Chapter 33.28 IMPLEMENTATION

Chapter 33.28
IMPLEMENTATION

Sections:

33.28.030 Background on key implementation tools.

33.28.010 Implementation.

This chapter presents the recommendations of the Steering Committee regarding implementation of the 24 Road Corridor Subarea Plan. The Committee evaluated a variety of implementation plans which are summarized in this chapter. The chapter then concludes with implementation recommendations for the “Preferred Plan.”

(Res. 109-00 § 7, 11-1-00)

33.28.020 Background and assumptions.

Answering the basic questions of what (type of future do residents want), where (is the appropriate location within the community for these activities to take place), and who (is the primary responsible party) is obviously important. How these decisions are made and executed is equally important. If the decisions cannot be implemented for lack of funding or political support, then the grandest of visions will fail.

The recommended implementations actions are based on the following assumptions:

(a) The public sector should provide the policy framework, regulations and programs which guide development in the public interest and to provide the infrastructure and basic services.

(b) Development will be dependent primarily upon private investment in response to market forces and trends.

(c) All land use and transportation decisions by their nature will create different opportunities and constraints for different properties.

The importance of these three assumptions is that they recognize the public sector has a limited ability to change or direct market trends, although they can direct or manage how and where these forces physically manifest themselves, and that inequities exist and will be created which benefit some properties and not others.

Table 14 summarizes the range of actions presented to and discussed by the 24 Road Steering Committee.

Table 14: Summary of Possible Implementation Actions
Action	Discussion	Responsibility
Revise Grand Junction Growth Plan or adopt 24 Road Corridor Subarea Plan.	Goal • Revise recommended land uses in the 24 Road Corridor. Implication • Requires City Council approval and then modifies Growth Plan.	Public



Revise existing Planned Development (PD) zone or establish a new mixed use zone for large-scale planned commercial, residential, and industrial developments. This zone would be applicable to the 24 Road Corridor and other areas where appropriate, subject to the following: • Significant benefit to the City as a whole, based upon cost benefit analysis. • Minimizes or mitigates any potential adverse environmental and social impacts. Other criteria.	Goals • Complement or refine existing PD zone districts. • Allow flexibility in intensity and mix of land uses. • Concentrate commercial development in compact centers or districts (rather than letting it spread out in strips). • Encourage high-quality visual environment. • Phase development to allow rational expansion of infrastructure. Implications • Existing PD zone may presently provide land-use flexibility – no need to create new zone. • Design standards should be added to existing language.	Public










Create design standards for new development.	Goal • Encourage high-quality visual environment (materials, site planning, signage, landscaping, architectural design). Implications • Adherence to “design standards” likely to increase cost of development. • Lack of guidelines or standards is likely to perpetuate existing type and quality of development.	Public




Prepare a Secondary Road Master Plan that establishes the location, standards for design, and construction of all area roads.	Goal • Establish interconnecting, logical road network. Implications • Parties responsible for constructing minor roads likely to be individual developments unless other mechanism, e.g., an “improvement district,” is in place. • Requires coordination between land owners and City.	Public




Establish a “general improvement district” to provide cost-sharing of “public improvements.”	Goals • Create amenities and enhancements that add land value and improve community image. • Plan, construct and maintain key image-giving visual elements, e.g., boulevard landscaping along 24 Road, Leach Creek recreational improvements, “gateway/entry design features,” golf course, etc. Implications • Without method for cost-sharing, improvements to public areas will require capital improvement funding from General Fund and be limited by availability of funds. • Individual property owners are unlikely to voluntarily finance perceived “area-wide” public or private improvements/amenities, e.g., golf course, trail system, etc.	Public/Private





Create organization to represent property owners, plan, and implement desired area improvements.	Goal • Create institutionalized method to address goals and issues by encouraging cooperation, collaboration and high-quality visual environment. Implications • Requires cooperation for the benefit of the many, at perhaps the expense of the few. • Some improvements and actions may be impossible to implement without cooperation.	Private

Following is a summary of background information relative to several of the development tools described above.

(Res. 109-00 § 7, 11-1-00)

33.28.030 Background on key implementation tools.

(a) Overlay Zone. The use of overlay zoning is one way to create a more flexible and discretionary alternative to traditional Euclidean zoning. An overlay zone is defined as “a mapped overlay district superimposed on one or more established zoning districts which may be used to impose supplemental restrictions on uses in these districts, permit uses otherwise disallowed, or implement some form of density bonus or incentive bonus program.”

Overlay zones are distinct from “floating” zones because of several features, the most significant of which is that overlay zones are mapped and floating zones are not mapped.

An overlay zone supplements the underlying zone district with additional requirements or incentives. Underlying zoning regulations remain in place. Examples might include special requirements such as design standards or guidelines, additional setbacks or height limits. A parcel within the overlay zone will thus be simultaneously subject to two sets of zoning regulations: the underlying and the overlay zoning requirements.

Overlay zone boundaries are also not restricted by the underlying zoning districts’ boundaries. An overlay zone may or may not encompass the entire underlying zoning district. Likewise, an overlay zone can cover more than one zoning district, or even portions of several underlying zoning districts.

(b) Improvement Districts. Improvement districts are a legal vehicle established by the City Council, or appropriate legislative body, whereby improvements to public property are financed by special tax assessments on affected private property.

Traditionally, improvement districts have accomplished street-oriented improvements, such as street paving, curb and gutter, sidewalks and drainage projects. Other types of improvements in public areas can be funded in this manner as long as they contribute to the public good.

The purpose of an improvement district is to provide financing and distribute costs over a specific area. It allows a city or county to construct and pay the entire cost of an extensive project within a very short time. The improvement also makes the improvements affordable to the benefited property since payment for improvements is usually carried over 10 years.

(c) Design Guidelines and Design Standards. Design elements including architectural style, use of materials, landscaping, signage and site plan features and elements can be addressed in the guidelines and standards. Without strong political support for their application, guidelines and standards will be ineffective. Traditionally, these tools are used in areas where there is a unique development pattern or character, such as an historic district or where there is a particular type of development to be controlled, such as retail or commercial. There should also be a method for the review of projects subject to the guidelines, such as a design review board comprised of citizens and professionals in the design field.

Because guidelines are advisory and often voluntary, challenges to them can be successfully argued. Standards are regulations adopted by the City Council or other appropriate legislative body and become part of the land use “code.” In either case, specificity in intent and language is desirable.

(d) Other Property Owners or Business Owners and Entities. These are all examples of institutionalized or legally organized methods for collaboration and cost- and profit-sharing. Many downtown or other business districts have been modeled after shopping centers, where agreements governing the “Common Area Improvements” responsibilities, etc., are used. In situations where there may be many unequal interests, and therefore unequal benefits, contractual agreements establishing organizational structures may be of benefit.

(e) Implementation Recommendations. The Steering Committee discussed how the 24 Road Corridor Subarea Plan could be implemented through both public and private means. These options fall into the general areas of policies, programs and capital investments.

(1) Implement 24 Road Improvements. Expand 24 Road to a five-lane parkway, with landscaped median, as soon as possible in order to meet transportation requirements as well as “set the tone” in the area for high-quality development.

(2) Adopt a Subarea Plan. Incorporate the recommendations of the Steering Committee into the Grand Junction Growth Plan by adopting the 24 Road Corridor Subarea Plan.

(3) Create a Mixed Use Zone for the Area. Current Grand Junction regulations provide for several planned development zones; however, they do not contain sufficient criteria to achieve the vision for 24 Road Corridor. A new mixed use zone could address issues and opportunities specific to the 24 Road Corridor.

(4) Adopt Design Standards and Guidelines. Develop design standards and guidelines to address the design and planning issues related to commercial development as well as larger land use, open space, and transportation framework issues in the corridor.

(5) Develop a Secondary Road Network Master Plan. Establish the location, type and character of secondary roads within the project area, including key access points and interconnections.

(f) In addition, the Steering Committee discussed two other potential options:

(1) The establishment of a public/private entity to provide for cost-sharing of “public” improvements, i.e., two additional lanes on 24 Road, boulevard landscaping, Leach Creek recreational improvements, a possible golf course, and gateway/entry designs.

(2) The potential to create an organization to represent property owners and plan, implement and maintain desired area improvements. This would “institutionalize” private sector involvement and create the means for agreement/cooperation among private sector interests and with the public sector.

Although landowners support the five elements described above, including the concept of more rigorous design standards than the City has in place today, it remains to be seen whether they are willing to step forward to participate financially in exchange for more flexibility in land use and site design through the planned development (PD) process. The potential for cost-sharing between the City and landowners for improvements to a five-lane 24 Road was discussed, with no resolution at this time.

(Res. 109-00 § 7, 11-1-00)