Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
5 250 500
Feet
CENTER ST
Center
Center Block
Block
Planning
Planning Area
Area
100
100 South
South Promenade
Promenade BUILDING ON SUCCESS,
BUILDING ON SUCCESS,
Planning
Planning Area
Area BLOCK BY BLOCK.
BLOCK BY BLOCK.
100 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
600 W
300 W
500 W
400 W
200 W
CENTER BLOCK AND 100 SOUTH PROMENADE
100 W
REDEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN
DRAFT
FINAL
May 2014
200 S
PROJECT TEAM CONSULTANT TEAM
Susan Henderson, Project Director, PlaceMakers
John Curtis, Mayor Hazel Borys, Best Practices Handbook, PlaceMakers
Paul Glauser, Redevelopment Agency Director Scott Doyon, Communications, PlaceMakers
Gary McGinn, Community Development Director Bill Dennis, Urban Design, B Dennis Town Design
Josh Yost, Community Development Planner Peter Swift, Transportation, Swift and Assoc.
Kathy Poole, Landscape Design, Poole Design, LLC
TASK FORCE ON CITY CENTER BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT
Adam Anderegg, Carnegie Library Building / Kaleidoscope Pictures Lee Sobel, Economics, RCLCO
The ideas that have emerged have much in common with some larger trends — Smart Growth, New
Urbanism and Traditional Neighborhood Development — and they are collectively the intersection
of history and opportunity. What happens when you take downtown Provo — what it’s been, what it
is, and what it’s poised to be — and apply the best ideas in planning, growth and development? Not
just nationally recognized ideas, but those that have emerged directly from the Provo community as
well. This report sets the stage for those results. connection with the Temple and its formal gardens? And how could it create greater opportunity —
in terms of business, transportation, lifestyle and quality of life — for the people of Provo?
THE CITY CENTER BLOCK PROJECT AND 100 SOUTH
The block bounded by Center Street, 300 West, 100 South, and 500 West is the Provo municipal Together with these efforts, the potential development’s impact on traffic, pedestrians and bikes on
block adjacent to Pioneer Park and the subject of this study. A number of groups have expressed an 100 South were all considered, to ensure incremental improvement over time. This included develop-
interest in redeveloping this particular block, and it is important the community plays a key role in ing frontage standards and designing a road diet to provide a more friendly pedestrian experience
that visioning process. The goal is to uncover ideas that are in tune with what best serves the people from the very formal, elaborate public gardens at the Temple and NuSkin, Downtown’s front yard, to
of Provo, and that their impact will ripple throughout downtown and, in the process, create all new the informal Pioneer Park with Farmer’s Market and great new splash pad, Downtown’s back yard.
opportunities across Downtown. The extra street width of 100 South provides an excellent opportunity for a linear park to connect the
front yard to the back yard.
The block currently contains a number of community assets but is also dominated by parking and,
in multiple spots because of walls and setbacks, doesn’t engage particularly well with passers-by. In To help with the collaborative design process, the city engaged a team of consultants, led by
short, it has a lot of unmet potential. PlaceMakers’ Susan Henderson, Hazel Borys and Scott Doyon, with significant guidance from Robert
Charles Lesser & Company’s Lee Sobel and Erin Talkington on economics, Bill Dennis on urban de-
The Provo community engaged in envisioning a better block during March 2014 interviews and work- sign, Kathy Poole on landscape design, and Peter Swift on traffic engineering.
shops and an April 2014 design charrette. The questions posed were how could it change over time?
What might be built there and how could present uses be accommodated? What might maximize Every block contributes to the overall health of downtown; a healthy downtown contributes to an
the tax revenues received from this key piece of property? How could it inspire a more integrated overall healthy Provo, which contributes to a vibrant and successful region.
The two large universities, Brigham Young University and Utah Valley University, have driven the
Provo-Orem area as a regional employment core, and can also be long-term sustainers of downtown
Provo’s growth. As Center Street becomes a livelier location, some students may be more likely to
trade proximity to campus for a cool environment. Students living and playing downtown encour-
age well-educated professionals to live and work in Provo after they graduate. Redevelopment plans
must strike a balance between short-term feasibility and long-term vision. In nearly all areas of the
Wasatch Front region today, development that relies on concurrent market support for a number
of different land uses and requires structured parking will be difficult to realize without public par-
ticipation. To achieve the density and mix of uses that will provide the critical mass to create a true
destination, the City Center site likely requires public help with structured parking and site prepara-
tion to make development feasible. Absent such assistance, development economics indicate that
the market provides broad support for horizontal, “multiple use” development with surface parking
planned in a format and location that could later be converted to a parking structure as additional
density is warranted by the market. See the 100-page Provo Center Block Redevelopment Market
Analysis by RCLCO for details: www.provocenterblock.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/RCLCO-
Provo-City-Center-Redevelopment-Market-Analysis-Report-Apr-9-20141.pdf.
CENTER BLOCK AND 100 SOUTH PROMENADE P R OVO, U TA H THE CHARRETTE PROCESS
Public Design Workshop
5
DAY THREE DAY FOUR
A pin-up of work-in-progress, more open house time, and a special conversation tailored towards Four days of intense City Center Block visioning came to a close Thursday evening as the project
downtown businesses gave the design team more specific direction. team presented an enthusiastic crowd of residents, business owners and local leaders with results of
the week’s work.
Charrettes begin with a number of days devoted to input, discussion, and idea generation but, at
some point, designers on the project team begin putting those ideas down on paper. Some invariably Concerns and desires have been voiced and, at least according to citizens at the public meeting,
end up in the recycling bin but others withstand the team’s scrutiny and — about midway through those considerations are evident in the plans coming together.
the charrette — get put up on the wall for an informal, work-in-progress review by residents. It’s
called a pin-up, and it’s an opportunity for the team to take a moment and ask, “Are we getting it?” A closing presentation and community discussion wrapped up the week. Project lead, Susan
Henderson, kicked off the presentation by reiterating where the process began, what it’s intended to
Based on reactions from locals Wednesday morning, the answer appeared to be yes. do, and how the community contributed to and influenced the work as it came together.
http://provout.swagit.com/play/04232014-869
http://www.provocenterblock.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/Provo-Closing-Presentation-Web.pdf
Both are also available at the Provo City Redevelopment Agency, (801) 852-6160.
THE CHARRETTE PROCESS CENTER BLOCK AND 100 SOUTH PROMENADE P R OVO, U TA H
Public Design Workshop
6
CITY CENTER BLOCK REDEVELOPMENT CONCEPT PLAN THE CONCEPT PLAN
The City Center Block Redevelopment Concept Plan looks specifically at the site and the various,
WHAT THE PROJECT IS financially-realistic ways to bring increased energy to Center Street, improve neighborhood
An opportunity to work with the community to develop a vision for the City Center Block and 100 connections, and add amenities along 100 South. It’s important to remember that this site plan is
South. a suggestion, illustrating the principles listed on page 8 of this report and in the Downtown Provo
Placemaking Best Practices Handbook described on page 4. Many different configurations are could
WHY THE PROJECT IS HAPPENING also satifsy these principles to deliver a walkable, livable place, including those illustrated on page 18.
1. Underutilized and aging, City Center Block is experiencing growing redevelopment interest from
developers. The City can benefit most by taking the lead in these discussions, rather than responding
to random developer proposals. To do this requires a vision for the property. In short, the City needs
a way to say, “This is what we want. This is what we don’t.”
100 N
2. The location of the block, and the fact that the City controls it, affords opportunities to better
connect downtown with surrounding neighborhoods, which carries with it economic, environmen-
tal, social and quality of life benefits for the City and its residents.
Throughout the April 2014 charrette meetings, residents and local businesses have been encouraged
to think big, and that’s what they did. Their unifying contribution was to make sure the design team
didn’t think solely in terms of the project site and, instead, took a broader view of how the benefits
of redevelopment could be an impetus for downtown redevelopment.
100 S
The team interpreted this directive as “Think Outside the Block” and thought considerably about
UNIVERSITY AVE
how the City Center Block Project could be an effective catalyst for a wider array of benefits. Among
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
100 W
them:
†† Increased life and business for Center Street through denser development and better 200 S
†† A more neighborhood-friendly connection along 100 South between Pioneer Park and the new
Temple Gardens.
This potential site plan, working around the existing Covey Center, reflects both the team’s
interactions with the community, and tested best practices of walkable, urban development. The
original pattern of two blocks is restored with a narrow, traffic calmed, closable, 400 West access
route between them.
Multiple civic/green spaces are incorporated throughout the site. The block is segmented to allow
multiple points of pedestrian entry and connection on all four sides, further connecting Center Street
with 100 South, 500 West and 300 West. The scale of each individual building is not monolithic,
but mirrors existing patterns on Center Street. Parking is moved to the interiors of buildings and
screened from view. The Center Street frontage is designed to bring increased variety and activity
to the sidewalk.
300 W
500 W
400 W
CENTER ST
100 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
100 N
100 W
100 S
The Connections: the permeability of the block provides easy and frequent pedestrian crossings
200 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
500 W
300 W
from Center Street to 100 South. These connections ensure that the park spaces are visible and
400 W
200 W
100 W
potential site plan: Center Street at the corner
accessible. of a reopened 400 West, opens a view to the
200 S interior Covey Center court. 100 N
CENTER ST
CENTER ST
100 S
100 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
100 N
Scale. The historic downtown urban fabric was platted with lots as small as 20’ wide. Buildings
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
100 W
UNIVERSITY AVE
average between 20’ and 120’. When buildings are larger than this, they can be a detriment of fine-
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
200 S
100 W
grained downtowns. Smaller scale individual buildings encourage the sort of walkability and livabil- Center Block: Existing rear entrance to the Cov-
ity that the City Center Block envisions. ey Center is incorporated as an outdoor square
200 S and potential performance space with interior
CENTER ST
residences and offices looking down upon it.
100 N
CENTER ST
100 N
100 S 100 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
Parking should not be seen from a public space, neither garages nor surface lots. They must always
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
100 W
UNIVERSITY AVE
500 W
300 W
200 W
100 W
200 S
CENTER ST
100 S
Center Street Activity. The front of the buildings along Center Street must be shopfronts. Active
UNIVERSITY AVE
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
space like restaurants and retail are strongly encouraged. Interim uses may be retail, office, or civic.
100 W
100 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
500 W
300 W
400 W
200 W
100 W
C I T Y C E N T E R B LO C K 200 S CENTER BLOCK AND 100 SOUTH PROMENADE
200 S
P R OVO, U TA H
Redevelopment Concept Plan
10
100 N
CENTER ST
100 S
UNIVERSITY AVE
300 W
500 W
400 W
200 W
100 W
200 S
A primary purpose of the Design Guidelines is to reinforce the historical character of the streetscapes within
downtown. Streetscapes are the public spaces formed by buildings along streets in an urbanized setting. These
outdoor, linear rooms have buildings as walls, street and sidewalk paving as flooring, the sky or the overhanging
tree canopy as a ceiling, lighting provided by the sun by day and street lights by night, and furnishings consisting
of vegetation, planters, benches and signage. Streetscapes are dynamic and change with the weather, time of
day and season. The public perception of a neighborhood, city block, or downtown is formed by the quality of
the streetscapes. Both the character of the buildings and the character of the floors, walls, and ceilings of these
outdoor rooms determine the overall perception of the streetscape.
The design of any new structure in downtown is of utmost importance because it must harmonize with the
character of the neighborhood and also be compatible with existing structures. The following guidelines are
not based upon a particular architectural style. Instead, they are general in nature and are intended to identify a
range of design options that will encourage development compatible with the existing character of downtown. Figure 2. PEDESTRIAN PASSAGES ILLUSTRATED
CONNECTIVITY
While downtown Provo has experienced recent street closures because of various large projects, the redevelop- In addition to 400 West, each of the two new blocks shall provide at least one pedestrian passage from Cen-
ment of City Center is an opportunity to improve connectivity. Redevelopment of the site shall include re-opening ter Street to 100 South. Passages shall remain open at all times, but buildings may span the passage above.
400 West to vehicles, bicyclists and pedestrians. The alignment shall be within thirty feet of the centerline of 400 Passages shall be treated as public space, and the walls of adjacent buildings shall provide a minimum of 30%
West to the north of Center Street and the South of 100 South; see Figure 1 below. The developer may pro- clear glazing at the first level for purposes of safety. Passages should intersect open spaces that are visible from
pose to maintain the street privately to facilitate closures for special events, but permanent, public egress shall Center Street and 100 South to draw people through the block.
be provided. The configuration of the street may be at grade rather than including curb and gutter to promote
public pedestrian events, but the frontage shall be treated as a public thoroughfare, and a minimum clear width CIVIC SPACE
of twenty feet shall be provided for vehicular traffic plus pedestrian facilities. Downtown Provo is blessed with the informal, un-programmed open space at Pioneer Park, and will soon have
the formal and elegant gardens at the Temple. The 100 South linear park will connect Pioneer Park with the Tem-
ple gardens, and the City Center blocks should provide
additional squares and plazas to incentivize cross-block
pedestrian traffic.
SQUARES
A square is a formal gathering place that provides un-
structured recreation or civic activity. A square at City
Center should be a commercial activity center visible
from Center Street and 100 South, and spatially defined
by buildings. Squares may be as small as 1/4 acre and
may be paved or landscaped. A square may also func-
tion as outdoor concert or theater space in conjunction
with the Covey Center.
Figure 1. ALIGNMENT OFFSET – 400 WEST
†† 500 W – 16,295 The most challenging intersection is 100 South at 500 West. This plan suggests changing this
intersection to:
†† 100 S – 3,755
†† Reduce pedestrian crossing time next to the park and on the east side with bulbouts
†† Freedom – 12,535
†† Ladder striping at all crossings
100 South hourly volumes are about 10% of the daily total, with only 375 cars per hour on peak.
†† Pedestrian activated walk signs (yellow/flashing), then red pedestrian signal after redevelopment
A one-lane peak directional ADT of about 60% represents about 225 vehicles per hour. Two way stop
control works for all intersections except 500 West. 500 West at 100 South has no stop control nor RE-ENVISIONING DOWNTOWN PROVO’S CIVIC LANDSCAPE
signal and is a very dangerous intersection for pedestrians. Imagine a leisurely stroll along 100 South Street between Pioneer Park and the Provo City
Center Temple Gardens. Today, crossing 500 West is a dangerous activity and the walk along all the
SPEEDS ALONG 100 SOUTH parking lots on the north side of the street is lacking in any charm. The buildings are far from the
†† 500W – 35 to 40 miles per hour street and sparse activity makes the pedestrian feel conspicuous, alone, and uncomfortable. Unless
you’re a Provo resident with a specific retail or dining need and “in the know,” there is little to draw
†† 200 - 300W – 28 to 35 miles per hour the pedestrian from 100 South to Center Street.
Why do cars travel so fast along 100 South? Drivers travel at the speed that feels safe, so the wider
the street, and more importantly, the greater the distance between the buildings, the faster cars
move. Today’s speeds along 100 South are not safe for pedestrians and cyclists.
To make a more livable street, the best building height to street width proportion is 1:1. When the
proportion of building height to street width reaches 1:6, we no longer perceive a sense of enclosure.
After meeting with the Fire Department, we determined that 10’ lanes and parallel parking on
the south side would work for ladder truck setup. Pursuing a road diet with the additional space
allocated to a linear park will increase safety without impeding traffic. This illustrative plan is not the preferred option, but shows a mid-block alternative to a linear
extension of 400 W.
The north side of the street has been transformed into a series of gardens conceived as outdoor
rooms. A range of activities and a variety of aesthetics attract city residents and visitors of all ages.
This series of gardens are distinct from one another yet still visually permeable enough to feel con-
nected and safe.
The gardens’ expression has been derived from the climate, geography, history, and aspirations of
the community. The gardens, like Provo, are enjoyable during all seasons despite the temperature 100 SOUTH BEFORE
extremes. Ice gardens celebrate the dramatic mountains, ski culture, and Olympic heritage of the
place. Fire gardens embrace the positive aspects of the sunny, high desert, the Olympic flame, and
the marvelous street cauldrons created for the Olympics that still festoon Provo’s downtown.
Uniting the two themes is the idea of water, drawing upon the history and existing water elements
of Downtown: the Grand Fountain of the Temple Gardens, the beloved new Splash Pad of Pioneer
Park, the former street fountain on University Avenue, and the historic irrigation canal that is located
directly beneath the park along 100 South. Citizens at project stakeholder meetings frequently ex-
pressed desires for “more water downtown.”
100 SOUTH AFTER
Collectively, the “Gardens of Fire and Ice” form a Linear Park that connects the Temple Gardens, the
NuSkin landscape, and Pioneer Park into a string of pearls that does not compete with Center Street
programmatically or aesthetically but instead supports its vitality. In fact, the linear park connects
Reducing the street width and making its edge more distinct with a robust stand of trees will also
Center Street and 100 South Street in an emphatic way through the creation of a large community
make the street safer for pedestrians and cyclists because it will slow vehicles as mentioned in Trans-
gathering landscape mid-block where 400 West was formerly a through street and will once more
portation Design.
be a connector.
The Linear Park Conceptual Plan imagines a width of 41’ from curb to building face. Allowing for a 10’
This quality civic landscape is a destination in itself while connecting into a greater whole. Like great
walk adjacent to the future buildings, the net width of the linear park is 33’, wide enough to create
streets, it is a classic that withstands the test of time. The true civic landscape has something for all,
meaningful spaces. Should there be compelling reasons to narrow this width due to utility or traffic
residents and visitors, young and old, and of all economic levels.
concerns, great care should be given because once the linear park is too thin, it will become a mere
The gardens significantly improve the arrival experience of the anticipated annual visitors to the Tem- through-corridor and unable to accommodate anything recognizable as a “space” in which people
ple and NuSkin, and provide a vibrant infrastructure to catalyze new development. They encourage would want to stop.
more people to visit downtown and stay longer, and they significantly contribute to the revitalization
of downtown.
gravel, and groundcovers/lawns. All of these elements are needed to create a park that is distinct DEVELOP IDEAS NOT THEMES
from a streetscape. It is necessary to balance the landscape into a unified whole that also contains a The outdoor rooms are developed from enriched ideas and not “themes.” Where themes often re-
variety of experiences. sult in simplistic icons and literal interpretations that strike of Disneyesque triteness, well-developed
ideas can allow visitors to fully engage in them because they can bring their own associations. Where
RESPOND TO CONTEXT themes wear out quickly, landscapes developed from well-honed ideas age well and can become
It is crucial that the linear park maintains its own artistic and spatial integrity, while responding to classics. For example, rather than literally exposing the water of the canal, which would bring safety,
the anticipated context around it. The park’s development requires clear strategies for connecting to liability, and maintenance problems, selective implementation of water, layered with other inflected
adjacent landscapes, especially important in four instances. ideas and historical associations, introduces water in a more powerfully way.
First, the park plan should not only connect Pioneer Park and the Temple Grounds but also solve the Similarly, rather than referring to the area’s heritage and desires for again hosting an Olympic Games
existing safety problem at 500 West and 100 South. This uncontrolled intersection has no light, no by replicating one of its symbols (the flame, winner’s platform, rings, etc.) the linear park could
pedestrian controls, and an under-demarcated pedestrian crossing in both pavement marking and include a more potent expression by starting with the idea of a symbol, infusing it with other ideas
signage/signaling. and associations, and transforming it into something completely new and utterly fascinating. Rather
than using icons, the linear park’s rooms should include rich expressions that are uniquely Provo.
Second, the existing treatment at the side street intersections, 100 West, Freedom Boulevard, and
300 West, should “open up” in ways that deflect to these streets and to views toward Center Street.
†† Limit water to special moments—as opposed to proposing large, linear elements that in a high
evapotranspiration environment will require substantial water replenishment
GARDEN STRUCTURE †† Evergreen tree grouping on the Covey Center block leverage the value of mature trees and estab-
The Gardens as “outdoor rooms” have a consistent set of elements and formal language that give lish Center Block “forecourt” to interior public gathering space
them spatial definition and lend them an overall, unified expression:
†† Tapering of the road responds to safety concerns
†† A spacious walk along the right of way line and proposed building faces forms a consistent, main
†† Transition to NuSkin campus assures harmony with the existing NuSkin landscape
“hallway.” The walk is consistently straight and does not meander, in part because of the limited
width of the strip but mainly because:
In addition, it is important to coordinate private development within the blocks with the linear parks,
even “extending” the rooms into the block interiors to create wider gardens in selective locations that
1) the walk needs to be continuous along the building face and
the City deems appropriate.
2) the walk should function as a hallway that leads to each room, allowing pedestrians to choose
where to stop or to move on and not as a walk that goes through each room.
†† A row of deciduous trees along the 100 South edge enclose the space, the trunks forming the
“columns” and the leafy canopies forming the “ceiling.” In all but selective locations, a double row
of trees is used to ensure a strong sense of enclosure.
†† Interior elements form the “furniture” of the rooms, some appearing as literal furniture and others
as centerpieces and animating elements.
†† Consistent palette of trash receptacles, light standards, bike racks, and seating, along with a strat-
egy for their placement.
†† Corners visually open to the side streets to ensure the park is connected to its larger context.
This outdoor room is a new plaza at the southeast corner of Pioneer Park formed through the re-
configuration of small portions of the driving lane of 500 West and the northern parking lane of 100
South. This road reconfiguration is crucial for pedestrian safety, especially given the marked increase
in pedestrian crossing at the intersection due to the development of both the linear park and City
Center Block development in addition to the existing Farmers Market pedestrian traffic.