THE SOUTHSIDE 2005 PLAN STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPMENT T H E C I T Y O F F L A G S T A F F F L A G S T A F F , A R I Z O N A MAY, 2005 S A N D O W N T O W N S O U T H S I D E N A U F R A N C I S C O P E A K S THE SOUTHSIDE 2005 PLAN STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPMENT T H E C I T Y O F F L A G S T A F F F L A G S T A F F , A R I Z O N A MAY, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................. PURPOSE AND SCOPE................................................................................................................. PROCESS....................................................................................................................................... HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT................................................................................................... 007 010 011 013 CHAPTER I: VISION ..................................................................................................................... A. GREAT PLACES AND SPACES........................................................................................ B. POSTCARDS FROM THE FUTURE................................................................................. C. CONCEPTS AND FRAMEWORK...................................................................................... D. TOP PRIORITIES............................................................................................................... 015 017 020 022 022 CHAPTER II: CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................... A. URBAN DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................... 1. Southside Sub-Areas..................................................................................................... 2. Analytical Maps.............................................................................................................. 3. Current Zoning and Land Use....................................................................................... 4. Underutilized Sites and The Historic Fabric.................................................................. 027 031 033 036 043 051 B. REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS............................................................................................ 1. Southside Character and Identity................................................................................... 2. Population Characteristics............................................................................................. 3. Trends............................................................................................................................ 4. Housing.......................................................................................................................... 5. Local retail...................................................................................................................... 6. Gentrification.................................................................................................................. 053 053 053 055 058 059 060 C. NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY.............................................................................. 067 1. NAU and Flagstaff.......................................................................................................... 067 2. Northern Arizona University Master Plan....................................................................... 070 D. TRANSPORTATION........................................................................................................... 1. Linkages......................................................................................................................... 2. Access............................................................................................................................ 3. Parking........................................................................................................................... 4. Public Transit.................................................................................................................. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , 075 075 077 077 079 A r i z o n a E. PUBLIC REALM................................................................................................................. 081 1. Rio De Flag.................................................................................................................... 091 2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access...................................................................................... 083 F. URBAN CONSERVATION................................................................................................. 1. Historic Resources......................................................................................................... 2. Urban Conservation....................................................................................................... 3. Urban Conservation District........................................................................................... 085 085 088 088 CHAPTER III: STRATEGIES ......................................................................................................... 089 SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES.................................................................................................. 090 A. URBAN DEVELOPMENT................................................................................................... 1. Existing Assets............................................................................................................... 2. Zoning............................................................................................................................ 3. Partnerships................................................................................................................... 4. Public Safety.................................................................................................................. 5. Great Places and Spaces............................................................................................... 6. Underutilized Sites......................................................................................................... 7. Guidelines for Rehabilitation and New Development.................................................... 8. Mike’s Pike and Phoenix Avenue................................................................................... 9. Community Center......................................................................................................... 093 093 093 100 100 101 101 113 113 113 B. REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS............................................................................................ 1. Affordability in the Southside.......................................................................................... 2. Owner Occupied Housing.............................................................................................. 3. Owner Occupancy in Housing....................................................................................... 4. Leasing Strategies......................................................................................................... 5. Partnerships................................................................................................................... 6. Small Scale Local Business........................................................................................... 7. Tourism........................................................................................................................... 114 114 115 116 117 119 120 120 C. NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY................................................................................ 1. Programs for One Community........................................................................................ 2. University-Town Relationship......................................................................................... 3. Future Joint Strategies................................................................................................... 4. Potential Sites for Rehabilitation and Development....................................................... 5. Pedestrian, Bike and Vehicular Access.......................................................................... 123 123 123 123 123 125 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a D. TRANSPORTATION........................................................................................................... 1. Southside Streetscape................................................................................................... 2. Parking Solutions........................................................................................................... 3. Future of Butler Avenue.................................................................................................. 4. Southside Access........................................................................................................... 5. Linking to Future Downtown Redevelopment................................................................ 6. Potential Railway Solutions............................................................................................ 7. Transit............................................................................................................................. 127 127 133 135 137 139 141 141 E. PUBLIC REALM................................................................................................................. 1. Rio De Flag and Flood Control....................................................................................... 2. Focal Public Open Space............................................................................................... 3. Open Space and Public Realm...................................................................................... 4. Public Improvements...................................................................................................... 143 143 143 145 145 F. 146 146 146 146 147 148 URBAN CONSERVATION.................................................................................................. 1. The Southside Urban Conservation District................................................................... 2. Southside Historic Design Review District..................................................................... 3. Affirmative Maintenance and Code Enforcement........................................................... 4. Adjustments and Exceptions to Development Regulations........................................... 5. Fee Reduction or Exemption for Permit Work................................................................ G. SIGNAGE........................................................................................................................... 151 APPENDICES A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Public Workshops............................................................................................................... PAPER 1: Precedents and Directions in University-Town Relationships........................... PAPER 2: Precedents and Directions in Local Retail........................................................ PAPER 3: Precedents and Directions in Non-Profit Development Associations............... PAPER 4: Urban Conservation........................................................................................... Field Notes and Observations; Urban Conservation.......................................................... Population Characteristics; Table and Boundary................................................................ 152 154 160 166 172 175 154 SOURCES....................................................................................................................................... 184 CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS........................................................................................ 186 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY “The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development” was created for the City of Flagstaff as a strategy document for the Southside neighborhood, which, is facing change on multiple levels. The Southside neighborhood has combined rich historical character with population influences. The neighborhood is the best representation of the ethnic diversity that evolved in Flagstaff from the turn of the century through the 1940’s and contains an array of 19th and early 20th century vernacular houses. Because of cultural history represented in over two-thirds of the buildings, the neighborhood has been nominated for listing on the National Register for Historic Places, The Historic Route 66 originally ran along the northern border of the neighborhood and to date Phoenix Street contains remnants of that route in the form of historic hotel buildings and their signs. The railroad too brought in people and trade into the area and spurred industrial sites like lumber mills. During the 1980’s Butler Street was widened and designated as a major East-West transportation corridor. As a result, a number of structures were moved out of the way and the neighborhood divided into 2 distinct sections. It also opened the opportunity for high traffic related commercial development. The proximity of the northern section to downtown, the mix of commercial and residential uses and the abundance of historical buildings, established the area as a walkable community of character. The southern section of T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 8 the neighborhood is dominated by the presence of Northern Arizona University. Being further away from Downtown, it has less commercial mix and influence. Many single family homes have been converted to duplex apartments and many multifamily apartments built to house students from NAU. The demand for housing student and staff still continues. In the early 1990’s, in response to the need for moving traffic efficiently from NAU to the Flagstaff Hospital north of Downtown, Francisco and Beaver Streets were established as a one-way pair. Though traffic volumes and speeds improved, the move also challenged the walkability of the streets and therefore impacted the commercial success of the establishments on the two streets. The Southside neighborhood has historically been in the floodplain of the Rio De Flag, which, has flooded repeatedly since the late 1800s. As a consequence of the “floodplain” designation by Federal Emergency Management Agency in 1983, it has become very expensive to build and rebuild in the area. Any loans require insurance, which, is very expensive or unavailable as companies refuse to touch the property. New development has to be built above the flood zone, which significantly adds to the cost of development. As a result, Southside has not been able to upkeep its buildings very well and has not attracted much new development. But that is set to change. The Army Corps of Engineers is undertaking a flood control project that will lift the area out of the floodplain. This is bound to attract investment and create infill opportunities in Southside. At the same time this development potential can put the historic T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 9 buildings at risk of being replaced for more lucrative, higher density buildings. Another project in the works is the extension Lone Tree Road from the I-40 freeway to Route 66 in the form of a major North-South artery. This will supplement the overcapacitated Milton Road and take some traffic off it. It can potentially mitigate traffic pressure on San Francisco and Beaver Streets and provide better access to NAU and areas east of Downtown. The aim of The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development is to recommend a variety of strategies that respond to the issues and changes the area is facing. The purpose of the working document is to enable the City of Flagstaff to recognize a community vision and to steer the improvement efforts of the Southside Neighborhood in this direction. Decision-makers will use The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development as a guide to make policy, future planning, phasing, and budgetary decisions for the Southside Neighborhood. The consultant team, Field Paoli Architects with Robert Bruce Anderson, formulated The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 10 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The aim of The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development is to recommend a variety of strategies that respond to the issues and changes the area is facing. The most imminent and impactive is the Rio De Flag flood control project that will lift Southside out of the FEMA designated floodplain and therefore attract development. The purpose of the working document is to enable the City of Flagstaff to recognize a community vision and to steer the development potential and improvement efforts of the Southside Neighborhood in this direction. Decision-makers will use The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development as a guide to make policy, future planning, phasing, and budgetary decisions for the Southside Neighborhood. This document contains information regarding the economic, urban form, historic context, transportation, and political context for new/ redevelopment and policies for the Southside neighborhood. The 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development is a strategic document; it is not a General Plan, Specific Plan, or an Urban Design Plan. The objective is to provide direction for the decision making that will affect future planning and policy changes and growth in the Southside Neighborhood. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 11 PROCESS This document is the outcome of a series of public workshops with residents and business owners of the Southside Neighborhood and City of Flagstaff staff and multi-disciplinary consideration of concepts, framework, and goals for the Southside Neighborhood. The Consultant team studied the Southside neighborhood’s strengths, weaknesses, and potentials. The community input of local residents, business owners, and City of Flagstaff staff members, helped the team formulate a multi-disciplinary vision for the district. This information gathering process preceded the formal analysis of the current context of the Southside neighborhood. At the community workshops, the team discussed potential strategies for improvement of the district. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 12 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 13 HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT Different users may use this document according to their specific needs. This section outlines the structure of The Southside 2005 Plan: Strategies for Development. Section I: VISION characterizes the existing and future conditions of the Southside neighborhood. This chapter also outlines the concepts, framework, and goals that may shape the future of the district. Section II: CONTEXT AND ANALYSIS lays the groundwork for the current situation of the Southside neighborhood and provides analysis of the key issues that the Southside neighborhood is currently facing in terms of future development and growth. This section also provides commentary regarding existing plans and current projects going forward in the district. Section III: STRATEGIES outlines a variety of strategies designed to achieve goals and complete the vision for the Southside neighborhood. This section also illustrates prototypical design options or alternatives for specific physical sites in the Southside neighborhood. Finally this section also summarizes the opportunities for phasing and funding of various strategies outlined in this document. The following framework has been used in the analysis and recommendations in the document. This is an attempt to categorize the above so that the different departments, agencies and people associated with the categories can locate and follow up the issues in the document. 1. Urban Development 2. Economic Development 3. Northern Arizona State University 4. Transportation 5. Public Realm 6. Urban Conservation T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a I. VISION 16 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 17 CHAPTER I. VISION 1A. GREAT PLACES AND SPACES As part of the community workshops, the consultant team asked small groups of residents and business owners to identify Great Places and Spaces in the Southside neighborhood. These are areas, buildings and places that are etched into the memory and day to day life of a neighborhood by way of their character, social contributions and importance. These hubs become milestones and landmarks in a community, contributing to the character and quality of life as a whole of the area. Any future development and policy should take into consideration and build on these Great Places and Spaces: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. T h e Guadalupe church Community garden Visitor center/ Amtrak station Cross Cultural Dance Resources South Beaver school De Beau hostel Downtowner/Nackard Tower Old Perez family property – Verde to Agassiz F.U.T.S. trail Murdoch community center Cogdill recreation center Sawmill Park & Willow Bend Environmental Education Center Pocket Park on Butler & San Francisco Street Beaver Street retail corridor Farmer’s market Macy’s restaurant S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. : El Charro restaurant Beaver Street Brewery Jalisco’s market Tourist Home and Ball Court Historic neighborhood. Historic house at Butler and Lonetree streets Northern Arizona University; Old Main – North campus Cemetery in N.A.U. Rock church at Beaver and Benton streets Riverside community church Springhill church 1st Missionary Baptist Where the grids collide South Agassiz, south of Cottage Rio De Flag S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 18 3. Visitor center/ Amtrak station 1. Guadalupe church 5. South Beaver school 2. Community garden 14. Beaver Street retail corridor 16. Macy’s restaurant 17. El Charro restaurant 15. Farmer’s market 19. Jalisco’s market 22. NAU; Old Main – North campus 21. Historic neighborhood; house at Butler and Lonetree Streets 20. Tourist Home and Ball Court 24. Rock church at Beaver and Benton streets T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 19 12. Sawmill Park & Willow Bend Environmental Education Center 10. Murdoch community center 6. De Beau hostel 7. Downtowner/Nackard Tower 18. Beaver Street Brewery 25. Riverside community church 30. Rio De Flag GREAT PLACES & SPACES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 20 1B. POSTCARDS FROM THE FUTURE Southside’s unique character and amenities attract residents and tourists alike. A restored Route 66, informing people of the way America traveled in the 1920s-60s, runs through the historic Southside neighborhood in Flagstaff. Over the years, the neighborhood has strived for and achieved a walkable quality with 2-way streets, traffic calming, streets lined with majestic trees, bike racks and furniture, supporting the commercial and residential uses. A bustling farmers’ market and adjacent small shops serves residents and tourists ,pulling in people from all over, on foot, through the trails, on bikes, by transit and by car. Local artists offer their works in the live-work studios. This together with other businesses and cultural activities on Phoenix, San Francisco and Beaver Streets, forms the vibrant hub of Southside. Parking is available on street and in parking lots tucked away from sight, in line with the aims of the Southside Parking District, which, allocates parking on a district level. New housing is available T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 21 to new residents, NAU faculty and residents in 23 story apartments. New development is of an appropriate scale and character and preserves views to the mountains. Historic buildings like the Handball Court and Tourist Homes make up a larger historic district and have been restored and preserved and put to use. Southside also serves as an arts district to Flagstaff with artists contributing from all over the Coconino county. A public gathering place that doubles as a concert venue, provides civic identity and pride to Southside. Smaller pocket parks dot the area. The neighborhood has a relaxed air with a bohemian, blue collar, and ethnically diverse population. Because of community programs over the years, some in local churches and community centers, there are fewer transients and homeless people on the streets. Community programs serve the area with the help of residents, NAU and school students. The Rio de Flag, once a feared source of flooding, is now a public greenway winding through the neighborhood. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 22 1C. CONCEPTS AND FRAMEWORK The concepts presented in this plan are conceived to implement the vision of the Southside neighborhood as a lively and economically viable community. Densification and Infill Development: Historically, growth in the country has taken the path of least resistance and least investment; cities have grown outwards. As a result people have been able to buy larger houses, park cheaply and find subsidized goods in big box and strip retail centers. On the other hand this kind of sprawl development has resulted in a loss of community, a loss of identity of place, ever growing freeways and congestion, an erosion of walkable communities, a challenge to small enterprise and to city centers. At the same time, density is not the universal solution to all woes. More important and relevant is the concept of appropriate density that a place can sustain and that is sensitively inserted to build on the history and context of a place. Infill development - developing within exiting city boundaries and city cores - is a way to build on existing infrastructure and reverse the above mentioned side effects of sprawl development. In city cores like Southside, infill development can achieve a continuous building fabric, intensity of commercial uses, employment in the area, housing opportunities at various price points, an enhanced identity for Southside and a walkable and vibrant neighborhood. Connectivity to Downtown & Other Neighborhoods: A complete neighborhood is one that is a self-contained in terms of having access to residential, work and entertainment uses. It is only logical that good access to other areas, peripheral and distant, can tap on a larger amenity base and weave neighborhoods together. Downtown is a highly visible area of the city in terms of being a healthy city center and having thoroughfare traffic to the Grand Canyon. Southside can benefit from a good vehicular and pedestrian linkage to Downtown across Route-66 and the railroad tracks. Northern Arizona University, Southside’s southern neighbor, is an institution that shares a quid-pro-quo relationship with Southside and its residents in terms of educational, employment, entertainment and housing opportunities. Connectivity to NAU can help both grow in a positive manner. Southside as a destination: Many qualities have established Southside as a place of character in Flagstaff, such as, its history, historic buildings, vibrant shopping streets in the form of San Francisco and Beaver streets, proximity to NAU and Downtown, public infrastructure, cultural diversity and location on Route-66. At the same time, the neighborhood has become a thoroughfare between NAU and Downtown, between east and west Flagstaff. The identity of this area, as a memorable destination, needs to be restored and built upon. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 23 Walkable, Mixed-Use Cores: Walking is an activity that is good for Main Street commerce and livability of an area, amongst other things. A mix of uses makes an area self-contained, provides a 24-hour community, work opportunities near housing, enhances area safety, decreases autodependance and therefore auto infrastructure, forms an enriching community and provides the area with character and a sense of place. Transportation and land-use policies should be considered in tandem with and relation to the above. Local Flavor & Presence: In the “Great Places & Spaces” exercise, Southside residents clearly resonated on the neighborhood churches, small retail and local events as the biggest amenities and character defining elements in Southside. This local flavor is what makes communities unique and grounds them geographically. Locally owned businesses builds strong communities. These businesses recycle a large share of their revenue back into the community by supporting other local businesses such as local banks, accountants, printers, and internet service providers. They have a major impact on the local economy as they are also major providers of jobs in the area. Entrepreneurship fuels economic innovation and prosperity, and serves as a key means for families to move out of low-wage jobs and into the middle class. Local ownership of businesses ensures that important decisions are made by people who live in the community and who will feel the impact of those decisions. It is in the interest of a community to consider ensuring the above with policies and incentives. Town & Gown: Increasingly, colleges and universities are developing not as gated citadels but as a key component of city building. Universities have evolved and adapted over time to better integrate with the cities in which they are located as they share an important “quid pro quo” relationship with them. Universities, in partnership with cities and private developers, have the capacity to become vital economic engines that stimulate the development of neighborhood and district amenities. As Universities have become more broadly diverse, they have also become more accessible to society, potentially becoming one of the key community focal points. The key to this vision is the integration of new development with existing assets to create improved systems of open space, transportation, and buildings. In order to provide multi-disciplinary consideration of the Southside Neighborhood, Section 3 - Context and Analysis, Section 4 - Issues, and Section 5 - Strategies of this document are organized according to the following framework: 1. Urban Development: Lifting Southside out of the Rio De Flag floodplain is going to attract development to the area. This document comes up with strategies that channelize the investments in a way that builds on and respects the historical character, neighborhood structure, scale of existing development, connections and walkability of the area. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 24 2. Economic Development: A number of factors have led to Southside being relatively economically depressed - being on the south side of the tracks, being in a floodplain, lack of access, competition from Downtown being some key reasons. The Southside 2005 Plan comes up with ways to attract appropriate retail to the area, bring in affordable housing, resist gentrification and set up catalyst projects that infuse energy into the various sub-areas of Southside. 3. Northern Arizona State University: Being the only neighborhood bordering NAU, Southside’s character and workings stand to be influenced by the university. A quid pro quo relationship already exists between the two - Southside has a renowned institution as a neighbor that is an employer, investor and people generator and NAU is afforded a vibrant, historically significant neighborhood where students and faculty can live, play and work. With precedents and recommendations, collaboration potentials are suggested that further the Southside-NAU relationship. 4. Transportation: With the Lone Tree extension, Southside will be flanked on three side by major arteries. These will potentially absorb some traffic out of the core of the neighborhood, and can reaffirm Southside as a pedestrian friendly area. San Francisco and Beaver Streets will still be the major North-South links into Downtown and can equally support vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles and therefore provide a better environment for retail and mixed-use. The Mountain Line bus system can better connect Southside to the rest of Flagstaff. A NAU bus shuttle can loop through Downtown, Southside and the campus. Buildings and other elements can define gateways that link NAU to Southside 5. Public Realm: This is the public part of the area including streets, open spaces and community buildings. The public realm of Southside can be made more accessible to pedestrians, vehicles and bicycles, with a stress on walkability. Residents and visitors could have landscaped streets with sidewalks that attract people and commerce. The area can be better connected to NAU and to downtown with strategic streets, gateways and signage. 6. Historic Conservation: The Southside Plan recommends the formation of an Urban Design Conservation District is suggested to retain and rehabilitate historic fabric of the Southside neighborhood and shape appropriate new development. This will be a locally enforceable program and could include code enforcement, guidelines for new development, loan grant assistance, a design review process and a streamlined and user-friendly process. Programs and initiatives are suggested that encourage the reuse and maintenance of existing building stock and prominently put these historical assets on the Flagstaff map. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 25 1D. TOP PRIORITIES The consultant team began by recording the set of top priorities that the City of Flagstaff and the Southside community cited as primary concerns of the community: 1. FUTURE CHARACTER OF NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS INCLUDING LOWER TRAFFIC SPEEDS AND BIKE CONNECTIVITY 2. RETENTION OF GUADALUPE CHURCH AS A COMMUNITY HUB 3. PLANNING FOR APPROPRIATE NEW DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING, AN APPROPRIATE MIX OF RESIDENTIAL USES. WITH ZONING AND OTHER TOOLS, PLAN FOR AN APPROPRIATE SCALE OF NEW DEVELOPMENT AND PRESERVE HISTORICAL CHARACTER. 4. SAFETY AND LAW ENFORCEMENT 5. N.A.U. - SOUTHSIDE RELATIONSHIP 6. FUTURE OF RIO DE FLAG 7. HOMELESS/ TRASH/ LITTER 8. LACK OF OWNER-OCCUPIED DWELLINGS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a II. CONTEXT & ANALYSES 28 te-6 6 In te rs ta te 40 Milton Road Rou CONTEXT AND LINKAGES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 29 CHAPTER II. CONTEXT AND ANALYSES Southside is located very centrally in the city of Flagstaff, bounded by Downtown to the north and NAU to the south. The Southside study area encompasses the area that is bound by Route 66 and downtown Flagstaff to the northeast, by Dupont and Franklin Streets and Northern Arizona to the southwest, Milton Street and Old Town to the northwest, and Elden and Lone Tree Road and the new Stone Forest neighborhood to the southeast. This section dissects the evolution, character and configuration of Southside on the basis of the established framework; 1. Urban Development, 2. Economic Development, 3. Northern Arizona State University, 4. Transportation, 5. Public Realm and 6. Urban Conservation. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 30 ADJACENT INFLUENCES ON THE STUDY AREA T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 31 2A. URBAN DEVELOPMENT Before getting into the existing and desirable development in the area, it is important to understand the bordering influences of the area. These are elaborated as below: 1. Downtown: Situated north across the railroad tracks and Route-66, Downtown still is a major influence on Southside. Being in proximity to Route-66 and to Downtown, Southside is located prominently on the Flagstaff map. Downtown is a thoroughfare for visitors headed to Grand Canyon and its neighbor Southside gets some of that traffic. It is connected to Southside by the one way pair of Francisco and Beaver Streets. These streets have great importance in Southside as the major commercial and mixed-use spines. 2. Old Town: This is the area, west of Southside, where Flagstaff was established as a railroad town. It has some historical buildings and the main land use is residential. 3. Northern Arizona University: Situated at the southern border of Southside, NAU is the only neighbor that is not separated by a major artery. A quid pro quo relationship exists between the two - Southside has a renowned institution as a neighbor that is an employer, investor and people generator and NAU is afforded a vibrant, historically significant neighborhood where students and faculty can live, play and work. 4. Stoneforest: This is an abandoned sawmill site, east of Southside, that is suddenly an opportunity for infill development. Medium to high density residential units are planned here with some corner retail. Franklin is the only street, other than Butler Avenue, that can potentially link the Stone Forest development to the Southside area. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 32 SUB-AREAS:MIXED-USE CORRIDORS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 33 2.A.1 Southside Subareas Given the rich and diverse history of Southside and the diverse constituents shaping it over time, it is appropriate that the area be looked as a grouping of smaller distinct sub-areas. 6 mixed-use subareas are noted: Route 66/ Railroad Addition, Mike’s Pike, San Francisco Street, Beaver Street, Butler Avenue, and the New Lone Tree. a. Sub-Areas: Residential Route 66/ Railroad Addition District: Route 66 and the railroad are the primary character-defining features of Flagstaff and of the Southside neighborhood. The railroad and Route-66 brought in people, vehicles, goods and investment into the area. The area historically is a mix of industrial land peripheral to the railroad and Route-66 related commercial buildings including motels and hostels; Part of Phoenix Street was the original Route-66. Several blocks of Phoenix Avenue are strongly reflective of the early 20th century tourist and railroad townscape of the American West. In fact two blocks of Phoenix Avenue contain no less than 10 National Register properties. Phoenix Street, the first parallel street south of the railroad, has taken on greater importance as the main feeder to the properties along the railroad, as the industrial uses have faded. Mike’s Pike: Mike’s Pike, like Phoenix was the original alignment for Route-66 as it travelled east off Milton. The historical origins of Mike’s Pike’s place name and function are no longer apparent. The obscure, offset entry at Milton is inhospitable to newcomer traffic. The area now is a mix of commercial and industrial uses and abandoned sites. Given its location, history and underutilized nature, the area holds great potential. San Francisco & Beaver Streets: San Francisco and Beaver Streets serve as the Southside neighborhood’s pedestrian-oriented retail commercial and mixed-use corridors. Relatively, San Francisco Street has more retail than Beaver probably because of a better connection to NAU, whose students and staff frequent the businesses on the street. In the early 90’s the streets were converted into a one-way pair to move traffic efficiently between NAU and Downtown and the hospital up north. As the only links to Downtown, the streets as a result, carried more traffic and faster traffic. This challenged the walkability and the commercial success of the area to an extent. Several National Register-listed properties are located on each street. Some of the recent retail commercial construction is incompatible in terms of setbacks, massing, and the present lack of openings. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 34 Exhibit 2A-5 Sub-Areas: Residential T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 35 Butler Avenue: Butler Avenue is a major eastwest corridor going through the Southside area. The street was widened in the 80’s to complement Route-66 and take some traffic off it. The widening distinctly divided the neighborhood and the lack of pedestrian crossings at every intersection exaggerated the divide and dedicated Butler to mainly vehicles. Most existing land uses faced the north-south streets. The Butler face attracted some auto-oriented businesses but those have contributed to the quality of life in the neighborhood. New Lone Tree: Lone Tree is a major north-south vehicular corridor that defines the eastern edge of Southside’s southeast quarter. The future realignment project will present opportunities for the existing alignment to function as a seam that connects Southside neighborhood with the proposed new adjacent Sawmill/Stoneforest residential community. The National Registerlisted Prochnow House holds the southeast corner at the intersection of Lone Tree Road and Butler Avenue. The existing Lone Tree Road is being upgraded to being a major north-south artery, linking Interstate 40 to Route 66. This will take some traffic, headed east of downtown, off Milton and Route 66. Being a north-south corridor, it will also relieve San Francisco and Beaver Streets of some traffic. b. SUB-AREAS: MIXED-USE+RESIDENTIAL to the north west, and Elden and Lone Tree Road to the south east. The four residential sub-areas are identified as: north west, north east, south west, and south east. San Francisco Street divides the sub-areas into east and west; Butler Avenue divides the subareas into north and south. Sub-Areas: Residential The Southside residential sub-areas are bound by Route 66 to the north east, by Dupont and Franklin Streets to the south west, Milton Street T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 36 2.A.2 Analytical Maps Base Map The following base map represents the individual streets and parcels in the Southside neighborhood. The overall site boundary is the dashed line that defines the project area. The solid boundary line defines the new Stone Forest neighborhood area. The Rio de Flag, cutting through the site, is shown in blue. BASE MAP T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 37 COMMUNITY BUILDINGS Church Civic School T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 38 Commercial Districts The following districts can be found in the Southside neighborhood, as defined by the commercial corridors: Route 66, Mike’s Pike, Beaver Street, and San Francisco Street. DISTRICTS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 39 Block Pattern Larger-scale unbroken blocks occur between Phoenix Avenue and Route 66. The block pattern grid is predominantly oriented towards Route 66; however the grid shifts to the true north-south direction at Agassiz and Verde Streets. Most of the blocks south of Cottage Avenue in the Southside neighborhood are bisected by smaller-scale alleys. Southside Study Area BNSF Railroad Redevelopment Boundary BLOCK PATTERN T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 40 Building Footprints The figure-ground diagram represents the small to large scale building footprints that make up the block pattern of the Southside neighborhood. Larger building sits along Phoenix Avenue and San Francisco Street. There exist multiple gaps in the continuous building facades of the urban fabric, both on block corners and midblock. Also apparent is the continuous fabric along San Francisco Street and the swath that has opened up with Butler Avenue as it cuts through the neighborhood. Southside Study Area Building BUILDING FOOTPRINTS BNSF Railroad Redevelopment Boundary T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 41 Building Conditions There are several buildings in need of major rehabilitation scattered within the Southside study area. The building conditions vary according to their degree of disrepair. Buildings that are in extremely poor condition are labeled dilapidated. Southside Study Area BUILDING CONDITIONS Major Rehabilitation Needed Dilapidated T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 42 CURRENT ZONING T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 43 2.A.3 Current zoning and Land Use Much of the existing Southside neighborhood was part of the initial town layout. The planners probably saw the importance of Francisco and Beaver Streets as north-south connectors and as the major commercial spines of the neighborhood and therefore zoned it as CommunityCommercial. The area is surrounded by supporting Multi-Family Residential and some Restrictive Industrial zoning, responding to the frontage on the railroad and Route 66. A good portion of the land within the commercial zoning has remained residential in its land use for a number of reasons: market capacity, the general health of the neighborhood and surrounding areas, state of the economy, limited access and increased speeds because of the one-way pairs being some of those reasons. amenity for the neighborhood. Butler Avenue, though an important component in the city’s transportation network, has effectively split the neighborhood into Northern and Southern sections. Lack of mitigating streetscape and pedestrian crossings has compounded the divide further. The northern section, being closer to downtown and Route-66, has most of the commercial uses. The southern section has multifamily residential responding to the needs of students from NAU. The Lone Tree realignment will promote the street to an important north-south arterial. This will reduce the traffic load on Milton Road and could effectively reduce the traffic on San Francisco and Beaver Streets as well. This major corridor will have development ramifications along its length A number of changes have occurred since the and here exists an opportunity for zoning to stay neighborhood was laid out that has changed the a step ahead of these changes. nature of development the area has, can and should attract. The zoning code should respond To the east of the existing Lone Tree Road is the to these comprehensive changes. The late 1980’s old Stoneforest Lumber Mill site that is currently saw Butler Avenue emerge as one of the main going through a zoning change to high density east-west vehicular corridors. A number of houses residential. This development will effectively were removed along the right of way to widen the extend the southern section of the Southside street. A few parcels north of Butler changed in neighborhood eastwards. A portion of the land-use from residential to commercial on the Stoneforest site abutting Butler Avenue and Lone Butler Avenue frontage. But given the vehicular Tree Road is proposed to be designated Urban nature of the street, and the related land uses it Commercial. attracted, the uses have not proved to be an T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 44 LAND USE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 45 Franklin is the southernmost street of the neighborhood bordering NAU. It is a potential access point for the neighborhood and NAU from the new Lone Tree Road. With the creation of the new neighborhood on the Stoneforest site, it is proposed that Franklin Street extend and connect into the Stoneforest development. This will increase the importance of Franklin in being both an edge street to NAU and a major east-west spine of the expanded Southside neighborhood. Land Use Single-family and multifamily residential uses make up most of the Southside study area. Commercial uses are largely found on Phoenix Avenue, Mike’s Pike, Beaver, and San Francisco Streets. Mixed-use buildings, churches, as well as residential may be found on Beaver and San Francisco Streets. Over time, industrial land uses have diminished due to high real-estate costs, changing adjacent land uses and the migration of trade from railroads to highways. Southside has a Commercial Service District designation for the Mile’s Pike Area that still allows uses from mobile home and trailer sales to construction yards. Many buildings are not used for industrial uses. The Regional Plan for Flagstaff envisages peopleoriented mixed-use neighborhoods where minimum densities are codified. To bring that about, and to respond to all the above, a new zoning code for the area or a zoning overlay is recommended. Zoning and land use have direct implications on the physical form of a community; these regulations are prescriptive and dictate how to regulate the design and urban form of a neighborhood. These measures regulate relationships between districts and corridors in order to shape a public realm promoting high quality social interaction within the neighborhood. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 46 LAND USE - COMMERCIAL T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 47 LAND USE - MULTI FAMILY HOUSING T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 48 Southside Study Area Owner-Occupied Buildings Non-Owner -Occupied Buildings Northern Arizona University Parcels BNSF Railroad OWNERSHIP T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 49 Butler Avenue: Effect on Urban Fabric The insertion of Butler has challenged the continuity of the urban fabric. The lack of pedestrian crossings, at streets like Humphreys, has compromised north-south pedestrian connectivity. This has had an impact on the land use continuity, especially the retail on San Francisco and Beaver Streets, which for the most part has not continued south across Butler Avenue. Though an important component in the city’s transportation network, Butler Avenue has effectively split the neighborhood into Northern and Southern sections. Lack of mitigating streetscape and pedestrian crossings has compounded the divide further. BUTLER AVENUE; EFFECT ON URBAN FABRIC T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 50 UNDERUTILIZED SITES AND THE HISTORIC FABRIC T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 51 2.A.4 Underutilized Sites and the Historic Fabric An underutilized site may be empty, deserted, have little building area or be a critical site that can act as a catalyst to development and investment. A compilation of such sites has been made for the Southside area. The historically significant sites have been shown in yellow to be mindful of them while considering development. The map shows a few areas which offer larger parcels and more opportunities. The first is the Mike’s Pike Area, that is being used for semi-industrial uses currently and has many empty buildings. Another area is parallel and south of the railroad, mostly along Phoenix Avenue. The Flagstaff Urban Trail system and the Route-66 underpass will be adjacent to these parcels. The parcel at the corner of Fulton and Butler Streets belongs to NAU and the university is considering various options to put an academic building with structured parking on it. This is a site with high visibility, marking an entrance into Flagstaff and into the University. The group of parcels on San Francisco and Franklin offer considerable space for a project that can benefit both the neighborhood and NAU. Most other opportunities are smaller, mostly residential parcels, suggesting infill opportunities. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 52 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 53 2B. REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS 2.B.1 Southside character and identity In recent memory, the Southside served as the City’s red light district, home to bars, bordellos, and was generally thought to be unsafe and “rough.” The outlaw character remains active in public perception. The Southside remains a place where artists, lower income residents and those with alternative life-styles are clustered. For Flagstaff residents, the Southside is not a common retail or dining destination, and there are lingering concerns about safety. Within the past several years there have been several highly publicized drug busts in the Southside as well as other parts of the City, reinforcing safety concerns. Additionally, the Southside is where ethnic minorities first settled in the Flagstaff, and where descendents of some of these families continue to live today. The Southside is demographically distinct from the rest of the City, with fewer families, more students, and more bohemian households. Local property owners suggest a need for a changed image or promotional campaign that focuses on the area’s ethnic identity and local creative talent, versus its historic identity. The population of Flagstaff is currently estimated at 61,270 and is projected to rise 15% in the next five years. Population growth in the area has threatened what some residents have called the “small-town character” of Flagstaff, where they say it used to be more common to run into familiar faces with some regularity. The Southside represents a neighborhood where this small-town character might be preserved in the historic housing stock, retail offerings, and new, small-scale development. 2.B.2 Population Characteristics The estimated 2004 population was 61,270 for the City of Flagstaff, and 1,353 for the Southside (Source: Claritas, see Exhibit 4C-1and 4C-2: Population Characteristics Table and Boundary). The population of the City is expected rise 10.56% in the next five years, to 68,850, and the population of the Southside is projected to increase at a slower rate, 2.73%, to 1,390 in 2009. Total households in the City in 2004 are estimated at 21,948, rising 15% by 2009 to 25,230. Households in the Southside total 584 and are expected to rise only about 5% to 614 by 2009. Average household T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 54 size in the Southside is smaller than the City, at 2.30 persons compared to 2.57 persons for Flagstaff, with many households in the neighborhood likely composed of single NAU students. There are fewer children and a greater percentage of young adults in the Southside, which is also not surprising. Nearly 30% of the Southside is aged 18-24, compared to 19% for the City, and only 16% is under age 18, compared to almost 25% for the City as a whole. The racial breakdown of the Southside is similar to that of the City as a whole, with one exception. The Southside has a greater percentage of Latino residents—36% versus 16% for the City. This reflects the fact the Southside has historically been home to Flagstaff’s ethnic population, which is primarily composed of Latinos of Mexican descent and a handful of African Americans. Household incomes differ significantly between the Southside and the City as whole, with averages at $55,627 and $26,920 respectively. Median household incomes are also very different, with the Southside at $19,943 and the City at $41,139. Southside residents are, by and large, renters who make considerably less money than the average Flagstaff resident. Almost 79% of Southside households are renter occupied, as compared to 52% for the City. Well over half (57.5%) of Southside residents earn less than $25,00 per year, compared to 29.2% for the City, and the overwhelming majority (89.2%) earn less than $50,000 per year, compared to the City as a whole where over 40% make more than $50,000. Population Characteristics Southside residents are also more likely to work in service professions (37.8% vs. 19% for the City), many working in the tourism industry as sales clerks and hotel and restaurant staff. Anecdotally, we understand that the majority of the owner-occupied households in the Southside (124 households, or 21%) are occupied by families who represent the historically ethnic fabric of the community, and it is these longtime residents who are most vulnerable to the pressures of gentrification. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 55 2.B.3 Trends a. Housing Flagstaff has developed into a bifurcated housing market, with new housing marketed to full time residents rapidly increasing in price and a growing number of second-home buyers driving the market for new development. In each of the last three years, prices have risen 10 to 15%, similar to national trends. An average ranch-style three-bedroom house sells for between $300,000 and $360,000. The rapid price increase on houses occupied year-round has resulted in rapidly decreased affordability, with limited supply priced to be affordable to local residents as well as little supply available to support a local move-up market. There is strong and under-served demand for housing products, including townhouses, priced at $150,000 to $250,000. But there is no evidence of market support for condos configured as stacked flats. In the Southside, primary demand is for rental housing and, given the proximity to the University, demand for rentals is likely to remain strong. Speculative buyers have acquired properties in the area with the likely intention of developing market-rate residential product, which is likely to be purchased for investments and rented out to students. Because the rent burden for student housing is typically spread over 3 to 4 rent-paying students per unit, these rents are often higher than moderate income families can afford. New houses are primarily marketed to affluent, seasonal residents of the Phoenix/Southern Arizona area and a smattering of households from outside of the state in search of more temperate summer weather. Anecdotally, second-home residents seem quite different from other Flagstaff residents. The age profile is generally older with a lot of affluent, active adults, aged 55 and up. Gated communities are popular for second home-buyers, who are attracted both to the feeling of affluence afforded and to the security provided for a home that may only be occupied one month a year. Products being developed for this market range from town homes to large single-family residences. Reportedly, prices range from $500,000 to $1,000,000. These two markets are distinct, and buyer crossover is rare. Developments typically appeal only to their specific buyer type. Little housing is currently being developed for the lower income service industry workers who support Flagstaff’s tourism economy, or, for that matter, for locally employed residents in the middle income brackets who may be in the market to “move up” into a new home in the future. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 56 Some gated communities offer recreational programs for children vacationing in the complex. These programs have patronized Southside businesses such as the “you paint it” pottery studio located in the mixed use, rehabbed feed store on Phoenix. Average rents are $1,200-1,300/ month, representing a rapid escalation over the last few years. Rentals are primarily occupied by full-time residents. Supportable student rent rates are higher. Because second homes do not generate school enrollment, student/household ratio is going down. This trend is compounded by trend of flight by local year-round residents to charter schools. b. Retail Shopper Patronage Patterns Local merchants reviewed by CCG report that most of their customers are local residents followed next by NAU faculty & students and lastly by visitors. Residents of second homes are an important source of demand for local food establishments. Visitors are unaware of the offerings on the Southside and are challenged by the barriers to accessing the area. Access is especially difficult for travelers on Route 66 if they miss the exit onto Beaver Street. Similarly, the turnoff to Mike’s Pike is difficult to see for travelers who are not already familiar with the area due to the one way road pattern. Visitors to Flagstaff often do not patronize the Southside as part of a trip to Flagstaff. There are several mountaineering recreation supplies stores and bars in the Southside neighborhood. Students are important patrons for the local bars, despite a 21 year old legal drinking age. There are a few rough bars where physical fighting has spilled out onto the streets. Drug problems are also reported around one bar on San Francisco. The Flagstaff visitor’s center typically refers visitors to businesses along Phoenix Avenue. The Altitude Restaurant promotes marketing to visiting skiers with discount for lift tickets. The Farmers Market occurs between the months of July and October and attracts city-wide residents; the Market successfully boosts awareness of this commercial area and promotes future patronage. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 57 Art Walks is one program that draws area residents and visitors to the Southside. There is potential for programming more Art Walks in the Southside neighborhood; these walks may provide some sales stimulus to local retail, but according to local residents this primarily generates sales for smaller, more inexpensive items. Flagstaff residents have the option to buy apparel and accessory items at the nearby mall, Wal-Mart, and Target. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 58 2.B.4 Housing Affordable Housing As defined by HUD (Department of Housing and Development) in 2004, the median household income for a 4-person household was $51,800 for Coconino County. For the City of Flagstaff and the Southside neighborhood, the median household income in 2004 was much lower, at $41,100 and $19,900, respectively. Coincidentally, the median household income number for Flagstaff corresponds almost exactly with the 80% AMI number for the County for a 4-person household ($41,400). The housing price affordable to these local households would be approximately $165,000 for the County and $123,000 for Flagstaff. These affordable prices are estimated at 100% AMI with a 30year mortgage, 6% interest, and a down-payment of 5%. AFFORDABLE PRICE BY INCOME CATEGORY T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 59 With the average 3-bedroom ranch house selling for upwards of $300,000, the above calculation further indicates how out-of-range housing prices currently are for the average resident of the City. The Southside’s longtime residents, for whom the affordability of the neighborhood should be protected, represent approximately one-sixth of the total households in the area. Of the Southside’s 600 households, 124 are homeowners, and the longtime resident families whom the City wants to protect are a subset of these homeowners, representing no more than 100 households. 2.B.5 Local retail Locally-owned businesses recycle a large share of their revenue back into the community by supporting other local businesses such as local banks, accountants, printers, and internet service providers. These businesses have a major impact on the local economy as they are also major providers of jobs in the area. Local ownership of businesses ensures that important decisions are made by people who live in the community and who will feel the impact of those decisions. Local businesses are owned by people who live in the community and are invested in its future. These individuals frequent and appreciate local amenities. Their tax dollars pay for local services. They are often actively involved in civic and cultural organizations. They advertise on local media. They use local accountants and printers. A diagram of a healthy small-town economy would reveal a web of interconnected relationships. Doing business with community members builds a web of personal and economic relationships that are essential to a strong neighborhood identity. Most important, locally owned businesses build strong communities. They foster walking, congregating and chance encounters with neighbors — activities essential to maintaining the quality of life and sense of connection and community. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 60 City Policies and Associations that Support the Growth of Local Retail Many cities are adopting size limits and other kinds of land-use policies that restrict the growth of chains, support downtown revitalization, and create an environment in which locally owned businesses can thrive. City incentives and business association policies may encourage and protect local businesses. Associations such as the Chamber of Commerce promote the business and convention life in the area. Their collaboration with other entities such as the Tourism Board and Visitors Center will attract more visitors to the local retail neighborhood. Retail Establishments with Local Character In an increasingly homogenized world, communities that preserve their one-of-a-kind businesses and distinctive character have an economic advantage. Thus communities benefit from attracting businesses with a local flavor. Some communities have concluded that, regardless of their size, “formula” businesses are rarely if at all acceptable due to their impacts on community character and the local economy. Formula businesses are legally defined as businesses that adopt standardized services, methods of operation, decor, uniforms, architecture, or other features virtually identical to businesses elsewhere. 2.B.6 Gentrification What is Gentrification? The meaning of the term “gentrification” is understood differently by different individuals and/or groups. Gentrification is a general term that refers to the arrival of a higher income group in an existing district, a related increase in rents and property values, a displacement of existing residents and tenants, and changes in the district’s character and culture. The term is often used negatively, suggesting the displacement of poor communities by more privileged outsiders. However the effects of gentrification are complex and contradictory, and its real impact varies. Many aspects of the gentrification process are desirable. Unfortunately, the benefits of these changes are often enjoyed disproportionately by new arrivals, while established residents find themselves economically and socially marginalized. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 61 When looking to stem or discourage gentrification, a community needs to define what type of gentrification they most want to discourage. Is it students displacing longtime residents? Is it people of higher income levels purchasing property and displacing poorer residents? Is it one race or ethnic group displacing a more disenfranchised group? Is it low-income renters being evicted or priced out of the neighborhood by renters with capacity to pay higher rent? The indicators and process of gentrification relate to periods of recurring disinvestment and reinvestment in a neighborhood, the physical revitalization and/or upgrading of the environment, as well as the socioeconomic or cultural effects on the community. Indicators of Gentrification The onset of gentrification involves the complex interplay between economic cycles, regional dynamics, and neighborhood demographics. Precedent shows that the threat of gentrification is at its greatest with the presence of the following regional and local characteristics: Regional Characteristics • • • Economy – an imbalance between housing demand and supply in the existing housing stock or new construction, created through rapid job growth or its residual effect: pent up demand. Housing Prices – high regional housing prices, where home ownership for middle-class households is only within reach in depressed or lower-income neighborhoods. This is becoming an increasingly important factor in Flagstaff where new housing is being produced at price levels above that which can be afforded by local residents. Location – within proximity to a growing metropolitan area with increasing congestion and convenient access to urban employment centers via highways and public transportation. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 62 Local Characteristics • Low Incomes – creating sensitivity to rapid increases in rents and home values, as well as the associated social factors (lower education levels, unskilled jobs, etc.). • Renters – areas with a high proportion of low-income renters are more vulnerable to rising prices in a housing market with rising prices. • Property Values – low housing values compared to regional norms, encourages investor speculation, especially in neighborhoods with an architecturally rich housing stock. • Limited supply—areas with tight market conditions, including low vacancy rates and limited opportunities to construct new products, will have greater incidence of displacement due to rising rents when new populations begin to move into the market. • Vacant and Underutilized Property – conversely, this indicator suggests that areas with property suitable for development of large scale new projects might experience neighborhood-wide increases in housing prices, and rents. • High architectural or historical building value and an influx of amenities/services that serve higher income levels. The Process of Gentrification An inflow of investment, rising rents, and real estate prices fuels gentrification. Both gentrification and disinvestment are processes that occur due to the action of social agents or institutions; landlords, developers, and banks all play key roles as capital flows into and out of the built environment. To make investment in new construction and rehabilitation of buildings profitable, developers must be able to attract higher paying residents. Once this process gets underway, landlords have an incentive to evict low-income residents in favor of more affluent tenants who can afford higher rent. Deferred maintenance by landlords during this phase may be motivate by a desire to drive out the lower income tenants. Newcomers express interest and proceed to buy and rehabilitate existing housing stock. Banks and other financial institutions offer mortgage and construction loans to these new potential owners. Construction of new development in these areas tends to raise real estate values. As a result, the prices of properties escalate, and displacement of the existing population occurs. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 63 Forms of Displacement Involuntary Displacement – This refers to residents who wish to remain in their neighborhood but are forced to move because they can no longer afford to pay the rapidly rising housing rents. The literature suggests that areas with a high percentage of low-income renter households are particularly susceptible to involuntary displacement. Voluntary Displacement – This refers to renters who choose to move due to life cycle factors that are not directly related to financial hardship. Homeowners who voluntarily sell their home in order to “cash in” on the increased equity attained as a result of gentrification are another force contributing to neighborhood change. Exclusionary Displacement – Additionally, exclusionary displacement describes a form of gentrification that primarily impacts low-income homeowners and, to a lesser degree, renters, where rising rents and home values prevent (1) current owners from buying another home within their community when, for life cycle reasons, they need to move and (2) other low-income households from moving in. Predatory Lending Predatory lending practices may occur in communities where prices are rising rapidly; homeowners may lose their homes and their investments due to the practices of predatory lenders. Some predatory lending practices include: making unaffordable loans based on the assets of the borrower rather than the borrowers’ ability to repay, inducing a borrower to refinance a loan repeatedly in order to charge high points and fees each time the loan is refinanced, also known as “loan flipping” and “packing” credit insurance on to a loan and/or engaging in fraud or deception to conceal the true nature of the loan obligation from an unsuspecting or unsophisticated borrower. Housing advocates believe that solutions to predatory lending exist. Such solutions include: strengthening anti-predatory lending and other consumer protection laws that prohibit abusive lending practices and help homeowners stay in their homes, aggressively enforcing existing federal and state fair housing laws; conducting consumer outreach and education; and better self-regulation by the industry. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 64 Political Factors and Realities The costs and financial resources of gentrification can both cause and offset adverse consequences to a community. One political response to the impacts of gentrification is a positive arrangement to link neighborhood residents and groups with local city or regional resources. For example, the Development Corporation Columbia Heights (DCCH) in Washington D.C. became a full partner with a private developer in a commercial development located in their neighborhood. This community development corporation will receive a portion of the joint venture’s profits; DCCH in turn will channel these profits into additional housing and economic development ventures to benefit the neighborhood’s low income residents. Cities also hold revenue tools that may aid communities in slowing the negative effects of gentrification. The cities of Atlanta and Cleveland have been working on tax deferral legislation. This legislation would offer longtime homeowners the ability to defer incremental tax increases due to gentrification-driven appreciation until they sell the house. Other city sponsored measures may extend to protect tenants in rental housing. These protective measures include instituting stringent tenant-landlord requirements such as landlord relocation payments to the tenant when landlords take units out of the rental market. Indeed these benefits offer some protection to residents in a rapidly gentrifying community. States also have the capacity to affect change in such communities. To ensure the continued supply and production of affordable housing stock in a gentrifying market, California state law mandates “fair share” housing requirements. These requirements ensure that a community continues to include affordable housing in addition to market-rate housing. Adequate enforcement mechanisms are needed to ensure that cities remain open to varying incomes. Other steps that both the public and private sectors have taken in encouraging revitalization of communities and addressing the adverse consequences of gentrification include: tax abatements, housing trust funds, job linkage efforts, linkage fee programs, and rent control. Strategies that have the potential to encourage “equitable development” should be examined; alternatives should be developed that promote economic and social diversity as well as long term stability for the community. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 65 Community Land Trusts (CLT) Nonprofit organizations known as community land trusts change the ownership structure of the land and buildings in communities. The CLT approach allows for residents to own the buildings they live in, and a community land trust owns the land under the buildings. Under this model, restrictions are placed on the price or rental of dwellings. For example, if a resident owns a house or apartment sitting on community-owned land and wants to sell it, he or she must offer it back to the community land trust at a price affordable to households of similar incomes. Permanent price restrictions thus ensure that the housing will always be affordable. A Community Land Trust offers membership to any resident of the geographical region where it is located. The purpose of a CLT is to create an institution to hold land and to retain the use-value of the land for the benefit of the community. The effect of a CLT is to provide affordable access to land for housing, small businesses, and civic projects. This effect can be achieved when a significant portion of the land in an area is held by a CLT. Local Planning and Community Land Trusts In situations where the community land trust is serving a development role, the CLT will often appear before the planning body as an applicant. In fact, the more active and sophisticated CLTs are some of the more experienced applicants to come before local commissions and boards. CLTs often take on projects which for-profit developers usually avoid. As a result, CLT projects are likely to involve some of the more controversial applications to come before the local board such as proposals to develop housing for low-income people that often elicit NIMBY reactions. CLTs, as community-based organizations, usually do extensive outreach and education to build support and understanding of their projects. In municipalities whose comprehensive plans seek to encourage a broader range of housing options, community land trusts can play a valuable role in helping to implement plan policies. Some cities and towns, for example, are pursuing “inclusionary zoning” as a way to make sure that new development includes an affordability component. Inclusionary zoning ordinances often require developers to provide a certain percentage of affordable units in their projects. Community land trusts, through their skills and resources, can help for-profit developers meet such affordability requirements. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 66 Community land trusts have a combination of skills in neighborhood organizing, community development, and financing packaging, and are well-suited to address neighborhood stabilization issues. Also, properties developed by land trusts pay local property taxes. While appreciation in land value is typically limited through the terms of the CLT’s long-term lease, this is comparable to the impact that other types of restrictive covenants or easements may have on land values. Moreover, by creating new housing and stabilizing neighborhoods, land trusts work to strengthen the local economy and tax base. Finally, CLTs are adept and active at coordinating diverse and creative financing packages for their projects. It is not at all uncommon for one project to have five or more sources of funding that may include commercial mortgages and construction loans, HUD loans and grants, state housing finance agency dollars, private foundation loans and grants, tax credit dollars, and even pension fund investments. Multiple funding sources generally require that a wide variety of standards and regulations be met to satisfy each source. CLT projects must typically meet strict requirements for housing quality, energy efficiency, historic preservation, handicapped accessibility, lead, asbestos, and other environmental mitigation, and levels of affordability. The entire community benefits from this thorough approach to development. Conclusions Community land trusts help communities to: • Gain control over local land use and reduce absentee ownership • Provide affordable housing for lower income residents in the community • Promote resident ownership and control of housing • Keep housing affordable for future residents • Capture the value of public investment for long-term community benefit • Build a strong base for community action T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 67 2C. NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY 2.C.1 NAU and Flagstaff NAU is the Southside’s southern neighbor with its campus stretching to I-40 and a little beyond. Established in 1899, NAU has a current enrollment of 19,000 students. In a city of population 57,000 NAU has a major presence just in terms of sheer numbers. The university provides the city an acclaimed institution for higher learning and a source of employment. DOWNTOWN SOUTHSIDE NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 68 NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY: MASTER PLAN AND SOUTHSIDE INTERFACE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 69 Being the only neighborhood bordering NAU, Southside’s character and workings stand to be influenced by the university. A quid pro quo relationship already exists between the two Southside has a renowned institution as a neighbor that is an employer, investor and people generator and NAU is afforded a vibrant, historically significant neighborhood where students and faculty can live, play and work. Humphreys, Beaver and San Francisco are the three north-south streets that connect NAU to Southside. The connections are a little challenged by Beaver and San Francisco Streets being a one way pair. In addition, Humphreys does not have pedestrian crossings across Butler Avenue, making it difficult for pedestrians and bicycles to access Southside and Downtown. Beaver and San Francisco Streets are the mixed-use streets in Southside and is a destination for students and faculty at NAU. Franklin Street forms an edge between NAU and Southside that is porous in places - especially near Beaver Street. But towards the eastern parts a tall fence clearly demarcates the two areas. This probably because of the run down nature of some houses close to the campus. Franklin Street will assume greater importance in the future once the Lone Tree Corridor develops as it will give an opportunity to access the campus from I-40 from the eastern side. In addition, Franklin is the only street connecting NAU and Southside to the Stoneforest mixed-use development to the east of Lone Tree Road. MAIN PEDESTRIAN NETWORK A number of students and faculty reside in the neighborhood given the proximity and amenities T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 70 it offers. There is an increasing trend amongst universities in the country to not build housing on campus as it is expensive and not very attractive to its prospective residents. People prefer a house/ apartment over a dormitory and want to live close to where they can work and play. Southside, therefore, is an ideal neighborhood for the faculty and staff. 2C.2 NAU MASTERPLAN NAU is in the process of creating a long-term masterplan that addresses, amongst other things, new buildings, landscape, circulation and parking. A pedestrian spine that aligns itself with Humphreys is one of the central features of the new Masterplan. This green spine is intended to give an imageable structure to the campus, weaving the various buildings and open spaces together. The campus spine will be strengthened with landscape and new buildings will be structured around it. The spine will extend from Dupont Street to the north to University Drive to the south - a length of approximately 1800’ or 8 city blocks. A loop system, that skirts around the central spine, is recommended for vehicular circulation. The spine runs north-south and aligns with Humphreys Street. The loop system will make a very pedestrian friendly zone on the inside of the loop. At the same time, it will impact traffic on the adjacent city streets adversely as vehicles will have to go around the loop to cross the campus. To the north of the campus, Route-66 and Butler NAU CONCEPT PLAN T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 71 CIRCULATION LOOP ROAD NETWORK T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 72 SITE P1 B. A. C. SITE P1: OPTIONS & DESIRED QUALITIES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 73 provide east-west access through the city, linking Milton and Lone Tree Road - the 2 freeway access routes. More east-west accesses are needed that meet the objective without compromising the pedestrian nature of the city and NAU. University Drive and McDonnell road are potential accesses that should be studied. Site P1 is an important site where NAU is proposing new development. Situated on the corner of Milton Road and Butler Avenue, the site has high visibility as a gateway feature for both NAU and the city of Flagstaff. The development will dictate how this important edge of NAU will relate to the city and its fabric. It will also potentially lay a precedent for future development on Butler Avenue. At the time of this document, 3 options are being considered for the site. All 3 options sensitively hide the parking structure with active ground level uses. Some try to build on the historic quad space or other open space on the inside. All three options step back substantially from the Milton Corner to extend the quad space north. This loses the opportunity to have a presence in the high profile Milton Corner. All the options strengthen the Humphrey’s green spine, helping it to connect it to Southside and the city. The building and street sections suggest that the building is stepping back considerably from Butler Avenue and has a fence separating the two. This again is a missed opportunity to establish a positive precedent in terms of relating to Butler Avenue and to the city of Flagstaff. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 74 te-6 6 In te rs ta te 40 Milton Road Rou CONTEXT AND LINKAGES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 75 2D. TRANSPORTATION 2.D.1 Linkages Milton Road forms the western boundary to the Southside study area. It is the only link into Central Flagstaff, including, Downtown, Southside and NAU, from the I-40 freeway. Additionally, it also carries traffic to the Grand Canyon through Downtown, making it a strained thoroughfare. For the lack of an option, Francisco and Beaver, despite being neighborhood streets are designated as minor arterials, carrying a lot of traffic from NAU to Downtown and the Hospital. Lone Tree Road forms the eastern boundary to the study area. There exist future plans to turn Lone Tree into a north-south arterial complementing and relieving the Milton Road Access. Route-66 and Butler Avenue are the 2 main eastwest access arterials in the city. Butler Avenue was widened in the early 90’s to introduce a second eastwest connection to the city. This has been a success in terms of reducing traffic congestion. But by designing Butler Avenue as solely a vehicular corridor, what once used to be Clay - a neighborhood street - and by not giving pedestrian sidewalks, crossings and streetscape due importance, Butler Avenue has effectively cut the Southside neighborhood into two halves, affecting development, land use and accesibility in the area. TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE: CURRENT Between Butler and the I-40 freeway, a distance of about 2 miles, there exists no other east-west access route. This is an area where more than a T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 76 SOUTHSIDE: EXISTING ACCESS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 77 third of the city’s population lives and/or works. NAU is considering a looped vehicular circulation system, limiting vehicles to the campus periphery on city streets and making the campus core pedestrian. This will have an adverse impact on traffic congestion in the area and will strain the already busy peripheral streets like Milton and Butler even more. 2.D.2 Access Converting San Francisco and Beaver streets into a one-way pair made Beaver Street the only entry south into Southside from Route-66 and Downtown. As Milton Road curves east and approaches Beaver Street, it is easy to miss the only entrance into Southside. This limited access has had an adverse impact on the commercial health of the area. NAU uses San Francisco Street to access Southside and Downtown. The nature of the street as the arterial clubs together fast moving traffic with bicycles and pedestrians. Humphreys is a potential route but has no pedestrian crossings at Butler, therefore, keeping away both pedestrians and bicycles. Phoenix Avenue is a right-in only entry but there is not enough development in that part of Southside to attract people. In addition its location, immediately before the dip and turn in Milton Road, is not an intuitive place for an entry. But Phoenix Avenue does have potential to be one of the important access points to Southside. 2.D.3 Parking Southside is unique in having pedestrian oriented streets that are typically 50’ wide. In this crosssection it has put in parallel parking on both sides of the streets. This has contributed both to the commercial viability and walkable nature of the streets as the parked cars protect pedestrians from moving traffic. The rest of the required parking is provided on undeveloped parcels or open space within the parcel. Currently new development has to self-park its requirement on its own parcel. This has led to “missing teeth” interrupting the continuity of street facades and some prime land not being available for development. Some may argue, this model of self-parking also leads to an area being overparked as there is no sharing of resources. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 78 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 79 2.D.4 Public Transit The multi-modal transportation system in the Southside currently accommodates pedestrians, bicycle riders, public transit commuters, and auto vehicle drivers. This integrated system functions in consideration of each individual mode of transportation; it is recommended that the development and finance of long range transportation planning projects continue to consider how these various modes of transportation coexist and have a positive impact on one another. The existing Flagstaff public transit system of Coconino County Transportation Services provides bus service on the Mountain Line to the Southside neighborhood. In addition, Mountain Line Transit provides services to Northern Arizona University for connections to Mountain Campus Transit (MCT). All Mountain Line routes connect at the Butler/ Humphreys Transfer Center at the north end of the NAU campus. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 80 RIO DE FLAG AND SOUTHSIDE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 81 2E. PUBLIC REALM 2.E.1 Rio De Flag In the early days of Flagstaff, Arizona, there were several floods which inundated the town. In fact, floods were recorded along the Rio in 1888, 1896, 1903, 1916, 1920, 1923, 1937, 1938, 1950, 1963, 1966, 1973, 1979, 1983, 1988, 1990, 1993, and 1995. The last major floods occurred in 1938 in terms of discharge and in 1993 in terms of volume. As the town grew and more houses were built, the river was diverted to a new course. North of Route 66, the channel was moved from its natural southeast path at the corner of Cherry Avenue and Kendrick Street instead to take a southward path along the west side of Kendrick St. The new channel now flows by the Flagstaff Public Library and Flagstaff City Hall, but its capacity to carry water volume is lowest at this location. On the south side of Route 66, the channel flows through Southside and there is always a risk of flooding during periods of high runoff. The Army Corps of Engineers is planning to install a large culvert underground to carry the flow south of the railroad tracks east to reunite the Rio de Flag with its original channel. The new Rio De Flag channel is proposed from Bonito Street to Route 66 and then it runs along Route 66 east until it crosses Butler Avenue. Reconstruction of the Clay Avenue Wash is proposed from Pinnacle Street to it’s confluence with the Rio De Flag near Route 66. The new detention basin is located near eastern boundary of the City Limits. Thus, Southside will be protected from the risk of future floods. The new alignment of the Rio De Flag will also remove the Southside area of town from the 100 year floodplain. The flood control project is supposed to start construction in the Summer of 2005. Coincidentally, this change in flood risk has the potential to change the character of the Southside neighborhood. Currently new construction has to be built at an expensive high base. Additionally a bank loan requires flood insurance, adding to the cost of building. Modifications to existing buildings are restricted. Therefore, once the floodplain designation is lifted, the area will attract investment that, if not channelized appropriately, can inappropriately alter the character of Southside. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 82 Southside Study Area BNSF Railroad Flagstaff Urban Trail System - Existing Flagstaff Urban Trail System - Proposed NAU Trail Redevelopment Boundary Existing Bike Lane Proposed Bike Lane TRAILS AND PATHS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 83 2.E.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Access The public areas, public amenities, modes of access like sidewalks, bicycle routes and public right of ways all define the public realm. The finer the grain of this realm, the more the city is accessible to its people and the more the sense of community. The small block size in Flagstaff - typically 300’x300’ - makes for a walkable environment; private land are interrupted more often by public streets and it makes for more interesting streetscapes. A system of alleys breaks the blocks down even further. Once the Rio De Flag project is in place, a FUTS trail will cross Route-66 along Humphreys, emerge south of the Railroad tracks and run east along them with the creek running underground. Another FUTS trail will connect the Sawmill Park, south of the Stoneforest site to this extension, making for a connected system, weaving together the public amenities. Pedestrian paths from NAU connect to Beaver Street and Humphreys Street, plugging in the university to the city and the neighborhood. Beaver Street currently has a dedicated bicycle lane but San Francisco Street does not. Tight street sections (Flagstaff typically has 50’ wide streets) must have ways to have different modes of transportation coexist, to be walkable, vibrant and commercially viable. The unpleasant conditions for bikes on San Francisco Street have more to do with a area wide transportation equation - of San Francisco being transformed into a minor arterial from a neighborhood street - rather than the lack of a bike lane. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 84 PROPOSED SOUTHSIDE HISTORIC DISTRICT BOUNDARY & SURVEY T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 85 2F. URBAN CONSERVATION 2.F.1 Historic Resources Flagstaff’s Southside is an area that possesses an extensive inventory of historic resources dating back more than 125 years. The Southside’s historic resources consist of buildings, structures, objects and cultural landscapes. These historic resources define Southside’s very distinctive, if not unique, character. Both individually and collectively, they make the places, the settings and the context that make the Southside memorable, that ensure that there is a “there” there. The Southside’s historic buildings have been comprehensively inventoried, recorded and evaluated as to their historical significance. Many of Southside’s historic buildings were first identified and recorded as part of the 1984 Flagstaff Historic Building Survey. The more comprehensive and focussed survey of Southside’s historic buildings occurred in 1992-93, with publication of Volumes I and II of the Southside/Old Town Historic Building Survey. This second survey inventoried 233 pre-1945 buildings, of which 201 possessed sufficient integrity to qualify as contributors to a 37block Southside Historic District. 34- 105 S. Elden Street As stated in Volume I, Final Summary Report, “The district contains an array of nineteenth and early twentieth century vernacular houses that represent a once common building type in the Flagstaff area. The architectural character of the district is also distinguished by a large number of Bungalow style residences, which also help illustrate the growth and development of the district in the 1920s, a period that corresponds with the popularity of the Bungalow style. The district also contains a small, but important number of vernacular adaptations of the Basque traditional house.” 17- 209 E. Cottage Avenue Although primarily residential in character, the Southside district possesses other types of significant historic uses, such as churches, motels, storefront retail, service-oriented commercial, light industrial and warehousing. The Southside’s built environment also reflects powerful associations with both the Santa Fe (now BNSF) Railroad and U.S. Highway 66. The presence of each corridor serves, more or less, to define the northern edges of the district. The historical significance of these two industries in defining the early 20th century townscape of the American West cannot be overstated, and within Flagstaff, a largely intact expression of this distinctive cultural landscape exists on Phoenix Avenue between Beaver and San Francisco Streets, and on San Francisco between Phoenix and Cottage Avenues. On sites that front on these three blocks, no fewer than 10 properties are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. 02-1E. Phoenix Avenue T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 86 Southside Study Area Stone Forest and Jeld Wen NAU Historic District Old Town Historic District Railroad Addition Historic District Proposed Southside Historic District Northern Arizona University Parcels BNSF Railroad Historic Buildings CURRENT HISTORIC DISTRICTS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 87 Cohesion and coherence are terms or concepts that are commonly used to describe areas or districts that possess integrity of historic fabric. While some areas in the Southside possess integrity of historic fabric, and therefore, cohesion or coherence, it is clear that many areas do not. Unfortunately, in many areas, the integrity of historic fabric that once existed has now been diluted, compromised or fragmented. There are several reasons for compromises or losses to the integrity of historic fabric: demolition of buildings, structures or objects that have been identified as being historically significant; inappropriate alterations or additions to historically significant structures; new construction that is incompatible or intrusive; installation of landscaping materials, signing and illumination solutions that distract from, compete with or overwhelm the character-defining features of the historic property; use of building materials, replacement glazing and new hardware and fixtures that are incompatible with the period of construction and architectural style of the historic property; failure to maintain and repair building materials and systems, as needed; and historically significant properties that are vacant and left unprotected. As noted above, Southside possesses approximately 200 structures that qualify as contributors to a 37-block Southside Historic District. And this Southside Historic District presently is pending nomination for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. At the same time, unless and until the City adopts some type of results-oriented “gentle renewal” program that promotes and assists rehabilitation of Southside’s historically significant properties, the Southside most likely will lose its distinctive feeling and observable historic character. 11- 123 S. San Francisco Street 43- 19 S. Agassiz Street 04 - 46 S. San Francisco Street 42- 23 S. Agassiz Street T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 88 2.F.2 Urban Conservation What is urban conservation? It is continuous activity, involving interests and stakeholders in both private and public sectors, that recognizes both the value and the importance of retaining, maintaining and revitalizing character-defining features of historic urban fabric. Historic urban fabric consists of numerous kinds of character-defining features typically associated with the built environment: buildings, structures, objects, places, parks, streets, plant materials, street furniture, signs, etc. Due to aging and other factors, historic urban fabric can wear thin and experience failures, stemming from lack of repair and routine maintenance, the presence of obsolete land uses, and new construction that is inappropriate or misguided. In sum, urban conservation measures represent a concerted effort to repair, reweave and renew historic urban fabric in a manner that is economical, timely and appropriate. 2.F.3 Urban Conservation District What is an urban conservation district? It is a defined geographical area, within which public agency policies and programs deliberately complement investments and contributions of the private and nonprofit sectors, in order to realize, coordinate and sustain certain desired improvements to an area’s historic urban fabric. An urban conservation district generally is inclusive of administrative and regulatory measures as well as projects and developments intended to retain and revitalize an area’s historic urban fabric. Revitalization of historic urban fabric within an urban conservation district often includes new construction, appearing as an addition to an existing historic building or as an entirely new development. Such new construction needs to demonstrate its respect for character-defining features of the existing historic urban fabric, and yet, at the same time, make a genuine contribution on its own terms. By contrast, new construction that emulates other periods or styles, or that creates false historicism, is both insincere and wasteful of an opportunity to further enhance and enrich a district’s historic setting, feeling and associations. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a III. STRATEGIES 90 CHAPTER III. STRATEGIES SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES: The following summarizes the framework of strategies for the Southside neighborhood developed by the consultant team with the input of Southside residents and business owners and City of Flagstaff staff: A. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Urban Development Recognize and capitalize on existing assets within the subareas of the Southside Neighborhood Explore a zoning overlay district for land uses and urban design Improve safety and community policing in the neighborhood Build upon “Great Places and Spaces” Consider key and underutilized sites for future revitalization Explore guidelines for rehabilitation and new development Investigate options for activation and potential of Mike’s Pike and Phoenix Avenue Consider the possibilities for a community center B. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Real Estate Economics Preserve Affordability in Southside Encourage mixed-income owner occupied housing Encourage More Owner Occupancy Devise leasing strategies to attract appropriate retail Promote partnerships with community organizations such as nonprofit management districts or associations 6. Encourage and protect small-scale local businesses in the area 7. Strategize ways to boost tourism in Southside C. Northern Arizona University 1. Encourage City and NAU collaboration for “One Community” 2. Improve university-town relationship T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 91 3. Promote a joint strategy for the future of northern NAU & Southside 4. Identify potential sites for rehabilitation, new development and common uses 5. Improve pedestrian, bike and vehicular access D. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Transportation Design Southside Streetscape as a pedestrian friendly and pedestrian priority area Study parking solutions for existing and future development in Southside Explore options for Butler Avenue to make it an appropriate fit for Southside and an avenue of pride for the City Address limited access/entry into the Southside Area Study ways to tap on the future redevelopment of Downtown Explore potential railway solutions with BNSF such as a “Quiet Zone” and a third track Coordinate transit to serve community E. Public Realm 1. Investigate the impacts of the Rio De Flag Flood Control Project; explore new public and private strategies for the Rio de Flag 2. Investigate options for a public venue for Southside activities such as a focal public open space 3. Tie new public spaces to current Southside public realm 4. Implement public improvements F. 1. 2. 3. 4. Historic Conservation Understand relationships between Urban Conservation Districts (UCD) and historical districts Explore the Certified Local Government of Downtown and a UCD Research possibilities for local implementation of a UCD Encourage programs and access to historical character of Southside & NAU; leverage historical character to encourage investment and development T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 92 SUB-AREA MAP T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 93 EXPANDED STRATEGIES 3A. URBAN DEVELOPMENT 3.A.1 Recognize and capitalize on existing assets within the sub-areas of the Southside Neighborhood Given the rich and diverse history of Southside and the diverse constituents shaping it over time, it is appropriate that the area be looked as a grouping of smaller distinct sub-areas. For example, Butler Avenue being changed into a major east-west transportation corridor automatically affected the nature of adjacent development and divided the neighborhood into two distinct parts. Future policy and development strategies should respond to the individual character and objectives of the sub-areas. As a start to this exercise of delineating these, 6 mixed-use sub-areas are noted: Route 66/ Railroad Addition, Mike’s Pike, San Francisco Street, Beaver Street, Butler Avenue, and the New Lone Tree. 3.A.2 Explore zoning changes/ a zoning overlay district for land uses and urban design Southside, on one hand, is expecting an infusion of development and investment as a result of the flood control project but, on the other, has to sensitively shape this new development to be contextual and to respect the historical fabric. A new set of zoning regulations or a zoning overlay can devise policies to help shape appropriate new development in terms of use, building mass and view corridors. The new zoning should respond to the “sub-areas” characteristics. The existing development typically has a 1-2 story scale and is built on small lots typically 25-50 feet wide. This has contributed to the character of the area and the new zoning policies should respect that. Incentives and policies should ensure that a good percentage of new development, especially residential, is built on a small lot area. The zoning should allow for densification in the mixed-use cores like Francisco Street and in other appropriate areas where collaborative mixed-use projects with NAU can be established. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 94 ZONING AREAS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 95 Zoning Areas Much has changed in the Southside neighborhood since the current zoning code was adopted. The sub-area map attempts at locating pockets of similar character within the neighborhood. This starts to hint at how new zoning could respond to these distinct areas. New development should refer to the zoning code, the sub-area characteristics and design guidelines. The major zoning categories recommended are: a. San Francisco Mixed-Use Historically, San Francisco and Beaver Streets have been the retail and mixed-use spines of the neighborhood. San Francisco Street has almost continuous retail from Phoenix Street until Butler Avenue. It has a good concentration of historically significant buildings. Most buildings are 1 to 2 stories high. Facades abut the street with no front or side setback making for continuous retail . It is recommended that future retail efforts be concentrated on San Francisco Street. With two streets, there is too much capacity for retail, given the small size of the neighborhood and its proximity to downtown. Additionally, one street makes for a clearer destination rather than retail diffused on two streets. New retail and mixed-used projects should also be focused on the southern part of San Francisco to relate to NAU and have enough momentum to cross Butler Avenue. Mixed-use, where uses are stacked on top of each other is key to making a vibrant hub in a community. Mixing residential uses gives an area activity in the evenings and promotes security with more “eyes on the street”. Mixing in office space draws in people owners and clients from different areas, gives people the option to live near their work and also gives the retail a lunchtime community. The southern part of San Francisco Street has little retail, arguably due to the size of the market and also Butler Avenue that has divided it into 2 distinct parts. Retail and mixed-use buildings should be encouraged in this part of San Francisco. The southern end, with the help of the opportunity sites, should make a statement as the end of San Francisco and the beginning of NAU. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 96 Mike’s Pike MIKE’S PIKE AND SOUTHSIDE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 97 The grain of the historic development should be acknowledged. New Buildings should present a scale respecting the existing scale of buildings. The maximum height of the buildings should be 60’. The building facade on the street should be no higher than 2 floors or 30’ high, whichever is less. Above that height, the building should step back at least 10’ in the form of a terrace or roof form. The old parcels were laid out in 25’ wide lots and that still is a workable lot width. New development should be allowed to have that width. Part of making development more affordable is to also allow for smaller and/or denser buildings. Buildings should have continuous retail facades with doors and windows opening out to the street. Parking should be dealt with on an area-wide basis for retail. b. Mike’s Pike-Old Route 66 Mike’s Pike and Phoenix Street, the original Route 66, off Milton Road, holds great potential in reviving the history it once had. The area has some light industrial and commercial supporting uses. Land and buildings are underutilized. This status might actually be helpful in the restoration and redevelopment of the area. The farmer’s market is a popular destination on Phoenix and Beaver Street. The points of entry ensure that the area can have frontage on both Milton, the existing Route 66 and on San Francisco Street. All this could be tied together with restored diners, motels, retail, the high motel signs, existing and restored historic buildings, motor memorabilia in concert with automobile and tire companies, special paving and appropriate streetscape. Most of the existing retail on Beaver Street has been incorporated within this area. Old and new residential should be a part of this area to encourage mixed-use. This will also keep the area in check from becoming solely a touristy destination. The 2002 Development Strategies by Field Paoli recommends cultural uses in rehabilitated buildings if possible. Commercial supporting and light industrial uses should still be allowed in the area. If the area becomes very successful and has a demand for Route-66 related uses, the commercial supporting and light industrial uses with naturally fade away. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 98 Buildings should have no front or side setbacks. The maximum height of the buildings should be 60’. The building facade on the street should be no higher than 2 floors or 30’ high, whichever is less. Above that height, the building should step back at least 10’ in the form of a terrace or roof form. Buildings should respect and respond to the scale and character of adjacent buildings, especially if they are historically significant. Parking should be dealt on a area-wide basis for retail. A workable access should be worked out from Milton into Mike’s Pike. The current turn is too close to Butler Avenue. The access point could be moved further north, also giving some frontage in the form of open space at the intersection. c. Beaver Street As per the previous discussion, Beaver Street, especially south of Cottage Avenue, has little retail and is mostly residential in character. It is recommended that this be part of the Residential Area so that retail can be consolidated on San Francisco Street. New retail would be allowed. At the same time, Beaver Street is an important spine in the neighborhood and therefore should encourage higher density development. High density residential in the form of apartments, condos and stacked townhouses should be encouraged. d. Franklin Street Franklin is a little acknowledged street at the edge of NAU and as the connection to Lone Tree Road. It will gain in importance in the future as it will extend the neighborhood into the new Sawmill development to the east and as Lone Tree becomes a major freeway access route. Though mostly part of the Residential Area, it should support high density development, possibly through a CUP. This corridor could have a string of taller, denser buildings, with minimal setbacks, overlooking the campus and encouraging similar development on the NAU side coming up to the street. The area on Franklin abutting NAU and the peripheral area within the NAU boundary is an opportunity for NAU related uses like higher density housing for students and faculty. Given the edge condition, new development can present a bolder massing towards the campus. Stacked townhouses, apartments and condos should be encouraged. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 99 e. Butler Avenue This is a major arterial running east-west through the Southside neighborhood. Commercial development on Butler has served automobile related uses and has not added character or amenity to the neighborhood. For the 2 zoning areas Butler Avenue is part of - “Residential” and “San Francisco Mixed-Use”- buildings on one hand should respond to the scale of Butler with higher densities and bolder massing, on the other hand, the uses should be mainly oriented towards the neighborhood streets. This will help pull the fabric as close to Butler as possible and help with the continuity of the north-south streets. (Automobile oriented uses facing Butler will tend have large set backs with parking lots.) f. Residential Area Residential uses are a backbone in terms of character of the Southside neighborhood. It is important to keep a balance between residential and nonresidential uses. Given all the improvements with the Rio, Lone Tree access, potential streetscape improvements and the University nearby, demand for housing will continue to grow. By consolidating the retail, and allowing residential as a mixed-use all over Southside, more area has been allocated to the use. New ways of increasing density, while respecting the scale and character of the neighborhood should be suggested. That may involve reducing the required ground coverage and open space. Also, the garages at the rear could have zero setbacks. Retail should be allowed as a conditional use and not banned altogether. There already exists some retail on Beaver that is not in the Mike’s Pike/Old Route 66 area. And more could be considered on a case by case basis. Incompatible uses like office space, car dealerships and Industrial uses should not be allowed. Buildings should be a maximum of 35’ high with heights up to 60’ for mixed-use buildings and denser housing projects. Buildings should respect and respond to the scale and character of adjacent buildings, especially if they are historically significant. Front and side setbacks should typically be followed to keep in context the existing residential. The zoning will address the typical buildings in the area with additional guidelines needed (see “SubAreas and Design Guidelines”) for the sub-areas within the residential area like Franklin, Butler and Beaver Streets, where higher densities and zero setbacks should be allowed. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 100 3.A.3 Promote partnerships with community organizations such as non-profit management district or association Such organizations can be an advocate for policies and programs that promote a strong mixed-use environment in Southside and collectively represent the interests of the stakeholders. The association can offer startup businesses capital and technical assistance, act as a caretaker of the Southside historic fabric, be a pedestrian-priority mixed-use and transit advocate, a destination marketer, an events producer and coordinator, a source of information and a liaison body with the regulatory bodies. Made up primarily of the business owners and stakeholders in the area, the group can be driven by collective goals. (example – Old Pasadena Development Corporation and the Pasadena Management District) 3.A.4 Improve safety and community policing in the neighborhood Southside is on the south side of the train tracks and that is how it has been perceived historically. The area being in a flood plain and having restricted access only made things worse in terms of demographics and the quality of building stock in the neighborhood. The neighborhood is now not deemed very safe and its a question whether that is perception or a fact. Nonetheless, residents complained about a lack of policing and parking enforcement. This should be at par with the other neighborhoods in Flagstaff; This should include trash removal, safety patrols, parking enforcement and appropriate street lighting for the area. Safety is a basic foundation on which quality of life is built on. The city should take necessary steps towards ensuring that. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 101 3.A.5 Build upon “Great Places and Spaces” These are popular places usually with a great deal of respect and history that play an important role in the daily life of this neighborhood. These are resources that should be reinvested and built on; new investments, programs and development strategies should work with this resource. Work with these “Great Places and Spaces” as a long term strategy for Southside. 3.A.6 Consider key and underutilized sites for future revitalization This is an exercise in infill development that is aimed at strengthening the development cores and builds on existing investments, assets and infrastructure. An underutilized site may be empty, deserted, have little building area or be a critical site that can act as a catalyst to development and investment. Such infill development is critical to creating a connected neighborhood, creating amenity and positively influencing other development. Sites on which the city can collaborate with NAU for mixed-use projects, should be identified. These projects can be mutually beneficial to both Southside and NAU in the amenity, investment, housing stock, entertainment and cultural venue, gateway statement they can be. UNDERUTILIZED SITES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 102 Sample sites and Catalyst Projects 3 sample sites have been chosen as demonstration sites and also because of their importance as potential catalyst projects. a. Opportunity Sites: Beaver @ Butler The proposed L-shape development is dedicated predominantly to residential use and includes surface parking at the back. Access to the parking is provided from the alley. Retail is located on the corner on Butler for increased visibility and proximity to the Northern Arizona University campus. The building block breaks down in mass to form smaller building blocks. The uses are mainly oriented towards Beaver Street. However the larger mass of the development is located on Butler Avenue. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a Alley Beaver Street Beaver Street 103 Butler Avenue Upper Level Beaver Street Alley Apartments with separate retail building Beaver Street Street-level retail with apartments above Butler Avenue Street Level Beaver Street Alley Corner retail with apartments Butler Avenue Corner retail with stacked townhouses Apartments with corner retail T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : Layout Alternatives S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 104 b. Opportunity Sites: San Francisco @ Franklin The L-shape development is seen as a possible NAU gateway project with significant retail and high density residential uses. There is potential for the building to have other NAU related uses as well. The site includes surface parking or structured parking at the back; access to the parking is provided from the alley. Continuous retail exists at street-level with residential apartments on the upper levels. The larger mass of the building sits on corner the corner and along Franklin Street. The building mass breaks down only above the street-level retail. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 105 Basement Level Street Level Upper Level Street Level Upper Level Alternative 1 Exhibit 3G-5 OPPORTUNITY SITES: SAN FRANCISCO@FRANKLIN Alternative 2 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 106 c. Opportunity Sites: O’Leary @ Hoskins This site provides alternative approaches to increasing density on single family lots. The access to the garage utilizes the alley as much as possible. The presence of the garage is minimized on the street; the living space is maximized. Garages at the rear, if covered, would not be subject to side setbacks. Rear units would enjoy some sight-lines and increased visibility from the street. These units would have pedestrian access from the street. A 15’ setback is maintained at the front of the building. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a Alley O’Leary Street 107 Alley O’Leary Street 3 units - 2 stacked at front, 1 over garage at rear Alley O’Leary Street 2 units with attached garages 4 units - 2 stacked at front and 2 at rear T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 108 B L O C K 10 B L O C K 9 B L O C K 8 B L O C K 7 B L O C K 6 OPPORTUNITY SITES FROM “2002 DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES” T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 109 d. Opportunity Sites: From 2002 Development Strategies These are a string of opportunity sites along Phoenix Avenue that offer potential for new development and also parking on a district level. The sites have high visibility from Route-66 and have a rich history. These opportunities can lead to the revitalization of Phoenix Avenue, in concert with Mike’s Pike, as the old Route-66. The new FUTS trail will run along these sites and give an opportunity for development to interface with it. Block 6 This is an opportunity site on San Francisco Street, en route to Downtown from the University and the south side of town. Currently, San Francisco Street is the only access north, making Block 6 a premium site. The adjacent retail, supported in numbers by the NAU students, creates a potential for more retail uses. The proximity to the university also sets up a possibility for artist studios and lofts with some connection to NAU. This will add to the character and interest of the Warehouse Historic area. The building on Block 6 is a historic lumber building and should be restored. Structural and interior modifications should be made to adapt it to the proposed uses. Any needed additions should respond and be respectful of the existing structure. The sidewalk on Phoenix Avenue should be a minimum width of 10 feet. Block 7 This block is in the middle of the Phoenix Avenue section, which this urban design plan is evaluating. The existing building can also success fully interface with the Flagstaff Urban Trail System running north of the block. The Lumber Company building on block 7 An important public use, like a museum or public institution, will be able to define a focal center for Phoenix Avenue. Being a historic structure, both the building and the open spaces should be restored. The new additions can be altered if that helps the layout or connections to the street and trail. The block, with the help of the extended Leroux Street right-of-way and other corridors, should try and link the FUTS to Phoenix Avenue. The Leroux Street view corridor, assisted by landscape, should also emphasize the Amtrak station, giving people a sense of bearing. The parking lot located at the back of the block should be structured to help with these connections. The sidewalk on Phoenix Avenue should be a minimum width of 10 feet. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t Existing view corridor, between block 7 and 8, looking north from Phoenix Avenue towards the train station . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 110 ILLUSTRATIVE SKETCH FROM “2002 DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES” T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 111 Block 8 Situated on the corner of Phoenix Avenue and Beaver Street, this site already has a successful market in place. This business can build on the planned improvements to the Southside Warehouse area, simultaneously contributing to the area in the process. This historic structure, of the market, should be restored with facade improvements and any needed interior modifications. The major access and windows should be on Phoenix Avenue to draw and contribute activity. Being a corner building, it should also address Beaver Street with windows, massing, lighting and/or signage. The Leroux Street right-of-way should be restored with a view corridor and vehicular/pedestrian access. This should aim to strongly link Phoenix Avenue to FUTS and conversely get people off the trail and involved in the activity on Phoenix Avenue. The sidewalk on Phoenix Avenue should be a minimum width of 10 feet. Block 10 This site is situated on the western end of Phoenix Avenue. It is bounded by the railroad from the north and Route 66 to the west. Given its location in the project, this site bears proposed student housing, retail and public parking components. The proximity to the University and the benefits of having housing in this area make student apartments a valuable proposition. The housing will contribute a permanent community and a sense of safety to the area. These units could be apartments or walk up townhouses/duplexes. A surface lot supports, in good part, the parking requirements of new and existing development. Located at one end of Phoenix Avenue, this helps to make making it a pedestrian friendly environment. In the future, as businesses expand, it can be converted into a parking structure. A smaller surface lot adds to the parking capacity on the other end of the street. Some retail should be located on the eastern end of this block, at the intersection of Phoenix Avenue and Mikes Pike. This helps to define and activate the extended Humphreys Street right of-way. People on bicycles and on foot can be funneled in from Mikes Pike and Phoenix Avenue into the FUTS and into north Downtown. Similarly, people coming in from the north on FUTS can access Phoenix Avenue and NAU in a convenient manner. The sidewalk on Phoenix Avenue should be a minimum width of 10 feet. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 112 Mike’s Pike MIKE’S PIKE AND SOUTHSIDE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 113 3.A.7 Explore guidelines for rehabilitation and new development 3.A.9 Consider the possibilities for a Community Center Guidelines go a step further than zoning in attempting to establish the design character of development. Guidelines should be drawn up for appropriate rehabilitation of historic structures and new development. This would address more detailed issues like scale, character, openings, circulation, style, construction materials and building form. The Murdoch Center was reportedly closed down for lack of funding. Other creative means should be utilized to bring the community together. For example, Guadalupe church’ status should be leveraged as a cultural center, a place with history, as a neighborhood resource and a catalyst. Select programs, voluntary led or otherwise, should make use of such places. Likewise, programs could be built around the existing community garden. 3.A.8 Investigate options for activation and potential of Mike’s Pike and Phoenix Avenue Uncover and study potential of the original Route66, through Mike’s Pike and Phoenix Avenue. Route-66 related businesses could be encouraged on that stretch and with other pieces of history unearthed and available, Mike’s Pike could be a new destination in Southside. Study possible relationships of Mike’s Pike and Phoenix Streets to Southside streets and their land-use as a connector between San Francisco and Beaver Streets. Mike’s Pike is a potential new entry for Southside from Milton Street, giving it more visibility. Phoenix Street has development opportunities and is close to Downtown. The farmer’s market, in its current location or a new site, is an immediate potential catalyst for Phoenix Avenue. A new Southside structure can emerge with Mike’s Pike, Beaver, Phoenix and San Francisco streets working together, physically linked and with a consolidated attraction power for Southside. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 114 3B. REAL ESTATE ECONOMICS 3.B.1 Preserve Affordability in the Southside In order to preserve the affordability of housing in the Southside for existing and longtime residents, the City could undertake several programs: a. Land Trust As we understand it, efforts are currently underway to establish a city-wide Community Land Trust (CLT) as a nonprofit corporation, which would purchase property as it comes on the market. (For further discussion of CLTs, please refer to the Context and Analysis section on gentrification). These units would then be resold at affordable prices to income-qualified households who agree to enter into an arrangement whereby they lease the underlying site and buy only the improvements on the property (house). Subsequent resales are limited to qualified buyers and priced to be affordable at a similar income level. The CLT would work on a shared equity model with the resale proceeds distributed to the buyer and the Trust. The CLT assures permanent affordability for housing units in the targeted areas, thus assuring long-term availability of affordability. The CLT would not likely be useful in assuring that existing residents withstand the financial opportunity to sell their units and leave the Southside as it does not reduce market pressure on these residents. b. Housing Rehabilitation Program The City currently offers a program that provides up to $25,000 for rehabilitation of a primary residence as an interest-deferred loan which is paid off at the time of refinancing or after resale. This program provides a benefit to existing residents who want to improve their property and who cannot afford either to move or to fund the rehab themselves. Further use of this program in the Southside would discourage voluntary displacement among longtime residents while improving the physical character of the housing stock. c. Awareness Campaign for Existing Programs Several statewide and local programs already exist to preserve affordability, and the City could direct funds to a local nonprofit organization to undertake a campaign to raise awareness in the Southside of existing assistance programs. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 115 For instance, the State of Arizona currently allows for a property-tax freeze for families living on fixed incomes, and earning below 80% of Area Median Income. This program would benefit longtime residents of the Southside, particularly those households headed by seniors on fixed incomes. The above-mentioned Housing Rehabilitation Program could also be of great benefit to longtime residents if they were made more aware of it. The City also offers a first-time home buyer program which serves residents earning less than $60,000 per year (see below). Awareness could be raised for this program, which though not helping to preserve affordability for existing Southside residents, will at least encourage residency by a mix of income levels. d. Develop New Affordable Housing Newly developed affordable housing would be protected under covenants that assure the long-term affordability of the units, with prices protected from market pressures and resales restricted to certain income levels. Local sources report that Habitat for Humanity (HFH) has spearheaded the construction of eleven new homes in eleven years in Flagstaff, but that none have been built in the last two years. The City should seek to encourage the growth of HFH’s activities in the area, as well as examining the possibility of assembling a site for which to do a Request for Proposals from an affordable housing developer. Development of single-family homes is not likely in the area and is not encouraged. Given the high affordability gap for Southside residents, high subsidies will be required even for multifamily ownership product. 3.B.2 Encourage Mixed-Income, Owner-Occupied Housing Development of new owner-occupied housing in the Southside would bring new residents to the area who are invested in the safety and appearance of their streets. In order to combat the exclusionary forces of gentrification, which are inevitable if new market-rate housing is developed in the area, it is important to create incentives for developers to include affordable units or local legislation which requires such inclusion. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 116 3.B.3 Encourage More Owner Occupancy New development in the Southside is likely to be purchased by investors who will find interested occupants among student renters, who split rents between 3 or 4 roommates and therefore can pay higher rents. As we understand it, the community would like to take steps to encourage more owner occupancy in the neighborhood. Though some regulations can be put in place to limit the number of cars per household in a new development, or the number of unrelated occupants per unit, these regulations are not likely to be effective discouragements to investors seeking to tap the student market. It is more effective to make efforts to encourage new owner occupancy than to make attempts to discourage rentals. The City’s First-Time Home-buyer Program helps families with lower incomes to become homeowners in the Southside. The program uses the same maximum home prices as HUD’s 203b program which is currently $204,500, and provides a “silent second” mortgage that does not need to be paid off until resale. The First-Time Home-buyer Program does not help to protect longtime residents from gentrification pressures. However it does encourage a diversity of incomes among the owner-occupied households in the neighborhood and further strengthens the community of Southside residents who are personally invested in its 24-hour safety. The development of new student housing in the area would relieve some of the pressures on existing Southside real estate and allow for more property to be occupied by other residents, including potential home-buyers. a. Incentives for Mix of Market-Rate and Affordable Units The City could provide incentives to developers who propose projects that include affordable townhouses in addition to market-rate units. These incentives might include an expedited permitting process, or an allowance for higher densities when affordable components are included. b. Inclusionary Housing Policy As we understand it, the State of Arizona currently does not enable municipalities to enact an inclusionary housing policy, or one that requires a set number of affordable units be included in new market-rate developments—typically those over a certain size threshold. One Councilman articulated the need for such a policy in Flagstaff to counter the forces of gentrification, and other policy makers are now considering how to create such a program. Such a program would be beneficial to the efforts to bring more affordable ownership housing to the Southside. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 117 3.B.4 Devise leasing strategies to attract appropriate retail It is recommended that a marketing study be completed that assesses what kinds of local retail businesses would complement the existing retail establishments in the neighboring areas of the downtown and the university. Indeed studies that address the sizes, types, and economic impact of retail establishments, are essential to ensure that years of revitalization work and downtown investment are not undermined by uncontrolled, competing retail growth elsewhere in the community. Not only can this growth be an eyesore that damages a town and its sense of place; it can also have an adverse impact on traffic, tax revenue, public services, and employment. a. Marketing Approaches: Niche Markets A key component in the marketing of the retail district of Southside is the identification of its unique “market niche.” The identification of the appropriate market niche required to enhance Southside’s draw is key to the formulation of a successful marketing approach. A strategy to increase retail revenue should be developed to assess how the Southside neighborhood possesses a competitive advantage over other retail districts in Flagstaff and the surrounding region. An opportunity may exist to create a venue for Flagstaff tourists and visitors to Route 66. Galleries and shops showcasing the arts and crafts of local artisans may also be a draw for this group. There may exist possibilities to market the Southside community as an arts district to Flagstaff visitors. Cafes and restaurants could complement this niche market. The revitalization of the Southside neighborhood should be focused in its approach and be directed toward capitalizing on the potential strengths of the district, thereby promoting a unique or specialized niche market. b. Target Retail Tenant Types Flagstaff’s Southside would benefit greatly from the revitalization of the retail corridors along Beaver, Butler, and South San Francisco. New retail would bring new foot traffic to the area, as well as jobs, a livelier sense of place, and a more appealing environment in which to locate new housing development. Currently, there is not sufficient activity or precedent to support certain specialty retail types, such as apparel. Below we have summarized the types of tenants that should be targeted for a first phase of revitalization on the Southside, in addition to discussing the importance of supporting local retail, and design concerns that would encourage retail patronage. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 118 Restaurants are the easiest type of retail outlets to establish in a transitional neighborhood like Southside. Food and beverage establishments can be stand-alone entities that serve as destinations for all those who know about them, and do not require other, adjacent successful retail to support them. Once a restaurant gains popularity, the traffic it brings to a block can then support other retail in the future. Chain retail incursion may be of some concern to local residents, however it is not a likely threat here. Given the small population base and limited market area draw, the Southside is not likely to meet the locational criteria of chain outlets. Target retail types for the Southside: - Local food specialties Ice-cream parlors, family dining Good quality fast food Coffee shops, like the highly successful Macy’s Camping/hiking gear outlets Artisan goods and galleries Tourist-oriented retail, including restaurants that focus on the history of Route 66, such as drive-up food establishments like A&W Local retail with a diversity of uses attracts a multiple-user market. A successful tenant mix for the Southside neighborhood should integrate a diversity of uses. The neighboring Northern Arizona University student population provides a diverse market target base for the local retail in the area. In addition to small food venders and eateries, there may be a desire by students for more stores that specialize in outdoor sports and recreation, bookstores, coffee houses, copy and photo stores. Apparel stores appealing to the student market should follow after the establishment of a district anchored by food and beverage tenants. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 119 3.B.5 Promote partnerships with community organizations such as nonprofit management districts or associations Nonprofit development associations and management districts work with communities to utilize their local resources by integrating constructive, inclusive community-based planning, and often manage educational programs, research and training. These groups partner with local businesses and city agencies to advocate for policies and programs that may promote a strong mixed-use environment in a community and collectively represent the interests of stakeholders. The associations may offer capital and technical assistance to start-up businesses, act as a caretaker of the historic fabric, be a pedestrian-priority mixed-use and transit advocate, a destination marketer, an events producer and a source of information, and/or a liaison body with the regulatory bodies. Made up primarily of business holders and stakeholders in the area, these groups are driven by collectively-formed goals. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) Since the early 1970s, downtowns across the United States and Canada have been using Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) as a mechanism for revitalization. BIDs allow business properties within that geographic area to contribute to programs aimed at promotion, management, maintenance and development of that district. This powerful tool allows for an assessment on property within a defined area. Revenues from this assessment are then directed back to the area to finance a wide range of services, including such things as security, maintenance, marketing, economic development, parking, and special events. The services provided by BIDs generally are financed by special assessments on the commercial property within the district. Unlike general property taxes, these revenues can be used only for services within the BID. In addition, decisions affecting the use of BID revenues are usually made by a board consisting of private property and business owners. While the power of government is used to insure that all property owners contribute to the BID, oversight is often limited to an annual budget re- view. BIDs provide a variety of services including street and public space maintenance,” customer service representatives” or “ambassadors” to provide information and assistance to tourist and shoppers, and unarmed security patrols to supplement police services. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 120 3.B.6 Encourage and protect small-scale local businesses in the area City incentives and business association policies could be used to achieve the above. Local business and talent is what lends character and uniqueness to an area (as is the current case). Local business is also better sourcing things locally and reinvesting its revenue in the local economy. Within leasing on a neighborhood level, consider protecting a market share for local businesses. This can be done with the help of initiatives and incentives from the City and business associations in terms of financial, marketing and regulatory assistance. 3.B.7 Strategize ways to boost tourism in Southside Tourists/out-of-towners make for 50% sales in the area and so are an important group to target. A clear signage strategy should be implemented so that tourists can find Southside from a car. New ways of accessing the area should be studied, including the entrance from Mike’s Pike. The local artist community can be leveraged for signage and an entry statement. Work with Visitor Center and the Chamber of Commerce to promote Southside as a contributor to tourist, convention and business promotion in the Flagstaff region. Study possibilities and potential of Southside as the arts district of Flagstaff - amongst other things. Historically, artists as a group have been attracted to areas with potential and character (and affordable rents). Conceive incentives to attract local and regional artists to live and work out of the neighborhood. Seek potential of any joint efforts with NAU. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 121 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 122 Potential bike access Route-66 on Humphreys Street NAU & SOUTHSIDE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 123 3C. NORTHERN ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY 3.C.1 Encourage City and NAU collaboration for “One Community” Increasingly, Universities and the cities they are in, are forging common identities to attract talent and to share amenities. Flagstaff and NAU have made a beginning with the “One Community” slogan that has been seen on Campus literature and on banners downtown. More avenues of collaboration and community interaction - like cultural, entertainment, social and educational opportunities - should be explored between the City and NAU 3.C.2 Improve University-Town relationship A sharing of resources is key to a good town-gown relationship. The city and NAU should work towards a more active and constructive Southside-NAU relationship. A city can provide a neighborhood to live, work and play and amenities to enjoy. A university can offer an institute of higher learning, a talent pool, an employment source and other amenities. The City should be receptive to the needs of NAU and help it attract and retain talent and sustain itself. Likewise, NAU should share its resources with the city and its residents, and take on campus-building as part of city-building. 3.C.3 Promote a joint strategy for the future of Northern NAU & Southside Southside forms the only neighborhood edge to NAU and so any change in one - from street layouts to land use, affects the other. Future strategies and Master Plans should be a concerted effort since the future of the two entities is so intertwined. For example, NAU is looking for opportunities to house its faculty and students and Southside is the ideal non-campus location in terms of proximity and amenity. In turn Southside stands to gain investment in the neighborhood and tax dollars for the city. 3.C.4 Identify potential sites for rehabilitation, new development and common uses NAU should propose contextually sensitive development model for the neighborhood and the City can be proactive about that and help NAU locate sites for related development. NAU should study what land-uses, including housing, it can develop in the Southside area, that can be an amenity for T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 124 UNDERUTILIZED SITES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 125 the entire area. It should try and see what uses can be placed in rehabilitated structures (historic or otherwise) like Savannah College of Art and design has done in the city of Savannah, Georgia. The city and NAU should jointly study a possibility of a collaborative building project in Southside. The site on Franklin and San Francisco streets is an important opportunity site for NAU and the city. Being close to NAU, it can house appropriate uses like housing and retail. Being on the southern end of San Francisco Street, it can act as an anchor and catalyst for development south of Butler Avenue. Additionally it can also be a catalyst and precedent for development on Franklin Street as the edge street between Southside and NAU. 3.C.5 Improve pedestrian, bike and vehicular access Most of the faculty, staff and students commute into the NAU campus on a daily basis. This group also accesses the neighborhood shops on a regular basis, setting up a stream of people travelling in and out of the campus. The connections into the Southside neighborhood should be improved upon. More north-south routes should be explored. Making every Butler intersection a pedestrian crossing will help in that. Additionally, transit stops should be strategically located and accessible to NAU. Traffic should be channelled through urban cores like Butler and San Francisco Streets to support and encourage commerce on them. There is potential for the NAU green spine on Humphreys to extend special streetscape up north T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : into the city. The green spine may be parallel to the commercial, social and vehicular spines of Southside - Beaver and San Francisco Street. Ultimately, traffic from NAU - pedestrian and vehicular, switches to Beaver and San Francisco Streets for north-south circulation. Traffic should be channelled to these streets to strengthen the San Francisco and Beaver corridors that are ultimately an amenity to NAU. The following is recommended for Humphreys street: • • A timed traffic light with pedestrian crossings is recommended on Butler Avenue Humphreys Street at 80’ wide, has a more generous right of way for a couple of blocks S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 126 Trees in grates/planters Special paving in parking space Trees every 2 parking spaces; planting staggered on the 2 sides Trees every 2 parking spaces; planting symmetrical on 2 street sides SAN FRANCISCO AND BEAVER STREETS: INTERIM STREETSCAPE AND TRAFFIC CALMING T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 127 north of Butler Avenue. The typical Southside 3D. TRANSPORTATION streets are 50’ wide • Humphreys aligns with the NAU campus spine, therefore making it an important street 3.D.1 Design Southside Streetscape as a connecting NAU to the city. The enhanced pedestrian friendly and pedestrian right of way can be capitalized on with the priority area help of streetscape and signage to act as a gateway between NAU and the city Traffic Calming is especially needed on San Francisco and Beaver Streets – the commercial Humphreys can also be an alternative for bicycles, spines of Southside – to be compatible with to the busy San Francisco Street, once the Route- existing and future use. Main Street retail survives 66 FUTS underpass is built. This is shown in the in a pedestrian oriented atmosphere that can be illustration to the left. adversely affected by the volume and speed of traffic. Redesign Southside Streets as a As part of the Masterplan, NAU is considering a destination, not just a medium to speed traffic to looped vehicular circulation system, limiting other parts of town. Sidewalks on Beaver are too vehicles to the campus periphery on city streets narrow and in bad shape. There is a need for and making the campus core pedestrian. On one street furniture, consistent with needs of adjacent hand, a pedestrian green spine can work very well, businesses, (e.g. how Macy’s tables work) and calming the core of the campus, tying the buildings not as rest stops for homeless. together, giving a coherent structure to the circulation and giving identity to the campus. On Design a system that is amenable and attractive the other hand, if this concept is implemented over to cyclists. There is a limited right of way on San a very large area, it will begin to have an adverse Francisco Street that cannot accommodate both impact on traffic congestion in the area and will parallel parking and bicycle lanes. One solution strain the already busy peripheral streets like is to slow down the speed of the vehicles to the Milton and Butler. It is possible to have limited speed of the bicycles and not have a dedicated vehicular circulation coexist with a pedestrian bike lane. Parallel parking is another vital spine concept and NAU should study alternatives ingredient to creating a friendly barrier between for more east-west routes through the campus. moving traffic and sidewalk activity. It also supports commerce in the parking it provides. Removing parallel parking could be detrimental to both the retail vitality and pedestrian nature of Southside. Dan Burden is a nationally recognized authority on bicycle and pedestrian facilities and programs, T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 128 TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE : CURRENT street corridor and intersection design, traffic flow and calming, and other design and planning elements that affect roadway environments. He has taught bicycle and pedestrian facility design courses in hundreds of different communities throughout the nation. He has personally photographed and examined walking and bicycling conditions in over 200 cities in the U.S. and abroad. Dan served as the principle writer for the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Planning and Design Curriculum, being introduced at many universities. His insights are becoming a model for college courses in civil engineering and urban T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r planning departments throughout the country. Dan serves as one of the main course instructors for the NHI (National Highway Institute) course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Facility Design. He held a workshop in Flagstaff and discussed, amongst other things, the future of San Francisco and Beaver Streets. Dan too came to a similar conclusion that given the limited right of way, the bikes should coexist with traffic that should be slowed down to the pace of the bicycles. He also noted that taking out parallel parking would compromise the commercial viability and pedestrian safety in the area. D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 129 TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE : FUTURE A project in the works is the extension Lone Tree Road from the I-40 freeway to Route 66 in the form of a major North-South artery. This will supplement the overcapacitated Milton Road and take some traffic off it. It can potentially mitigate traffic pressure on San Francisco and Beaver Streets and provide better access to NAU and areas east of Downtown. Currently San Francisco and Beaver Streets are serving as minor arterials and as a result have become busy north-south vehicular corridors in the city. A 2 phase strategy is suggested for San Francisco and Beaver Streets. In the short run, in the interest of these T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : streets being the social and commercial spines of the neighborhood, traffic calming measures, in concert with streetscape improvements, should be considered. This can be in the form of parallel parking on both sides of the street, bulbouts at crossings, planting and street furniture. In addition stop signs, or preferably timed traffic lights, can be implemented that keep traffic moving at the desired pace. The speed of the traffic should be slowed down to the speed of the bicycle so that bicycles can safely travel in the car lanes. Removal of parallel parking is not recommended as the parked cars serve two important purposes S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 130 SAN FRANCISCO AND BEAVER STREETS: INTERIM STREETSCAPE AND TRAFFIC CALMING 7’ sidewalk 8’ parallel parking 5 0 ’ 10’ lane R I G 8’ parallel parking 10’ lane H T O F W 7’ sidewalk A Y Bulb-out with tree grate and street furniture Special paving in parking space Trees in grates/ planters T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 131 that are ultimately tied to the walkability and the economic health of the area; The parked cars act as a buffer for the pedestrians from moving traffic, creating a secure sidewalk zone. The parking is a critical resource to the viability of street retail. Lack of parking threatens the access of the rest of the city and the region to Southside retail. The realignment of Lone Tree Road can have a major impact on the traffic flow and daily community patterns in the Southside neighborhood. The future realigned Lone Tree artery will be the second major north-south artery, complementing Milton and potentially relieving San Francisco and Beaver streets and the Southside neighborhood of some traffic. When the Lone Tree Corridor is in place, turning San Francisco and Beaver Streets back to 2-way streets should be revisited. This will be plausible as the Lone Tree corridor can take some northsouth traffic off San Francisco and Beaver Streets, thereby transforming them from minor arterials to neighborhood streets. This can improve access into Southside, automatically calm traffic, result in a more vibrant street with 2-way traffic, and be better for the retail viability of the area. Vibrant, compact, walkable mixed-use projects with active street-level uses are pedestrianfriendly places for the community. The incorporation of accessible links to public transit and pedestrian and bicycle traffic is critical to their success. The compact street may be home to pedestrians, light rail, buses, cars, and bicycles, all bringing people to the local retail area. In addition these communities are more environmental sustainable and work towards reducing sprawl, automobile congestion, and airwater pollution. Streetscape improvements such as lighting, planting, paving, signage, seating, and other amenities improve the walkability of retailoriented streets. Implementation of these improvements provides Southside with the infrastructure and impetus for strong street retailing. It is important that a retail environment be created through clean sidewalks, crosswalks, paseos, abundant plantings, banners, and improved lighting to convey a feeling of safety and comfort. Other street furnishings such as trash cans, newspapers, and bike racks should be incorporated in the space of the sidewalk. San Francisco and Beaver are the main commercial and social spines of the Southside Neighborhood. Businesses located on main streets are efficient users of public infrastructure and services. These businesses build strong communities by sustaining vibrant town centers, linking neighborhood in a web of economic and social relationships, and contributing to local causes. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 132 PARKING DISTRICT: A NEIGHBORHOOD RESOURCE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 133 3.D.2 Study parking solutions for existing and future development in Southside The solutions should work with the desired pedestrian nature and the continuous urban fabric lining the streets. Parking lots should be kept out of sight and tucked behind buildings. The parking should be considered as a resource for the area and be tackled as a district in terms of demand and supply rather than trying to meet parking demand on a site by site basis. A parking district consolidates parking and results in better utilization of this resource. It makes available premium land for development that can contribute to the momentum and vitality of development in the area. It can also lead to continuity of retail facades or other uses. In-lieu fees can be collected from businesses that do not want to create their own parking, making the development of parking a centralized and economical model. Southside can benefit tremendously from the formation of a parking district. To protect and develop the walkable character of Southside, a maximum parking ratio should be considered for various land-uses in the area. Transit is not optimally developed and accessible to Southside and so the parking ratios should respond to the market realities. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 134 BUTLER AVENUE RECOMMENDATIONS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 135 3.D.3 Explore options for Butler Avenue to make it an appropriate fit for Southside and an Avenue of pride for the City Butler currently has limited pedestrian crossings, compromising the north-south pedestrian movement from NAU to Southside and Downtown. It has encouraged development that contributes little to the life and character of Southside. Butler Avenue could be shaped as a lushly landscaped urban boulevard, a street that coalesces its two now estranged sides, as a street that is easy to cross over on foot and is a pleasant area in the neighborhood. The proposed changes can be designed not to affect the capacity of the street; timed traffic lights can be implemented to allow for more pedestrian crossings. Streetscape improvements including a median and sidewalks with tree planting can reduce the apparent width of Butler Avenue and make it easier for a pedestrian to cross 4 lanes of traffic. Turn lanes should be part of the median width. In addition, generous planting and a median can turn Butler into a pedestrian friendly boulevard that is also a civic symbol. Development can then be encouraged to come as close as possible to the Butler right of way, thus contributing to the continuity of the north south building fabric. Butler can be an avenue that positively contributes to the traffic movement, pedestrian realm and character of Southside and Flagstaff. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 136 ACCESS POSSIBILITIES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 137 3.D.4 Address limited access/entry into the Southside Area It is recommended that attention be given to the relief of traffic congestion and the improvement of pedestrian public safety and comfort. The new and improved transportation system should benefit the overall pedestrian and vehicular mobility within the district as well as conditions for regional traffic attempting to access the neighborhood and connect to Greater Flagstaff. Beaver Street is the only entry south into Southside from Route-66 and Downtown. This limited access has had an adverse impact on the commercial viability of the area. As stated before, San Francisco and Beaver Streets as 2-way streets should be revisited once the Lone Tree alignment is in place. The Lone Tree corridor will provide relief to the north-south traffic movement. San Francisco and Beaver, designed as neighborhood streets, have been functioning as arterials for the lack of a dedicated arterial other than the overcrowded Milton Road. A study is recommended that looks at the impact of converting the two streets back to 2-way on area traffic, commerce and pedestrian vitality. Franklin Street could be an entry into Southside off the Lone Tree Corridor. It is strategically located at the edge of NAU and Southside, and is therefore positioned to serve both areas. It also can link these areas to the new Stoneforest neighborhood east of Lone Tree. Mike’s Pike is another opportunity for access as a gateway into the Southside area. Coupled with Route-66 related improvements and land-uses that can potentially be developed, Mike’s Pike can be a major face for Southside on Milton Street. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 138 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT & SOUTHSIDE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 139 3.D.5 Study ways to tap on the future redevelopment of Downtown Downtown is a logical high visibility part of the city and to add to that, it is a thoroughfare for traffic to the Grand Canyon. Efficient connections to Downtown and its future developments will be beneficial to Southside. Future mixed-use development projects may be inserted as the eastern anchor to Downtown Flagstaff. This could attract a sizeable daytime and evening population. Southside can tap on this target group in the form of physical ways to access the area and by marketing Southside as a strategic destination in Flagstaff. Appropriate signage should be displayed at strategic access points. Pedestrian movement should be convenient and pleasant in terms of crossings, sidewalk access and landscape. Southside should work with the Visitor Center and Chamber of Commerce to tap on this potential. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 140 BNSF QUIET ZONE T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 141 3.D.6 Explore potential railway solutions with BNSF such as a “Quiet Zone” and a third track A Quiet Zone could be established through Southside where the BNSF train engines will not sound their horns if safety measures like flashing lights, crossing gates and local warning systems are put in place. The City should continue to work with BNSF to determine feasibility. The Train tracks are a vital part of the history of Flagstaff and are an asset today. A quiet zone could work towards development and trains coexisting together. It will allow and encourage development to occur adjacent to the tracks. The quiet zone, a minimum of 0.5 miles long, would cover the entire east-west width of the Southside area. BNSF is considering a third track as part of its expansion and an increase in trade. The city should work with BNSF to explore options for this route, including skirting the City peripherally, that would be minimally invasive to the fabric of the city - especially the historic fabric of Southside and to Downtown-Southside connections. 3.D.7 Coordinate transit to serve community Development in the Southside neighborhood that is coordinated with the existing Flagstaff Public Transit lines as well as existing pedestrian and bike trail systems. This will provide the benefits of an interconnected public realm to the community. There is a need to provide public transit service frequencies. The public access to transit service to the Southside neighborhood at increased should be located at strategic points for pedestrians and bicyclists. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 142 RIO DE FLAG AND IMPACTS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 143 3E. PUBLIC REALM 3.E.1 Investigate the impacts of the Rio De Flag Flood Control Project; explore new public and private strategies for the Rio de Flag The Rio De Flag control project in part involves the diversion of the channel to an underground conduit. This can free land available above for other uses. The flow in the open channel will be reduced, possibly allowing development to be closer to the channel edges. The open channel mostly flows through public property but now, rather than being the potential flooding source it can be the riparian green meandering through Southside. The Rio is a historic resource weaving through private lots in Southside; it could be restored and maintained as a greenway. A privately restored and maintained Rio, for all to see, will be an asset. Guidelines and incentives, that allow the richness of individual interpretations, could be developed by the City. The public areas it flows through can be public open spaces for Southside as is the potential case of the Rio on Ellery Street. The area by Jalisco’s Market could be a public park with retail use utilizing it. The lifting of the floodplain designation means that new construction does not have to be built on a high plinth or have to pay flood insurance and so construction costs will be lower. These and other impacts of the flood control project should be studies in how Southside will and can do things differently in the future. 3.E.2 Investigate options for a public venue for Southside activities such as a focal public open space Southside lacks a focal open space that defines the center of the community and allows people to gather as a community. This could be a great social and commercial asset to the area. Options should be studies on possible options. The ideal space should be on or close to one of the mixeduse commercial spines of the neighborhood so that it has high visibility for usage, related commerce and safety. One such option could be a new plaza at the corner of Leroux Street and Phoenix Avenue could serve as a community focal point in the Southside neighborhood. The proposed “South Square” could serve as a public gathering space for activities such as the Farmer’s Market or other special seasonal events. The adjoining east-west streets could be closed for major events. This location is T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 144 OPEN SPACE POSSIBILITIES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 145 central, close to Beaver and San Francisco Streets, has visibility from Downtown and Route66 and can be a catalyst to development on Phoenix Street. Study possibilities for more pocket parks and/or community gardens as neighborhood resources. This and any other open spaces should be tied to the public realm of Southside in terms of access. The street grid, open spaces, plazas, trails and paths should all be an interconnected network that allow people different options to traverse the neighborhood and give them a sense of ownership and pride. 3.E.3 Tie new public spaces to current Southside public realm 3.E.4 Implement public improvements Utilities should be installed on streets where they do not exist today, including, the area around Agassiz Street. Streets exist where there is a lack of a curb, gutter and sidewalk. A lack of these amenities has suppressed development, livability and real estate costs and this can be easily remedied. These improvements can act as a catalyst for the area. Some areas in the Southside do not have any street lighting, compromising the safety of the neighborhood. This has been a frequent concern of the residents, as expressed in the workshops. Amenities, at par with other neighborhoods, should be made available to the Southside area. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 146 3F. URBAN CONSERVATION 3.F.1 Formation of the Southside Urban Conservation District The Southside Urban Conservation District is intended to exist as an “umbrella” organization whose primary purpose is management of projects and programs expressly designed for the benefit of Southside residents, property and business owners. The district should function as a dedicated instrument or vehicle to facilitate the timely sharing of information and cost-effective implementation and monitoring of projects and programs. The precise design and appropriate chartering of this task force type body are dependent upon preparation of a detailed delineation and review of existing purviews, responsibilities, staffing and programs among all agencies, entities and organizations with projects and programs in the Southside. 3.F.2 Adoption of a Historic Design Review District for the Southside Consistent with the City of Flagstaff’s status and terms of its contractual agreement with the Arizona State Parks Board as a Certified Local Government (CLG), and the precedent established by the City’s adoption of Ordinance Nos. 1857 and 1956, the opportunity clearly exists to formally establish a historic design review district for the Southside. Unlike an urban conservation district, which essentially is a management tool to facilitate the coordination, implementation and monitoring of all projects and programs in an urban district, the historic design review district in Flagstaff functions per specific CLG program requirements. In large measure, these requirements are intended to promote and support the preservation and rehabilitation of the distinctive, character-defining features of a district’s significant historic fabric. 3.F.3 Affirmative Maintenance and Code Enforcement in the Southside Just as people and motor vehicles get older and clearly benefit from regular maintenance and occasional repair, so do buildings and other structures. Materials and systems of a building wear out and require repair or replacement. If not looked after and maintained, a building over time will deteriorate to a point that it becomes dilapidated, a condition that often warrants demolition. It is in everyone’s best interest—the building’s owner, the neighborhood, and the municipality—if a building is maintained and repaired, just as people are advised to see their doctor for routine checkups and take their motor vehicles to a mechanic for routine maintenance. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 147 The Southside possesses an extensive and very valuable inventory of older, historically-significant buildings. Unfortunately, many of these buildings have been altered or “upgraded” inappropriately, that is, the alterations fail to respect or enhance the character-defining features of the building. Even though well intentioned and often times carried out at considerable expense, such “improvements” very often are counter productive, resulting in devaluation of the property. In many cases such work is done without proper permit(s) and without benefit of professional assistance. Southside property owners could benefit from a tailor-made, focused affirmative maintenance and code enforcement program. This type of program could offer partial or total fee exemption for cityrequired agency review and permit work; an outreach program that provides property owners with practical advice and useful information regarding energy-saving measures, systems up grades and door and window replacement; a statement by the County Assessor that indicates those improvements subject to increased assessment and those not subject to increased assessment; rehab fairs and seminars that put property owners in direct touch with contractors, building suppliers, city inspectors, architects and others actively committed to retention and revitalization of the Southside’s historicallysignificant buildings. 3.F.4 Adjustments and Exceptions to Development Regulations Many historic properties tend to exhibit unusual, if not unique, character-defining features. As such, it is often times difficult to apply a standardized set of design guidelines without the need to grant adjustments or exceptions to municipal codes and development regulations. An alternative approach or tool for granting reasonable adjustments or exceptions makes use of performance standards. The following list provides some examples of performance standards applicable to alteration of historic properties: • The proposed alteration would not adversely impact either the historic property or neighboring properties, consistent with recommended actions of THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES; • The required number of on-site parking spaces is satisfied by other enforceable measures, e.g., a contractual agreement for use of other off-street parking spaces that meet code requirements; • The code requirements that normally govern the design and minimum dimensions of on-site parking spaces are waived or adjusted when character-defining features of the historic property would not be adversely impacted; T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 148 • The proposed encroachment into a required setback would be offset by exceeding other applicable minimum requirements; • The proposed subdivision or lot line adjustment would not disrupt or intrude upon visual character of neighboring properties and existing townscape; and • The degree of significance of the historic property would have some bearing on both the number and the types of adjustments and/or exceptions that would be given consideration. 3.F.5 Fee Reduction or Exemption for Permit Work In order to offset or reduce the additional costs and burdens of retaining, maintaining and rehabilitating designated historic properties, the owners of such properties can be offered reduced fees, or even exemption from such fees, as related to city-required project review and permit work. Beyond the financial savings or benefit afforded to the property owner, it is worth noting that this particular quid pro quo normally results in much more work being done with, rather than without, required permit(s), which in turn means that many more historic properties of a community are properly maintained and rehabilitated than is the case when such work is done without benefit of permit(s), agency review and professional assistance. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 149 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 150 SIGNAGE OPPORTUNITIES T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 151 3G. SIGNAGE Flagstaff and Southside already possess some iconic landmarks in terms of historic buildings, towers and the landscape around that attracts and orients people. At the same time, access to Southside is challenged and can be remedied to an extent by signage. People visiting Downtown, or driving by the peripheral streets would benefit from knowing what is available and how to get to it. The drawing on the left suggests the potential sites to be considered for signage. This can be in the form of wayfinding and/or advertising a feature of Southside. Some of the sites are discussed. Beaver Street is the only street into Southside from Route 66 and Downtown. And the way it comes up suddenly as Milton curves east, it is very easy to miss it, as many people do. This entry should be advertised at appropriate points. Five Points is a potential new entry into Southside and into Mike’s Pike. This can relieve the pressure off Beaver Street and the neighborhood would be more accessible as a result of it. Milton, Route 66 and Butler and the future Lone Tree corridor are/will be high volume streets that can serve as show-windows for Southside. Appropriate signage should be positioned on these streets. Downtown should have maps and other signage that inform people about Southside and direct them there. The NAU signage system, currently being developed, should be coordinated with Southside, as there is much crossover pedestrian and vehicular traffic. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 152 APPENDICES A. PUBLIC WORKSHOPS A.1 Summary of stakeholder comments from interviews conducted by the consultant team on June 16-17, 2004 a. Businesses are for bike lanes but don’t want to jeopardize street parking, and therefore their business, for it There is not enough home ownership or the owners occupying their houses resulting the neighborhood being in a state of disrepair The neighborhood would benefit from some public gathering space Area treated as “stepchild”, especially the residents who happen to be the long-term stake holders of the neighborhood University is buying land in the Southside Area Some friction between students and residents Lack of maintenance on City’s part with street lighting, streetscape, trash removal. (Lighting especially around Leroux Street). Students, residents and police have successfully worked together in the past – this needs to be an ongoing program Lack of safety, law enforcement, parking enforcement (vehicles park on) Noise, graffiti, gang activity in area Presence of vagrants, homeless, transients; probably attracted to neighborhood because of shelter South Beaver school has old building – in need of maintenance Murdoch (community) center should not close Guadalupe church is a cultural center for the neighborhood. Has history and stories attached to it. Can be strategically used as an asset Residents concerned about land consolidation and development close to Butler making rents go up Typical developments on Butler do not benefit the neighborhood Butler has become a pedestrian barrier vis a vis north-south connectivity in the Southside neighborhood New residential development should mostly be single family to preserve the scale and attract investment b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k. l. m. n. o. p. q. r. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 153 s. t. u. v. w. x. y. Small/Smaller lot sizes should be encouraged for character and affordability More ownership and NAU faculty residents should be encouraged. Students are dragging the neighborhood down Currently the businesses thrive on NAU traffic Historic properties, like the Tourist Homes, should be put to appropriate use Guidelines can people vision what they can do with their properties Rio De Flag is currently a mess with people dumping garbage, sleeping in it and its Right of Way being a part of private property. What will happen with it in the future? One –way pair has been bad for businesses. Beaver the only way into the neighborhood from north Students and residents would like to see bike lanes on San Francisco St A.2 Summary of City of Flagstaff staff comments a. b. Crime, maintenance and affordable housing some of the more important issues Design review guidelines do not apply to single family homes. How existing and new single family homes be regulated N.W. corner of Butler and Beaver should be one of the test sites City looking for recommendations to zoning Neighborhood considering “Weed & Seed” program Neighborhood is a target for HUD money Lots are sometimes too small to fit desired uses One-way pair will serve an arterial responsibility till the Lone Tree extension is completed Mikes Pike should be developed as a gateway to the Southside for Milton. One suggestion is to have a cul-de-sac on Mike’s Pike Street at Milton Avenue Downtown is aiming to be a “quiet zone” for the railway. Disincentives will be implemented for pedestrians to run across the tracks. Study underway There is little development opportunity in the neighborhood and therefore little scope for catalyst projects. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 154 B. PAPER 1: PRECEDENTS AND DIRECTIONS IN UNIVERSITY-TOWN RELATIONSHIPS Universities have evolved and adapted over time to better integrate with the cities in which they are located. As they have become more broadly diverse, they have also become more accessible to society. Schools are no longer gated citadels, but instead may act as catalysts for private developments and city sponsored projects. Universities, in partnership with cities and private developers, have the capacity to become vital economic engines that stimulate the development of neighborhood and district amenities. Private businesses located in the community have increased their funding efforts over time for university facilities and programs through formal sponsorships. In contrast to the for-profit world of private companies, however, municipal bodies and university institutions often have built a history of competition and constraining each other’s potential. American universities have suffered the impacts of the recession, reduced endowments, and state funding. Finding new revenue streams from both private and public sources is critical to their livelihood. The new paradigm of the “University-Town Center” represents the new relationships emerging between academic institutions and the locales in which they are situated. A university-town center combines housing with non-residential uses designed to bring institutional functions and the surrounding community together for common purposes. University-Town Centers create an identity for and spark new synergy in a neighborhood; they serve as community focal points for the region The University-Town Center concept is context-driven and can be adapted to the specific needs of the academic and municipal institutions and surrounding community. This partnership can become the principal agent guiding the redevelopment of a neighborhood. 1. The Atlanta-based developer Place Properties at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (UTC) and Kennesaw State University (KSU), northwest of Atlanta, partnered together to transform a commuter college into a residential campus. Place Properties has built University Place at KSU, a new multi-phase student housing community, designed around a central pedestrian boulevard and anchored by a town hall. The town center building is intended to serve as a community gathering space, flanked by a substantial retail component serving the local university as well as the surrounding community. The purchasing power and demand of UTC students made the urban retail component economically viable, providing an amenity for the entire community. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 155 2. In partnership with the city of Atlanta, the Georgia Institute of Technology, built a multiuse redevelopment of several blocks adjacent to the campus. The project comprises the School of management, a research center, an economic development institute, a hotel, a conference center, a Barnes & Noble, and restaurants. Wayne Clough, president of the Georgia Institute of Technology, described the synergistic goals that inspired the newly constructed University –Town Center, Technology Square: “We realized that we needed to engage our neighborhood in Atlanta. The cloistering strategy wasn’t working; it hurt both the school and the city.” The collaboration between universities and towns can fuel the local as well as the regional economy of an area through the creation of Mixed-Use College Gateways The cooperation of cities and universities is fueling a growing trend towards joint campus/town developments that, in turn, shape local and regional economies. By working together, with or without developers, both the campus and the own can leverage their resources, funding, power, and expertise. Often the city is benefiting through increased property tax, sales, tax, and parking revenues. 1. At Northwestern University, located adjacent to downtown Evanston, Illinois, Arthur Hill & Company developed downtown property into a new mixed-use development, Church Street Plaza. Entirely privately developed in cooperation with the City and Northwestern, the project contains a retail/ entertainment pavilion with a multiplex cinema, as well as a bookstore, a hotel, office space, housing, and a parking structure. 2. Ohio State University (OSU) in Columbus, Ohio has partnered with the city of Columbus to form a non-profit organization called Campus Partners for Community Urban Redevelopment to master plan a comprehensive revitalization of the neighborhoods adjoining the OSU campus. The plan offers some 250 recommendations organized around the following four themes: a. Improve rental housing and the quality of life in the predominantly student neighborhoods b. Increase the level of home ownership in the university district c. Revitalize the retail market serving those neighborhoods d. Encourage faculty, staff, and student involvement with the neighborhoods through a variety of learning and service activities The City used its power of eminent domain and acquired properties and negotiated relocation contracts with existing businesses for the development of the University Gateway Center. This center offers a mix of retail, entertainment, office, and residential uses, plus parking, serving the adjacent OSU community. The university purchased a bookstore as it was going out of business that will be one of T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 156 the largest in the Midwest and a major a major anchor when combined with the university bookstore. The University Gateway Center will be one of the largest mixed-use, urban redevelopment projects in Central Ohio; it is expected to open in summer 2005. More active and symbiotic relationships between universities and towns blur the edges between campus and town; this integration creates ‘One Community’ 1. The University of Pennsylvania has worked systematically to reinvigorate its urban environs. In 1997, with the City of Philadelphia, it started West Philadelphia Initiatives, a program intended to encourage public and private reinvestment in declining neighborhoods around the university. To date, the results of their collaborative efforts include a public school, market rate housing, a grocery store, a movie theater, a bookstore, and assorted small shops and restaurants. 2. Yale University has become a principal agent in the city of New Haven’s redevelopment of downtown. The University has helped the city to create a special tax district that has attracted many shops and restaurants to the city’s core, as well as softening or blurring the edges of campus through new green space and ground-level retail. 3. Andre Luciano, coach of Northern Arizona University, asked the City of Flagstaff a question last Spring,” Why can’t Flagstaff be more of a true college town and demonstrate some NAU spirit next fall?” Coach Luciano’s simple question became a challenge to the city was answered by a partnership and community effort initiated by the partnership between the university and the city. Seventy five banners were erected in downtown Flagstaff, proudly proclaiming, “One Community-Flagstaff and Northern Arizona University.” Universities promote new student housing as well as new private housing development and amenities for the neighboring communities in which they are situated. 1. In Baltimore, a partnership has been formed between the city and Johns Hopkins University to form East Baltimore Development Inc. (EBDI), dedicated to the revitalization of the East Baltimore Middle East neighborhood, approximately 80 acres just north of the Johns Hopkins campus. As partners, the university and the city with private developers have developed a campus open space system as well as new biotech park encompassing research and dormitory space. In addition to the creation of 8.000 new jobs, EBDI has planned for the development of up to 1,500 revitalized and newly constructed homes. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 157 2. The University of California is overseeing the construction of its new tenth campus in Merced County wit the City of Merced. The campus’s first phase, funded through lease revenue bonds, is slated to open in 2005, accommodating 25,000 students and 6,000 faculty members in 25 years. The University also prepared the guidelines for the selection of the master developer of private housing for the surrounding community. This new 2,133 acre development, located next to campus, is expected to grow to 31,000 new residents. The partnership of universities and towns prioritize development plans that have a broad scope with multilayered strategies for a community Visible physical improvements constitute just one part of the overall impacts of University-Town Centers. Cities contribute special infrastructure improvements, financing for planning and consultants, development incentives, and a streamlined review process; the educational institution provides expertise in law, government, and federal programs, and use of its resources. Universities in partnership with cities need to draft multi-year development plans or frameworks that go beyond and do not seek a quick return, but instead think with a long term vision of the community’s needs. These projects involve intense and extensive planning efforts. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 158 1. When the University of California’s Hastings Law School decided to develop an eight-level garage next to its campus in the urban Tenderloin neighborhood of San Francisco, the project met community opposition. By listening more closely to community needs, Hastings realized the benefits of developing a mixed-use facility that would include retail and housing. In addition, the university teamed up with a local YMCA to include in the program a sports and recreation center to be jointly used by student and neighbors. Currently the project is being redesigned with community support. 2. The mixed-use project, Village Commons, was developed more than a decade ago in South Hadley, Massachusetts, by Mount Holyoke College. Village Commons is a mix of specialty businesses that took time to locate and develop. Today, it serves as the town’s most significant and vital shopping center. 3. The Savannah College of Art and Design (SCAD), founded in 1978, has never had a typical campus. Instead, it has bought and renovated buildings around the city, creating a network of more than 50 school buildings. Motels have been converted to dorms. An old movie theater was rehabilitated. Factory buildings were adapted as studios for artists. “Savannah never experienced urban renewal, so we found many buildings, sometimes in bad shape with good bones, that were well-suited to adaptive reuse, “ says SCAD president Paula Wallace. “In this way we have become a big force in city development.” T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 159 As more universities and cities seek more cost-effective ways to spend capital funds, they are compelled to find real opportunity on a dwindling number of developable sites. The sharing of resources and facilities between universities and towns provides enormous community benefits. Boundaries have blurred as cities and private businesses seek to tie into the resources offered by universities; and the academic institutions, in turn, recognize the political leverage attached to working with cities. These redefined relations between town and gown has led to joint planning initiatives. Through careful collaboration, creative financing, and long-term planning, city departments and universities are developing successful strategies to achieve shared goals. Resources: Urban Land, Egan, Nancy, and Nakazawa, Paul, “Intellectual Capital,” October 2004 Urban Land, Smirtniotopoulos, Peter, “Matriculation Reloaded,” October 2003 Architectural Record, Levinson, Nancy, “Campus Planning is Breaking New Ground,” August 2004 Technology Square, Georgia Institute of Technology http://www.gatech.edu/news-room/release.php?id=481 Church Street Plaza, Northwestern University, Arthur Hill & Company http://www.medill.northwestern.edu/studentwork/Winter2004/Glick/Commercial/main.html http:// www.icsc.org/srch/sct/current/sct9805/47.htm University Gateway, Ohio State University http://www.thelantern.com/news/2004/11/29/Campus/Osus-Investment.In.Property.Pays.Off815871.shtml West Philadelphia Initiatives, University of Pennsylvania http://research.uli.org/Content/Awards/2003/WestPhilly.htm East Baltimore Development Inc. (EBDI), Johns Hopkins University http://www.ebdi.org/about_ebdi.html T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 160 C. PAPER 2: PRECEDENTS AND DIRECTIONS IN LOCAL RETAIL Locally-owned businesses recycle a large share of their revenue back into the community by supporting other local businesses such as local banks, accountants, printers, and internet service providers. These businesses have a major impact on the local economy as they are also major providers of jobs in the area. Local ownership of businesses ensures that important decisions are made by people who live in the community and who will feel the impact of those decisions. Local businesses are owned by people who live in the community and are invested in its future. These individuals frequent and appreciate local amenities. Their tax dollars pay for local services. They are often actively involved in civic and cultural organizations. They advertise on local media. They use local accountants and printers. A diagram of a healthy small-town economy would reveal a web of interconnected relationships. Doing business with community members builds a web of personal and economic relationships that are essential to a strong neighborhood identity. Most important, locally owned businesses build strong communities. They foster walking, congregating and chance encounters with neighbors — activities essential to maintaining the quality of life and sense of connection and community. A Broad Mix and Diversity of Small to Medium-Scale Retail Developments National or chain-store developers routinely receive multimillion dollar subsidies that are rarely offered to local businesses. State and federal tax policies tilt the playing field as well, giving national retailers an advantage over their smaller rivals. New local retail development may also boost the tax base and relieve some of the burden shouldered by homeowners. Entrepreneurship fuels economic innovation and prosperity, and serves as a key means for families to move out of low-wage jobs and into the middle class. A competitive marketplace of diverse businesses is the best way to ensure innovation and low prices over the long-term and the community’s prosperity. A variety of small and medium-sized local businesses, in conjunction with chain or franchise establishments, guarantees a broad range of product choices that satisfies the diverse needs and tastes of residents, workers, and visitors. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 161 City Policies that Support the Growth of Local Retail Many cities are adopting size limits and other kinds of land-use policies that restrict the growth of chains, support downtown revitalization, and create an environment in which locally owned businesses can thrive. City incentives and business association policies may encourage and protect local businesses. Protecting a market share for local businesses with policy initiatives should be a priority. 1. The Boulder Independent Business Alliance (BIBA) is a coalition of over 150 locally owned businesses determined to defend the city’s homegrown economy from takeover by national and global chains. Last year BIBA introduced the Community Vitality Act (CVA), a package of four local ordinances drafted with the help of the Institute for Local Self-Reliance’s New Rules Project, a national effort to identify and promote policies that build strong, sustainable local economies. The CVA would require that the city give preference to locally owned businesses for purchases and contracts; prohibit the city from leasing city-owned property to non-local businesses; limit the number of “formula” businesses (i.e., identical chains) that could locate within Boulder; and establish a public review process for approving new large-scale retail stores. Non-Profit Organizations Promote Local Retail Associations such as the Chamber of Commerce promote the business and convention life in the area. Their collaboration with other entities such as the Tourism Board and Visitors Center will attract more visitors to the local retail neighborhood. 1. The Austin Independent Business Alliance (A.I.B.A) works to promote locally owned businesses and speak to the concerns of independent business. A.I.B.A’s mission is to shift more dollars to locally-owned independent businesses by helping shoppers to make fully informed decisions by recognizing the full value that locally-owned independent businesses provide to our community. The 240-member Austin Independent Business Alliance has blanketed the city with posters calling on residents to “Celebrate Your Independents” and persuaded Austin Mayor Will Wynn to issue an official Independents Week proclamation. Members are organizing a variety of events and contests, all of which are designed get people thinking about how their spending decisions affect Austin’s future. 2. Founded in 1998, the Boulder Independent Business Alliance’s (BIBA), primary mission is to make the choice “local or chain?” a significant consideration for residents in their spending decisions. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 162 BIBA membership is open to any business that is majority owned by area residents and keeps decision-making authority local. For residents and visitors alike, one of BIBA’s most useful creations is The BIBA Guide, a directory of locally owned businesses. The coalition advertises through many local media outlets. BIBA is more new ideas: gift certificates, a pooled health insurance program for local businesses and their employees, a local business investment fund to serve as an alternative to stock market funds, and a local currency. 3. Nearly a dozen other communities are now forming independent business alliances. Some were inspired by Boulder’s success; others arrived at the idea independently. A new Salt Lake City alliance was instrumental last year in blocking plans for a sprawling shopping center. In Vermont, general store owners are forming an alliance for joint purchasing and marketing. In Tucson, restaurants have banded together under the banner Tucson Originals to lower costs through group purchasing and build awareness of the value of local restaurants to the city’s sense of place. Finally, the American Independent Business Alliance was launched; the alliance is a national network that will serve as an incubator and support structure for local coalitions. Retail Establishments with Local Character In an increasingly homogenized world, communities that preserve their one-of-a-kind businesses and distinctive character have an economic advantage. Thus communities benefit from attracting businesses with a local flavor. Some communities have concluded that, regardless of their size, “formula” businesses are rarely if at all acceptable due to their impacts on community character and the local economy. Formula businesses are legally defined as businesses that adopt standardized services, methods of operation, décor, uniforms, architecture, or other features virtually identical to businesses elsewhere. 1. To maintain its distinctive character of small to medium local businesses, the City of Coronado allows no more than 10 formula restaurants downtown. The City also requires a special review and permit process for chain stores proposing to locate in the area. Businesses Located on Main Streets Businesses located on main streets are efficient users of public infrastructure and services. These businesses build strong communities by sustaining vibrant town centers, linking neighborhoods in a web of economic and social relationships, and contributing to local causes. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 163 1. Pearl Street is an outdoor pedestrian mall that boasts an array of ground-level restaurants, cafes, bookstores, offices, and shops offering an assortment of goods. Located in the heart of Boulder, CO, the tree-lined, brick walkway also features a regular host of street performers, and seasonal festivities. Play areas for children feature an assortment of boulders to climb on in this active public space. Compact Retail Streets with Pedestrian/Bike Access and Connections to Public Transit Vibrant, compact, walkable mixed-use projects with active street-level uses are pedestrian-friendly places for the community. The incorporation of accessible links to public transit and pedestrian and bicycle traffic is critical to their success. The compact street may be home to pedestrians, light rail, buses, cars, and bicycles, all bringing people to the local retail area. In addition these communities are more environmental sustainable and work towards reducing sprawl, automobile congestion, and air and water pollution. 1. Castro Street in downtown Mountain View is a successful example of downtown redevelopment and streetscape design. There exists a diverse assortment of restaurants, bookstores, night clubs, coffee houses, restaurants, and shops. The sidewalk cafes, parks, and outdoor plazas line historic and modern infill storefronts along Castro Street. The neighboring residential areas offer a mix of historic single family homes and new multifamily housing complexes. Bus, local light rail, and regional train lines are accessible by foot from Castro Street. Streetscape Improvements Streetscape improvements such as lighting, planting, paving, signage, seating, and other amenities improve the walkability of retail-oriented streets. Implementation of these improvements provides Southside with the infrastructure and impetus for strong street retailing. It is important that a retail environment be created through clean sidewalks, crosswalks, paseos, abundant plantings, banners, and improved lighting to convey a feeling of safety and comfort. Other street furnishings such as trash cans, newspapers, and bike racks should be incorporated in the space of the sidewalk. In addition well-identified and convenient parking and graphics will inform the general public that the Southside neighborhood is on the move. 1. Second Street in downtown Mount Vernon, WA on Washington’s Puget Sound, is an active main street with expanded sidewalks, mature street trees, and one-sided parallel street parking T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 164 bays. Ground-level retail storefronts line either side of Second Street. The generous sidewalks and plazas with benches, lighting, and landscaped areas provide comfortable places for pedestrians to sit, take a stroll, people watch, and bring visitors. Circulation, Access, and Parking Strategy – Streets and Garages Convenient vehicular circulation and access to ample available parking is key to ensuring the success of any local retail. Smart parking strategies will ensure that the community will continue to choose to make visits to the local Southside shopping area for their retail needs. One strategy is to create a walkable main street by assigning faster-moving traffic, surface lots, and parking garages to the peripheral streets, creating and pedestrian-friendly internal zone that has on-street parking. 1. In downtown Mountain View, CA, along Castro Street, parallel street parking bays are defined by planted street trees. Parking garages line the streets that are parallel to Castro Street. Surface parking lots are tucked behind storefront businesses lining Castro Street and are accessible by midblock paseos. Leasing Strategies for Retail Space It is recommended that a marketing study be completed that assesses what kinds of local retail businesses would complement the existing retail establishments in the neighboring areas of the downtown and the university. Indeed studies that address the sizes, types, and economic impact of retail establishments, are essential to ensure that years of revitalization work and downtown investment are not undermined by uncontrolled, competing retail growth elsewhere in the community. Not only can this growth be an eyesore that damages a town and its sense of place; it can also have an adverse impact on traffic, tax revenue, public services, and employment. Marketing Approaches: Niche Markets A key component in the marketing of the retail district of Southside is the identification of its unique “market niche.” The identification of the appropriate market niche required to enhance Southside’s draw is key to the formulation of a successful marketing approach. A strategy to increase retail revenue should be developed to assess how the Southside neighborhood possesses a competitive advantage over other retail districts in Flagstaff and the surrounding region. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 165 An opportunity may exist to create a venue for Flagstaff tourists and visitors to Route 66. Galleries and shops showcasing the arts and crafts of local artisans may also be a draw for this group. There may exist possibilities and market the Southside community as an arts district to Flagstaff visitors. Cafes and restaurants could complement this niche market. The revitalization of the Southside neighborhood should be focused in its approach and be directed toward capitalizing on the potential strengths of the district, thereby promoting a unique or specialized niche market. Marketing Approaches: A Diversity of Uses Local retail with a diversity of uses attracts a multiple-user market. A successful tenant mix for the Southside neighborhood should integrate a diversity of uses. The neighboring Northern Arizona University (NAU) student population provides a diverse market target base for the local retail in the area. In addition to small food venders and eateries, there may be a desire by students for more stores that specialize in outdoor sports and recreation, bookstores, coffee houses, copy and photo stores, as well as apparel. Indeed transforming Southside into a thriving retailing area will require a coordinated program of diversity of uses and retail tenants uses to be offered to the community. RESOURCES: Main Street News, Mitchell, Stacy, “Protecting Locally Owned Retail: Planning Tools,” No, 204, February 2004 American Independent Business Alliance www.amiba.net Business Alliance for Local Living Economies www.livingeconomies.org The Home Town Advantage Bulletin www.newsrules.org/hta T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 166 D. PAPER 3: PRECEDENTS AND DIRECTIONS IN NON-PROFIT DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATIONS 1. Non-Profit Development Associations and Management Districts Non-profit development associations and management districts work with communities to utilize their local resources by integrating constructive, inclusive community-based planning, and often manage educational programs, research and training. These groups partner with local businesses and city agencies to advocate for policies and programs that may promote a strong mixed-use environment in a community and collectively represent the interests of stakeholders. The associations may offer capital and technical assistance to start-up businesses, act as a caretaker of the historic fabric, be a pedestrian-priority mixed-use and transit advocate, a destination marketer, an events producer and a source of information, and/or a liaison body with the regulatory bodies. Made up primarily of business holders and stakeholders in the area, these groups are driven by collectively-formed goals. Pasadena Development Corporation (PDC) Pasadena Development Corporation (PDC) was founded in 1977 as a result of the efforts of the City, Federal Government, and Chamber of Commerce to stimulate job creation. PDC is a non-profit 501(c)(4) local economic development corporation that utilizes both governments: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), Economic Development Administration Funds, U.S. Treasury, and private bank funds. These loans are for small businesses within the San Gabriel Valley and Los Angeles County. Contracted by the City of Pasadena, PDC operates and provides a small business revolving loan program, technical assistance, and counseling program to micro and small businesses that create or retain jobs for individuals from low-to-moderate income families. The Old Pasadena Management District (OPMD) The Old Pasadena Management District (OPMD) is a non-profit business organization that creatively plans, manages and develops Old Pasadena as a unique, authentic and vibrant downtown experience. The OPMD currently contracts with the City of Pasadena to manage the Old Pasadena Business Improvement District (BID). The BID enhances the basic City services by funding district-wide security, marketing, and maintenance programs to provide a clean, safe vibrant downtown experience. All operations are financed through annual tax assessments on privately owned commercial property. The Old Pasadena BID was formed in 2000 and will be considered for renewal in 2005. This organization is led by a cross section of Old Pasadena stakeholders and managed by professional staff. This includes merchants, tenants, property owners, residents and city management, led by 23 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 167 volunteer directors. Geographic boundaries of the Business Improvement District (BID) are Pasadena Avenue to the west, Arroyo Parkway to the east, Del Mar Boulevard to the south and Walnut Street to the north. The District is a 21-block National Register Historic District, and includes two historic public parks. The Management District Is: · The caretaker of Old Pasadena’s public spaces. · A destination marketer. · A public policy advocate for Old Pasadena. · A center city housing and transportation advocate. · An information source. · A special events producer. The Old Pasadena Management District advocates at City Hall, and seeks favorable publicity and partnerships for programs designed to benefit the District. On a daily basis, their “Clean Team” personnel clean the streets and sidewalks of Old Pasadena. They also operate the Old Pasadena Ambassador Guides, providing a security presence and hospitality for the District. Downtown Inglewood Marketplace Management District In 2002 the City of Inglewood in Southern California hired a private consulting firm to work with downtown property/business owners to determine their interest in establishing a management district. Since 2002 the Management District has supported festivals and events that serve to promote and enhance downtown Inglewood businesses. The District has been working in partnership with City Departments on these projects. The association also provides assistance to downtown merchants and small businesses in the development of marketing strategies and long-term goals. Finally the managing group has developed a working budget for the fulfillment of two objectives: · Improvement of the aesthetic environment of downtown businesses by providing maintenance services for all service streets in the downtown community. · Reduction of the costs of existing businesses’ marketing, advertising, and security services and at the same time structure services to help develop and retain businesses in the area. The Downtown Inglewood Marketplace Management District is currently in the process of implementing strategies to fulfill these objectives. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 168 2. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) Since the early ’70s, downtowns across the United States and Canada have been using Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) as a mechanism for revitalization. BIDs allow business properties within that geographic area to contribute to programs aimed at promotion, management, maintenance and development of that district. This powerful tool allows for an assessment on property within a defined area. Revenues from this assessment are then directed back to the area to finance a wide range of services, including such things as security, maintenance, marketing, economic development, parking, and special events. The services provided by BIDs generally are financed by special assessments on the commercial property within the district. Unlike general property taxes, these revenues can be used only for services within the BID. In addition, decisions affecting the use of BID revenues are usually made by a board consisting of private property and business owners. While the power of government is used to insure that all property owners contribute to the BID, oversight is often limited to an annual budget review. BIDs provide a variety of services including street and public space maintenance, “customer service representatives” or “ambassadors” to provide information and assistance to tourist and shoppers, and unarmed security patrols to supplement police services. Although many of these services traditionally have been provided by public workers, when BIDs are involved, the work generally goes private. BIDs in California In California, BIDs are a type of assessment district in which business owners choose to be assessed a fee, which is collected on their behalf by the City, for use in promoting and improving the business area. BIDs date back to 1965 with the approval of Assembly Bill 103 - the “Parking and Business Improvement Area Law.” Today there are approximately 200 BIDs in the state. Benefits: A BID provides a business area with the resources to develop marketing campaigns, increase awareness and lobbying efforts, secure additional funding and enhance public improvement and beautification projects in partnership with the City. An organized business community can work more effectively to create positive change and increase support for businesses in the area. In San Diego, BIDs work closely with elected officials and city staff to voice collective concerns, monitor business regulations and obtain funding for their business development projects. Marketing Activities: The BIDs have developed a variety of successful marketing activities that generate business for the districts. These activities range from special events such as restaurant tours, block parties, weekly farmers markets and holiday festivals to developing public relations and marketing materials. BIDs use the Internet, develop coupon books, coordinate cooperative advertising T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 169 campaigns and develop and distribute district brochures. BIDs also coordinate some of San Diego’s most popular, large-scale street festivals, including the Adams Avenue Street Fair, Gas lamp’s Mardi Gras and Hillcrest’s City Fest. BIDs also market the districts to potential businesses in an effort to reduce vacancies, provide a good mix of businesses and strengthen the BID. All of these activities help to further market the district to customers. Additional Funding: Many BIDs receive additional funding through various City grant programs. BID assessments are often used to leverage funding for a variety of projects. While a BID pools its resources through assessment, the City of San Diego is allocating millions of additional dollars to many of the same business development and revitalization goals within BIDs. Many BIDs are receiving a significant City match of funds for their assessments. That is an extraordinary return on investment for individual small businesses and the BIDs as a whole. Many of San Diego’s BIDs receive funding from the City’s Transient Occupancy Tax and from City parking meter revenues. Several of the BIDs also run very successful special events and secure corporate sponsorships for various projects which help to supplement business improvement projects. The City also invests millions of dollars in many of the City’s BIDs through extensive streetscape improvement and redevelopment projects. Other City Assistance: The City of San Diego is committed to supporting BIDs because they are strengthening the small business community, creating new jobs, attracting new businesses, and revitalizing older neighborhood commercial districts across the city. To improve and diversify the economic base of the districts, the City’s Office of Small Business assists the BIDs with market assessments, sales tax revenue assessments, business plans, property owner assistance, retail recruiting, and database collection to measure neighborhood economic activity 34th Street Partnership Founded in 1992, the 34th Street Partnership is a coalition of property-owners, tenants, and city officials, working to revitalize a 31 block district in the heart of midtown Manhattan with major streetscape improvements, special security and sanitation services, public events, tourist assistance, and free retail services. The Partnership’s programs and services are funded principally by a special assessment on commercial properties within the district. Funds are collected by the city and returned in full to the Partnership. In recent years, the 34th Street Partnership has partnered with the nonprofit community-based group, the Bryant Park Restoration Corporation, and work with the Department of Transportation, to improve the streetscape security in their community. The coalition was successful in their collaborative efforts in installing a mid-block crossing to Bryant Park. The new pedestrian T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 170 crosswalk reduces the dangers of pedestrians cutting across traffic daily to access the park. The group is also responsible for overseeing the yearly installations of holiday and seasonal decorations along the streets in the area. Coliseum Central Business Improvement District Coliseum Central is a not-for-profit business improvement district that was created to establish and maintain the District as the dominant commercial center on the Peninsula and one of the major commercial centers in Hampton Roads. Coliseum Central offers a variety of programs and services to the Businesses located in the District. The group holds an event each year to promote safety, wellness, crime prevention, and neighborhood unity. The Coliseum Central ‘Neighborhood Night Out’ is a free event includes activities designed for family fun and education. Children identifications are done by the Hampton Sheriff’s Department; bike safety checks and gun safety information is provided by the Hampton Police Division; kids are able to check out fire trucks from the Hampton Fire Department, and information is provided by local agencies that promote health and safety. The American Red Cross also sponsors their Blood Mobile available for donors. Other programs include the Advertising Co-op Program, the Physical Improvement Program, the Cooperative Security Program, and the Security Improvement Grant Program. Coliseum Central also provides the banners that are located in the District, holds an annual holiday parade and many other events, holds a monthly Business Roundtable, and hires musicians to play at businesses. The Downtown Everett Association The Downtown Everett Association is committed to advancing Downtown Everett as a vibrant economic, cultural and governmental center through leadership, advocacy and the ongoing administration of a business improvement district (BID). The organization’s membership is comprised of property owners who support the revitalization of Everett’s historic central core through annual fee assessments. The Downtown Everett Association focuses on specific priorities geared toward injecting new life into Everett’s historic central core: · · · · · · T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 Create a safe and clean environment Keep members educated and informed Provide representation to media and government Enhance quality business and commerce Encourage residential development Support long-term parking solutions P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 171 The idea of forming a business improvement district (BID) came in response to a growing awareness of Downtown Everett’s deteriorating condition in the early 1990’s. Weeds sprouted from sidewalk cracks, graffiti marred building walls, and garbage containers overflowed with trash. To reverse this trend, downtown supporters saw the formation of a BID as a time-tested solution—one that could prevent problems as well as respond to them. Thus, a group of active downtown stakeholders— business and property owners, community leaders, and concerned citizens—drafted a new plan of action. This plan now forms the basis of operations for the BID. In form and function, the BID resembles a homeowners association. Each property owner pays an annual assessment for services such as the ongoing maintenance of sidewalks, alleys, and other common areas. These funds are collected by the City of Everett’s Finance Department, and are administered by the Downtown Everett Association. RESOURCES: Pasadena Development Corporation (PDC). http://www.pdcloans.org/ Downtown Inglewood Marketplace Management District Feasibility http://www.cityofinglewood.org/pdfs/commdev/Assessment_District_Overview_1104.pdf. Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) http://www.sannet.gov/economic-development/business-assistance/small-business/bids.shtml 34th Street Partnership. http://www.34thstreet.org/partnership/index.php The Downtown Everett Association http://www.downtowneverett.com/ David Bonnell. outreach@southside.community.us Flagstaff Non-Profit Resources Vision 2020, City of Flagstaff, United Way Friends of Flagstaff’s Future Historic Commission, City of Flagstaff Historical Society, Pioneer Museum-Karen Cooper Cococino County Supervisor –Liz Archuletta Southside Neighborhood Catholic Social Services Sunshine Mission T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 172 E. PAPER 4: URBAN CONSERVATION What is urban conservation? It is continuous activity, involving interests and stakeholders in both private and public sectors that recognizes both the value and the importance of retaining, maintaining and revitalizing characterdefining features of historic urban fabric. Historic urban fabric consists of numerous kinds of characterdefining features typically associated with the built environment: buildings, structures, objects, places, parks, streets, plant materials, street furniture, signs, etc. Due to aging and other factors, historic urban fabric can wear thin and experience failures, stemming from lack of repair and routine maintenance, the presence of obsolete land uses, and new construction that is inappropriate or misguided. In sum, urban conservation measures represent a concerted effort to repair, reweave and renew historic urban fabric in a manner that is economical, timely and appropriate. What is an urban conservation district? It is a defined geographical area, within which public agency policies and programs deliberately complement investments and contributions of the private and non-profit sectors, in order to realize, coordinate and sustain certain desired improvements to an area’s historic urban fabric. An urban conservation district generally is inclusive of administrative and regulatory measures as well as projects and developments intended to retain and revitalize an area’s historic urban fabric. Note: Revitalization of historic urban fabric within an urban conservation district often includes new construction, appearing as an addition to an existing historic building or as an entirely new development. Such new construction needs to demonstrate its respect for character-defining features of the existing historic urban fabric, and yet, at the same time, make a genuine contribution on its own terms. By contrast, new construction that attempts to emulate other periods or styles, or that creates false historicism, is insincere and wasteful. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 173 CONCLUSION 1. Urban conservation districts are designed to function as “tailor made” instruments or tools for the administration and management of revitalization programs and projects in older urban areas of historical significance. Each urban conservation district is a unique creation, based upon the particular character-defining features, needs, policies, programs and regulations that belong to and affect a defined district, zone or geographical area. 2. The legislative action that is used to formally establish an urban conservation district depends upon specific program objectives, needs and requirements. If, for example, an urban conservation district consists of new standards and regulations of an enforceable nature, then most likely its formal establishment will be adoption by ordinance. On the other hand, if an urban conservation district only references inter alia existing ordinances or codes previously adopted by ordinance, then its formal establishment most likely will be adoption by resolution. Establishment of an urban conservation district for the Southside District provides an opportunity to effect improved communication and coordination among the numerous agencies and entities responsible for current and future programs and projects in, of and for the Southside District. An urban conservation district of this type functions as an “umbrella” organization, and therefore, as a central source of information and means for effecting necessary and more cost-effective coordination of programs and projects. Its precise design and appropriate chartering is dependent upon preparation of a detailed delineation and review of existing agency purviews, responsibilities, programs, staffing and interfacing with other agencies, entities and organizations. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 174 KEY MAP FOR PHOTOGRAPHS T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 175 F. FIELD NOTES & OBSERVATIONS; URBAN CONSERVATION -Robert Bruce Anderson 1. Church properties on the Southside tend to be well maintained, and, in the case of church structures #169 (Our Lady of Guadalupe, 302 S. Kendrick) and #35 (First Baptist, 123 S. Beaver), historic integrity associated with design and materials appears to have been retained in large measure. 2. New doors, new door hardware and new vertical wood siding (T-111?) are evident on or abutting front entries on structure #44 (310 S. Beaver), a National Register listed property. The wood siding may have been installed either to enclose a former porch or to replace an earlier wall. 3. Contributing structures #129 (51-52 E. Ellery) and #196 (502 S. Leroux) have both new sheathing and new glazing (aluminum frame sliders), and #196 has a new front door. 01-19W. Phoenix Avenue 4. New front doors, front door hardware and new glazing (usually aluminum frame sliders) are commonplace “upgrades” on the Southside. 5. No on-street parking is permitted on Beaver south of Butler; travel and bike lanes only. Query: where are residents, their guests and delivery vehicles supposed to park, if only for 5-10 minutes? 6. Vacant lots seem to be everywhere on the Southside. Why? Any pattern or recurrent names in present ownership? Which building types, materials, designs, heights, setbacks, etc. are appropriate for new infill construction on these parcels? 02-1E. Phoenix Avenue 7. The southeast corner of the Southside neighborhood has experienced considerable neglect and loss of integrity with respect to its historic fabric. Expressed another way, it presently reads as a disparate, unsettled townscape. 8. Mike’s Pike—what is it? What’s in a name? Can its history be leveraged to attract development? As a street or place of interest or meaning, it does not read as anything distinctive at the moment. 9. Walking and driving around the Southside, one increasingly observes abuse of buildings everywhere. Most likely the abuse is not intentional, but rather represents misguided, uninformed and inappropriate alteration of significant, and therefore valuable, historic properties and characterdefining features. In other words, these historic properties and character-defining features are being devalued, to the point that neither rehabilitation nor retention and repair will continue to exist as 03-214-2165 S. Lerony Street T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 176 04 - 46 S. San Francisco Street 06 - 314 S. San Francisco St. 05 - 409 S. San Francisco Street 08- 19W. Phoenix Avenue 09- 19W. Phoenix Avenue 12- 204 J. Mike’s Pike 07- 19W. Phoenix Avenue 11- 123 S. San Francisco Street 10- 19S. San Francisco Street 13- 217 S. San Francisco Street 14- 217 S. San Francisco Street T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t 15- 310 S. Beaver Street . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 177 viable options or opportunities. Demolition and new construction will become Southside’s future. (Some might say that this future for Southside already has arrived.) In my opinion, unless and until the City adopts a meaningful “gentle renewal” program that both promotes and financially assists rehabilitation of Southside’s privately-owned, historically-significant properties, the Southside most likely will lose its distinctive flavor and historic character. New construction that attempts to replicate, duplicate or otherwise retain Southside’s flavor and character will probably have a hard time being either authentic or sustainable. 10. There are many intrusions, especially south of Butler, of two-story six, eight and 12-pack apartment structures, built very cheaply. Absentee ownership, lack of maintenance, no evident interest in being part of the Southside. 16- 322 O’Leary Street 11. The appropriate authorities including Jim Woodward need to take a look at structure #60 (8 W. Benton). Also, across Leroux, structure #174 (124 S. Leroux). Both of these two “contributors” are in bad shape and are deteriorating further at a rapid pace. 12. Compare structure #214 (102 S. O’Leary), a “contributor” w/ new sheathing and glazing, with first structure south of #214, a “non-contributor” w/ original exterior and glazing in the 1993 survey now upgraded to “contributor” in the 1998 NR nomination form. 13. Structure #216 (116 S. O’Leary), a “contributor” w/ new sheathing, glazing and openings. 14. Structure #221 (124 S. O’Leary), a “contributor” w/ new metal siding (painted pink!) and glazing in the 1993 survey now downgraded to “non-contributor” in the 1998 NR nomination form, opposite structure #220 (123 S. O’Leary) a “contributor” w/ original wood siding and glazing. 17- 209 E. Cottage Avenue 15. Between the survey date of 1993 and 2004, this 11-year interim has seen many, unfortunate and unnecessary alterations to so-called “contributors”. Most likely a National Register Historic District listing for the Southside obtained much sooner, say, in 1996, would have helped to prevent or avoid some or even many of these alterations, simply because being located within a National Register Historic District most often brings a certain amount of prestige and value to properties located therein. Pride then becomes a key factor or ingredient in how people treat their properties. Even so, however, a National Register Historic District listing will not, and can not, do it alone. Property owners need access to good technical information, financial assistance and/or incentives, names of good people or firms in the trades, etc., and the City must be an active partner in terms of code enforcement, General Plan policies, and adherence to zoning regulations. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t 16- 322 O’Leary Street . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 178 19- 316 E. Brannen Avenue 20- 324 E. Brannen Avenue 23- 302 S. Kendrick Street S o u t h s i d e 22- 106 S. O’Leary Street 25- 120-122 E.Butler Avenue 26- 120-122 E.Butler Avenue 29- 110-112 S. O’Leary Street 30- 106 S. Agassiz Street 24- 319 S. San Francisco Street 28- 120-122 E.Butler Avenue 27- 120-122 E.Butler Avenue T h e 21- 123 S. O’Leary Street 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 179 16. Cohesion and coherence are terms or concepts that are commonly used to describe places, areas or districts that possess integrity of historic fabric. They are not terms that I would use to describe the prevalent historic fabric or character of the Southside neighborhood. Instead, I would use terms such as fragmented, diluted and compromised to describe or characterize the historic fabric or townscape of the Southside neighborhood. 17. At the same time, the Southside neighborhood is not without its real gems. Without question, a very significant and largely intact expression of early 20th century townscape of the American west exists on Phoenix Avenue between Beaver and San Francisco, and on the west side of San Francisco between Phoenix and Cottage Avenue. Within these two blocks, which resolutely establish the southern edge of the Railroad Addition Historic District, no fewer than 10 buildings are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. For my money, the most striking of them all is the Du Beau Hostel. 31- 102 S. O’Leary Street 18. Structure #75 at 120-122 E. Butler is, in fact, a property consisting of some 12 buildings, described in the 1993 survey as the Vasquez House and Cottages. As a building type, it is one of the most distinctive historic properties on the Southside. Cottages for itinerant laborers? Affordable housing for transients? Integrity of design and materials, at least upon first glance, appears to be quite good. 19. Structures #307, 309 and 310, located on the east side of San Francisco between Ellery and Franklin Avenues, are identified in the 1993 survey as “contributors”. They don’t exist anymore. They have either been demolished or moved to another site(s), most likely the result of a collective action by a single investor or developer, say, UNA? 32- 116 S. O’Leary Street 20. Structure # 33, located at the southeast corner of Beaver and Cottage, recently was purchased, or so we have been told, for $500,000. For this price, retention of this noteworthy “contributor” to the proposed Southside National Register Historic District is most unlikely. Built between 1898 and 1901, and known by its historic name as the J.C. Blake/Phil Coyle House, the 1993 survey report highlights this structure as “the best example of the double ell located in the Southside.” [The double ell plan is characterized by opposing symmetrical wings, separated by a shed roofed veranda, and usually consisting of two separate entrances.] 33- 124 S. O’Leary Street T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 180 34- 105 S. Elden Street 35- 502 S. Lerony Street 36- 51-52 E. Ellery Avenue 38- 201 W. Cottage Avenue 39- 8 W. Benton Avenue 40- 124 S. Lerony Street 37- 201 W. Cottage Avenue 41- 124 S. Lerony Street 42- 23 S. Agassiz Street 43- 19 S. Agassiz Street 44- looking east, N. Ellery Avenue S. Agassiz Street 45- 100 block of W. Phoenix Avenue 46- S. O’Leary Street at Ashurst Avenue T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 181 47- Cottage Avenue, east of J. O’Leary Street 48- 200 block, S. Humphreys Street, east side 49- 200 block, S. Humphreys Street, east side 50- S. Agassiz Street, east side, at E. Benton Avenue 51- SE corner, S. Beaver Street and W. Benton Avenue 52- SE corner, S. Beaver Street and E. Benton Avenue 53- SW corner, S. San Francisco Street and E. Benton Avenue 54- SE corner, S. San Francisco Street and E. Butler Avenue 57- SW corner, S. Agassiz St. and E. Ellery Avenue 55- NE corner, S. Beaver Street and W. Benton Avenue 58- SE corner, S. Agassiz St. and E. Cottage Avenue 56- J. Agassiz St., west side, north of Brannen Avenue T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 182 G. POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS BOUNDARY AND TABLE POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS BOUNDARY T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 183 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS TABLE 2004 (Estimate) Flagstaff City 2009 (Projection) ? '04-'09 Southside Neighborhood* 2004 2009 ? (Estimate) (Projection) '04-'09 Total Population 61,270 68,850 12.37% 1,353 1,390 2.73% Total Households Average Household Size 21,948 2.57 25,230 14.95% 584 2.30 614 5.14% % of Total 14,249 11,066 27,366 5,027 23.3% 18.1% 44.7% 8.2% 215 401 625 112 15.9% 29.6% 46.2% 8.3% Est. Population by Race W hite Black or African American American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Pacific Islander Other Race Two or more races 42,639 853 8,445 689 67 3,294 1,721 69.6% 1.4% 13.8% 1.1% 0.1% 5.4% 2.8% 1,056 59 60 10 2 125 41 78.0% 4.4% 4.4% 0.7% 0.1% 9.2% 3.0% 9,232 15.1% 488 36.1% 10,579 11,369 48.2% 51.8% 124 460 21.2% 78.8% Est. Population Hispanic or Latino Household Tenure Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Mean Household Income Median Household Income $55,627 $41,139 Less than $25,000 $25,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 and more Est. Employed Pop 16+ by Occupation Management, Business, & Financial Professional and Related Service Sales and Office Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Construction, Extraction & Maint. Production, Trans., & Material Moving * % of Total Population by Age 0-17 18-24 25-59 60+ $26,920 $19,943 6,411 6,613 3,864 5,060 29.2% 30.1% 17.6% 23.1% 336 185 19 44 57.5% 31.7% 3.3% 7.5% 31,713 3,994 8,192 6,024 8,578 129 2,222 2,574 100.0% 12.6% 25.8% 19.0% 27.0% 0.4% 7.0% 8.1% 842 88 143 318 193 7 22 71 100.0% 10.5% 17.0% 37.8% 22.9% 0.8% 2.6% 8.4% POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS TABLE See polygon in Popoluation Charcterisitics Boundary for boundaries used. T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 184 SOURCES Community Organizations and Development: Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) http://www.sannet.gov/economic-development/business-assistance/small-business/bids.shtml Friends of Flagstaff’s Future Vision 2020, City of Flagstaff, Weed and Seed, Federal Strategy/Grant Program Gentrification: Institute for Community Economics (ICE) http://www.iceclt.org/clt/ Planning Commissioners Journal, Peterson, Tom, “Community Land Trusts: An Introduction and An Inside Look” http://www.plannersweb.com/articles/pet112.html Kennedy, Maureen and Leonard, Paul, “Dealing with Neighborhood Change: A Primer on Gentrification and Policy Choices” http://www.brookings.edu/dybdocroot/es/urban/gentrification/gentrification.pdf U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/sfh/buying/loanfraud.cfm T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 185 Retail: American Independent Business Alliance www.amiba.net Business Alliance for Local Living Economies www.livingeconomies.org The Home Town Advantage Bulletin www.newsrules.org/hta Main Street News, Mitchell, Stacy, “Protecting Locally Owned Retail: Planning Tools,” No, 204, February 2004 University-Town: Urban Land, Egan, Nancy, and Nakazawa, Paul, “Intellectual Capital,” October 2004 Urban Land, Smirtniotopoulos, Peter, “Matriculation Reloaded,” October 2003 Architectural Record, Levinson, Nancy, “Campus Planning is Breaking New Ground,” August 2004 T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 186 CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Mayor and City Council Joseph C. Donaldson, Mayor Art Babbott Karen K. Cooper Joseph P. Haughey Kara M. Kelty Libby Silva Al White Southside Community Association Board Members Tisha Cazel Dan Cothran Jonathan Day Greg Gutierrez Betty Juarez Dennis Keesler Elson Miles Stan Mish Ann Ralles Planning & Zoning Commission Jim Sims James Babbitt Lesley Gould Frank Brandt David Bonnell, Outreach Coordinator Karen Cooper Tim Cunningham Steve Drumright Robert Mrozinski Traffic Commission Avtar Khalsa Jack Welch Joe Haughey Gary Smith Paul Pertuit Randy Weems Ruth Porter-Tilman Stacey Shaw T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a 187 Northern Arizona University John Haeger, President, NAU Sam Wheeler, Assistant Vice President, University Services Scott Miller, Ayers Saint Gross, Masterplan Architects City Staff Gerry Craig, Traffic Engineer Manager Neil Gullickson, Development Services Case Manager Randy Pellatz, Assistant Utilities Director John Saltonstall, Associate Planner Dave Wessell, FMPO Transportation Planner Michael Kerski, Community Investment Director Ursula Montaño, Project Manager, Long Range Planning Manager The Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Company Michael G. McCallister, Project Engineer CONSULTANTS Field Paoli Architects: Urban Design Frank Fuller, FAIA, Principal in Charge Sameer Chadha, Project Manager & Senior Urban Designer Grace Lee, Urban Designer Conley Consulting Group: Economics Denise Conley Jay Barman Anderson Urban Design: Urban Conservation Robert Bruce Anderson T h e S o u t h s i d e 2 0 0 5 P l a n : S t r a t e g i e s f o r D e v e l o p m e n t . F l a g s t a f f , A r i z o n a