior Citizen Housing
y I , -- • ' B ' . ;a M d
6 ire-Use Commercial eandings
_j ��I l Sl ree f smpe'"'° ewen I)
Single- and Two -Fam e sidences J 7J - .: 4- ■ 71 Retention Pend
Village Green
1 ��' F l ' .# � • — 0 „_.1� ' • : -•— Sidewalk System
• Pedestrian Crosswalk Senior Citizen Housing -!� - ' _ _ I IN /
: i . ___ II;X . .. r 7 1 7. ( 5 ._________ n - - — :- i '.:__,== --
am--,-
Intersection Improvement/ 7.-1 8 t -
';:in
^ - � - - __ , • _ ►. Pedestrian Walkway
I Gateway Milling /sank
•. — � :4:7 S '`� ja • Mixed -Uaial Bulgs •` ! • � t Sidwlk Sysfen _-, r _ , Parkin g Let
1 y 1 iii
k * �. a • i
RR ER
III
kb ` w �" e a •Y •�` Doody
= Proposed Nigh*.
y � �; � e
,"s.- -..0,• ry N _ � .a; u _ Plaza
I N D " , � s !
- • :- n Improvement/Traffic Signal
"1 � - Tower /focal Point Intersection Improvement/Traffic
- „" i Pedestrian Crosswalk ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN
R eta iI s tares TOWN CENTER
II Plaza URBAN DESIGN PLAN
• I _ A• a i = , WARREN TOWNSHIP NEW JERSEY
J
c°' 7' - \ A. *bum Amman.. - ❑
• Primo@ New km"
)
at subsequent public hearings. Citizens at The Town Center Urban Design Plan permitted. Altogether, the plan foresees an
I large did not appear to be organized or well The plan eventually adopted by the planning estimated 143,000 square feet ofoffice space,
focused, except for a coalition of senior citi- board in September 1990 delineates four 100,000 square feet of retail, and up to 190
zens. The main concern of this politically different areas —the commercial core, at the housing units, the majority age- restricted.
I influential coalition was to expand senior intersection of the two arterials, and three It should be noted that a parking utiliza-
citizen housing opportunities in the area. surrounding mixed -use zones. The core is tionstudypreparedaspartoftheplan found
Not all housing types were endorsed, envisioned as a purely commercial area, al- that, while office parking had an average
I though —the coalition lobbied against high- lowing a multiplicity of nonresidential uses. utilization rate of 90 percent, retail parking
density housing. in favor of the low- and A mix of commercial and residential, al- had utilization rates ofonly 40 to 65 percent.
medium - density solutions eventually though not within the same building, is Consequently, the plan recommends that
adopted. recommended for the surrounding districts. the office parking requirement bereduced 10
I Finally, a number ofplanning profession- Age - restricted housing is permitted in two of percent and the retail parking requirement of
als were involved. Nelessen and his staff these districts, at much higher densities. one space per 153 square feet be reduced to
participated in detailing the proposals and The plan is built on a series of incentives, one space per 250 -300 square feet. When
I producing the plan. The municipal traffic offered to developers in exchange for onsite combined with shared parking opportuni-
engineer was not supportive, mainly because and offsite improvements. It recommends a ties, parkinglot redevelopment, and curbside
significant revisions to the municipal design 60 percent increase in the commercial FAR, parking, these measures contain the poten-
standards (curb cuts, parking, etc.) were re- and an increase in the building height to tial for significant savings to the developer.
I quired. The traffic consultant was less sensi- three- and -a -half stories. The multi -use zon- In a nutshell, the incentives offered are as
tive to streetscape and appearance issues. ing offers much greater flexibility in deter- follows:
Nevertheless, the consultant agreed with mining each tract's potential uses and how • increase in the permitted floor area ratios
I much of Nelessen's analysis of the area and, these uses can be combined. The smaller lot (FARs) for commercial development;
having endorsed the loop road concept, was sizes (10,000 square feet) encourage more • increase in the permitted building height;
supportive. affordable housing in a community prima-
rily zoned for lots of one acre or more. A • decrease in the parking requirements for
' limited amount of two - family units is also retail and office space;
6 PLANNERS' CASIBOOK 2
1
• encouragement of curbside parking; was seen as particularly important for the board review, with Nelessen's assistance, and
• encouragement ofshared parking arrange- most visible buildings —those close to major one application has been approved. Since
menu; intersections, prominently locatedwithin the all of these applications have followed the
public viewshed, at locations ofvisual termi- plan's provisions, it would appear that the '
• greater flexibility in the mix of different nation, or adjacent to areas of extensive com- development community considers it ad-
types of commercial space; munity use.
�' vantageous over the existing zoning. How-
• greater flexibility in the mix between com- The architectural standards also encour- ever, the review and approval process has
mercial and residential; age a range of building masses, forms, and become more time - consuming and expen-
I
• • decrease in the minimum lot size for roof lines, with buildings of varying propor- sive. Applications are likely to be referred to
residential development; tions and scales. The intent was to create a the zoning board of adjustment, given the
• higher densities for age- restricted hous- medium -size grain, with footprints for com- extent of the variances requested. Although
mercial buildings ranging from 2,000 to the zoning board has been receptive to the _
ing development;
15,000 square feet and residential building plan, additional efforts were required to edu-
• permission of multifamily housing. footprints ranging from 800 to 2,200 square cate the board members, further delaying
In exchange for these incentives, the plan feet. the approval process and making it more I
requires significant dedication ofland for the The plan contains an illustrative site plan expensive for the applicant.
construction of new roads (the new Main and an axonometric map (shown on page 2) This notwithstanding, steps have been
Street), significant streetscape improvements as visual guides for implementation. taken to implement the plan. The Transpor- '
(sidewalks, lighting, landscaping, street trees, tation Improvement District, establishing
street furniture, pedestrian amenities), and OUTCOMES the mechanism for allocating improvement
adherence to stringent site design and archi- The New Jersey planning enabling legisla- costs to developers, and conceived with the
I
tectural design standards. An affordable hous- tion requires the periodic reexamination of loop road concept in mind, was approved by
ing set -aside is also required. municipal master plans, and substantial con- the township committee shortly after the
The plan's circulation system distinguishes formance between these documents and zon- plan's adoption. The township attorney has I
between three types of roads, with different ing or development ordinances. Typically, a been authorized to draft new zoning provi-
design standards. The arterials are primarily municipality will revise its master plan and lions, including new design standards, fol-
reserved for through traffic, and extensive subsequently make the appropriate amend- lowing the plan's recommendations, and
retrofitting is proposed to create a traditional ments to its zoning and development ordi- some of these are now in the discussion stage.
I
"boulevard" appearance —with double rows nances. However, decisions on these docu- And, according to local officials, some of
of trees, intensive screening, gateway build- ments are made by two distinct bodies. these provisions, namely those allowing Be-
ings, and so forth. The proposed Main Street, Municipal planning boards, comprised pre - mor citizen housing at higher densities, are
built entirely on dedicated land, will provide dominantly of appointed members, are re- likely to be adopted by the township com- I
a circumferential route around the town sponsible for master plan decisions, whereas mittee.
center. It is seen as a pedestrian- friendly zoning /land - development ordinances are
street, with curbside parking, continuous adopted by an elected governing body. LESSONS LEARNED
I
retail frontage, and significant streetscape In Warren, conformance between the Create a constituency for change. Success -
features. Finally, several types of local roads, new master plan and the prior zoning has not ful plans should capture the imagination of a
with narrower cartways, are proposed for been achieved to date —the master plan's large number of residents and local officials.
I
residential, commercial, and parking areas. more controversial recommendations, in- The VPS process emphasized public partici-
The site design standards incorporate clas- eluding the town center plan, have not yet pation from the outset and energized the
sic community design principles of street been translated into zoning amendments. interest ofresidents, merchants, and officials I
form, spatial enclosure, and visual termina- Failure to act on this rests with the township in decisions regarding planning and develop -
tion. Individual developments are encour- committee, which appears unwilling, at least ment issues.
aged to create identifiable places, stressing at present, to take responsibility for what
high- quality spatial and visual elements that some consider "radical" changes. Do not expect to have unanimous support
I
convey a positive and enduring image. The This has created a dilemma for town or to avoid criticism. In spite of consider -
overriding principle is to create a pedestrian center developers. Development applications able efforts involved in building a consensus,
realm, offering a continuous, safe, and pleas- can either follow existing zoning, in which not everyone was convinced by the method- I
ant network ofpaths, sidewalks, bridges, and case they will run counter to the adopted ology or accepted the results. One local de-
crosswalks, enhanced by places to rest (e.g. planning board policy as expressed in the veloper viewed the VPS as "sly," adding that
benches and seating areas) and socialize (e.g. plan, and risk being rejected; or they can he thought the planners were trying to "steer
plaices, squares, courtyards). follow the master plan, and contradict the the residents a certain way." Another partici- r
The architectural standards are intended existing zoning provisions, therefore requir- pant asked, "Can anyone seriously think that
to encourage new buildings grounded in ing waivers, variances, special public notic- anyone could be so daft as to prefer a vista
history and seeking to establish a design ing procedures, and so forth. filled with above - ground oil tanks or parking
I
dialogue with the underlying historic and Since the plan's approval, several appli- lots to a well - designed house in a woodland
vernacular fabric of the community. This cations have received informal planning setting ?"
I
PLANNERS' CASEBOOK 2 7
. 1
Assume contradiction will be part of the aging the plan's more flexible regulatory because it is assumed that people will not
planning process. Strong support by cite- framework for and development, which al- walk. Smaller setbacks, continuous retail
I
zens and public officials for planning and lows "gi eand take" berween the municipal- frontage, and other design principles tradi-
design concepts does not necessarily lead to iry and the development community, led to tionally used to define a pedestrian scale can
adoption of the zoning changes needed to feelings of insecurity. In this context, the appear foreign and out of context. Curbside
implement those concepts. In this case, the question of windfalls and the fear of "too parking is resisted by police and fire officials
community balked at adopting concepts of much" development havealso been expressed. on the grounds that it can make emergency
mixed -use development, of housing within In spite of the many meetings required to access more difficult.
walking distance of commercial develop- develop and adopt the plan, a structured
I
ment, and of higher density housing, albeit presentation of the more innovative prin- CONCLUSION
affordable or age - restricted. As one commit- ciples, in the form of educational design On balance, the experience has clearly been
teewoman told the press, "I don't agree with workshops, would have been helpful. positive. Somerset County is evidently pleased
I
the extreme changes in zoning. Most of the with the town center plan. Not only was the
changes were a radical departure from the Expect strong resistance to new planning plan approved by the county staff, but it
zoning that we have." paradigms. The postwar low- densitysubur- eventually won the 1991 Somerset County
I
Contradiction is also reflected in the se- ban model so prevalent across the nation "Excellence in Planning" award. In granting
lection of planning consultants. Although continues to have many influential propo- the award, the county described it as "the first
the planning board hired Nelessen to draft nents, and these views have strong represen- attempt in New Jersey to retrofit an existing
both the master plan and town center plan, ration at the local political level. Like other strip commercial area with a neorradirional
I
the township has continued to retain another neotraditionalisr proposals, the plan has en- development plan." Similarly, the develop-
consul tant, closely associated with the previ- countered opposition from those who refuse ment community has shown considerable
ous planning options, for review of site plan to question the conventional wisdom of the interest, once its initial reservations were
I
applications. last 40 years. And since the plan attempts to overcome. This interest is particularly prom-
retrofi t an existingdeveloped area, the level of ising, given the current recession. However,
Hold educational workshops for local skepticism has been proportionally greater. implementation is still in its early stages. As
I
officials. If new planning concepts are intro- Efforts to establish a viable environment for one local merchant put it, "the test of time is
duced, make sure they are well understood. pedestrians in a fragmented land -use pattern the only criteria that will determine whether
In Warren, the lack of experience with man- can seem like a waste of time and money, the plan will be successful or not."
ill
1
1
L1E56 NW N3SSYHNVN3 1
* 133d1S 213111103 069
*2!01332110 9N1d AlI3 N3SSYHNYHD
clan( ssnv2l) W 1f1
I
10 9NINNVid 590E70
L£909 "II `°
tfNri3 i
uon 'S 9 1 09 JSe3£I£t
I
�i SS' Ht'1 >rioossy2uiuurid urouaury
26619 G 'ddb saauueidpolo
siouiilI ` ° °EOitiJ * � jo almusui u i.i tuy I
ZK ' °N um.ia 0 14. a .R A
d I V d
0604sod •S•n SI
aij 3fing
M
1