CVS at 15th and Utica

[dbacksfan 2.0]

Thanks for the correction on location.

However, this is a good example of a "walkable" design in a car environment.  The intersection in Tempe has 2 lanes of traffic in either direction, some with 3 protected turn lanes, and one with 3 travel lanes.  You have to walk over 90' to cross the street in any direction. (Compare that to cherry street where the pedestrian crossings are 75' or so, and where the maximum is two lanes each way with a single turn lane on Utica only).

Similar to 15th and Utica, however, this example appears to be at the edge of a walkable environment.  Just down the street on Mill, it narrows down to one lane each way with on-street parking and a bike lane.  In the other direction, it opens up to 3 auto-lanes each way.

Based on the building design, however, it looks like Tempe wants future growth to be walkable, not car-centric.  We can learn from this.

That area of Tempe has been a walkable space since forever as I understand, and yes IIRC they required CVS to build that way. Mill Ave. has been reconstructed a few times to make it more pedestrian friendly since the 70's when ASU started growing, but they had a good walkable space to begin with and have done a lot to maintain it. For perspective though, that part of Mill Ave is only 3/8 of a mile long, and from the CVS to Tempe Town Lake is just over a 1/2 mile away.

Yes, you don't have to go very far from there to return to a more autocentric design, but there are several cities in Maricopa county that are revitalizing similar areas and they are sticklers for what is built in those areas to keep those areas walkable.

If you can get the wonderful people in the ice cube, and it sounds like there is some rethinking going on (about damn time btw) maybe you can get a better development.

[carltonplace]

Anything on Utica from 21st to I-244 absolutely should be built with pedestrians in mind.  It has rightfully been planned as a mixed-use corridor and has two of the city's biggest employers (the hospitals) and one of its main retail centers as anchors, as well as being adjacent to Cherry Street and 11th which will be a pedestrian-focused corridor in the future (not there yet).  

Buildings are a big part of it but making the streetscape more inviting should be a future city project.  Outside of Peoria (244 to Brookside) and 11th St (Peoria to Yale) I can't think of a more important corridor for future mixed-use development outside of downtown Tulsa.

The loss of density on Utica can be directly attibuted to the construction of 51 through the Forrest Orchard neighborhood and to everyone's favorite Tulsa developer. Oh, and Tulsa's terrible zoning rules.

[AquaMan]

Some poster here once referred to the neighborhood as a collection of POS properties when I complained about tearing down a nice little two story quad apartment building from the 1920's just west of Utica on 14th place. Now its vacant land.

The first home I sold as a realtor was on 14th place. A lovely little bungalow. Future plans for the area at that time included commercial/industrial zoning but the buyer felt the same way I did. We couldn't see the city writing off the neighborhood. Either there isn't a plan for protecting the area or its not being followed due to name brand pressure.

[takemebacktotulsa]

They have until December 16 to submit a better proposal.

Has anyone heard anything?

[DowntownDan]

The TMAPC today voted CVS down 5-4.  The small area plan has prevailed by the skin of its teeth.  They mostly disliked the drive-thru on the corner.  Were not for that, it would have passed.  On to City Council.

[DowntownDan]

At the previous hearing the commissioners took issue with the drive-thru on the corner.  CVS had submitted a new proposal but did not change the drive-thru.  In fact, they clarified that the drive thru would go below grade by about 3 feet, so pedestrians on the corner would be separated from the building not only by the drive thru-lane, but three feet in elevation, separated by a 3 foot wall.  The only change they made was to close down the 14th place entrance, which was appreciated and was one of the major points of contention.  But their insistence on the drive-thru did them in.

http://www.tmapc.org/Documents/Agendas/12-16-15/PUD-437-A.pdf

[SXSW]

Great news

[PonderInc]

The TMAPC today voted CVS down 5-4.  The small area plan has prevailed by the skin of its teeth.  They mostly disliked the drive-thru on the corner.  Were not for that, it would have passed.  On to City Council.

Just FYI, since the TMAPC denied the application, it will not go to the City Council, unless an appeal is filed.

[DowntownDan]

Just FYI, since the TMAPC denied the application, it will not go to the City Council, unless an appeal is filed.

Since it was 5-4, I can see them paying the $15 to give it a shot with City Council.  They might also try to get the City Council to give them another chance to change the site plan under the current application.  If they are required to try again later through a new application, I think they will fall under the new zoning code taking effect January 1.  I haven't had time to review the new zoning code thoroughly enough to know if it would be more or less helpful to them but I think PUDs are dead under the new code.  I don't know if applications to amend current PUDs are processed the same or different under the new code.  I'll take some time to read it over the next few weeks and figure it out. 

Anyway, it's important to note that this would have passed had it not been for the drive-thru on the corner.  My fear is "be careful what you wish for."  If the next proposal is worse, but doesn't have a drive through, it will likely pass.  I take heart that some of the commissioners were committed to walkability and the small area plan.  I'm a little concerned that some didn't care about walkability and believed that cherry street ended at Utica.  One commissioner even said that trying to make that corner walkable would be like "putting lipstick on a pig."  Thanks commissioner for saying that a major intersection on one of the only urban walking districts in town is a pig. 

[Breadburner]

love yes....!!!......Lets hope this smile hole does not get built in this location.....

[SXSW]

love yes....!!!......Lets hope this smile hole does not get built in this location.....

Or if it does it should be part of a larger mixed-use development with a corner entrance, glass along Utica and 15th, drive-thru on the side.  The best option would be to combine this with office space above with the parking lot underneath the offices closer to 14th.  The only curb cuts allowed would be one on Utica and one on 15th.

[PonderInc]

In the new zoning code, if a PUD application is in process prior to 1-1-16, it will be processed as a PUD.

Starting in January, instead of PUDs, we'll start seeing MPDs (Master Planned Development).  The MPD is very similar to a PUD, except it isn't constrained by the "underlying" zoning. (Thus, it's a PUD on steroids, limited only by the developer's imagination and the wisdom and intelligence of the TMAPC and City Council.)  (Uh-oh.) They will actually be similar to Corridor zoning, in which the developer can pretty much do whatever they want, as long as it's approved by the planning commission.  So everything from building height to setbacks to signage to parking to landscaping all gets proposed in the developer's application.  If it gets approved, that's your zoning for that place.

The MPD goes against the Comprehensive Plan's clear statement to eliminate one-off / ad hoc zoning.

However, there are a couple very interesting lines in the zoning code related to MPDs.

There's good stuff in section 25.070-D 2 Supplemental Review and Approval Criteria

Among the criteria mentioned, an MPD needs to be consistent with adopted plans, and it needs to "result in public benefits that are equal to or greater than those that would have resulted from development under conventional zoning regulations." 

Another criteria is: "Whether appropriate terms and conditions have been imposed on the approval to protect the interests of surrounding property owners and residents, existing and future residents of the MPD and the general public."

Mr. Dix, who likes nothing better than approving pig-like developments in historic neighborhoods, may find it harder to justify his actions in the new system.  I guess time will tell.

[cannon_fodder]

Good thinking, but you're wrong. Those are platitude and completely subjective.

"We determine that the [insert beloved building] here is past its useful life and not viable for rehabilitation.  The area is better served by new construction that conforms to all modern codes and has a long useful life. Such construction being unlikely to happen under conventional zoning, deviation represents a great public benefit. All surrounding property owners and residence will benefit from said new construction and the general public will see increased tax revenue."

COPY, PASTE. Minutes of meeting done!

[PonderInc]

Yes, but we now have intelligent professional planners in INCOG's Development Services department.  Unlike during the Wayne Alberty years, we now have qualified people who care.  I think they will demand a better product than in previous decades.  Fingers crossed.  We'll see.

[DowntownDan]

CVS has appealed to City Council and it will be heard on Thursday at 6:00 pm.  They have revised the plan since TMAPC voted them down by moving the drive thru from the corner to the side and configuring the entrance oddly along the northwest corner of the box building near the sidewalk, but not directly facing it.  On the corner is a friggin window which will not be transparent, but spandrel glass. 

They have refused to come up with any sort of creativity in the design for that unique corner or to offer anything in the realm of walkability, mixed use, or anything else required by the small area plan.  It they want that corner, at the end of one of the only urban walking neighborhoods in town, they really need to put some effort into fitting in with the neighborhood.  Smaller footprint, mixed use building, no drive thru (a planning commissioner mentioned that he has seen urban pharmacies with designated parking spaces and a screen to pick up prescriptions that are hand delivered, as opposed to an actual drive thru), or anything else really.  This is what they build everywhere.  Drive by a "brick facade" CVS anywhere else in town.  They look terrible and nothing like the drawings.  It's not genuine brick laying, it's plasterboard with thin brick facade, and anyone with eyes can tell.  Please help us kill this suburban monstrosity proposed for Cherry Street.

https://drive.google.com/a/okstatealumni.org/file/d/0B4Dqzlhdnu6jNlhtSFAtUDQ4UEE/view?usp=sharing