DOCSLIB.ORG

2020 Plan Update Process Phase 2: Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020 Plan Update Process Phase 2: Analysis 2020 Plan Update Process Phase 2: Analysis Plan Element Review Current Conditions Data This Packet contains all the current Plan Elements with Staff Commentary and Current Condition Maps. This documents is meant for use by the Rockford 2020 Plan Update Task Force ROCKFORD 2020 PLAN: 2014 Review Current Conditions Data Issues & Opportunities Plan Element 1: Issues and Opportunities Community Vision The “vision” of this plan is to contribute to the realization of the mission statement generated in the “Blueprint for Rockford’s Future” — to strengthen and focus this community’s commitment to improve the lives of all its’ people. While many of the focal points are the same as those in Blueprint — linkages, access and neighborhoods — the emphasis is different. Here, in the 2020 Plan, the emphasis is on the use of the land and on physical facilities; in Blueprint, the emphasis leaned more towards solving problems through partnerships. What is needed for success is a combination of the two approaches. Community Goals and Principles • Land Use: Guide Rockford’s development through the 2020 Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and Building Code, following the principles of Smart Growth, Staff Commentary: Sustainable Growth and New Urbanism have emerged as recognized planning and design methods since the 2004 plan adoption. • Transportation: Improve transportation infrastructure, services and networks (Airport, transit, roadways, and pathways) to provide efficient and accessible movement of all Rockford residents and goods throughout the community. Staff Commentary: Passenger and freight rail transit is not included in the 2004 plan. • Community facilities: Develop and provide easy access for all Rockford residents to the quality and types of resources and services people need to improve their quality of life, and to develop to their fullest potential. • Telecommunications: Ensure that all Rockford citizens and businesses have access to the latest telecommunications services. • Housing: Ensure that all Rockford residents have a decent and affordable home and a suitable living environment. • Economic development: Bring businesses, the community and other resources together for the entire community of Rockford to attain a robust and diverse economic environment. • Neighborhoods: Ensure that all Rockford residents live in neighborhoods that are safe and that are at least either stable or improving. Page 1 of 2 ROCKFORD 2020 PLAN: 2014 Review Current Conditions Data Issues & Opportunities • Natural resources: Safeguard and improve environmental features as a means of promoting sustainable urban development, revitalization and a good quality of life in Rockford. • Historic preservation: Identify, protect and preserve Rockford’s historic resources in order to enhance the quality of life and economic wellbeing of current and future generations. • Community design: Improve the aesthetics and enhance the identity of Rockford as whole as well as constituent neighborhoods, major road corridors and gateways, and the riverfront. • Public participation: Engage the public through community outreach, consensus building and public education. • Monitoring and Evaluation: Ensure that the 2020 Plan remains viable while still consistent with its original evaluation principles through a regular review and amendment process. Page 2 of 2 ROCKFORD 2020 PLAN: 2014 Review Current Conditions Data Land Use Plan Element 2: Land Use The development and use of land is the result of a complex process involving legal, social, economic and environmental aspects. This plan is just one component of the City’s regulatory role in that process. As Rockford’s official comprehensive land use plan, it provides a general framework to guide future long-term land development decisions and actions by both the public and private sectors. Other elements are the City’s zoning, subdivision and building regulations, as well as incentives offered through various Economic Development and housing programs. Each of these plays a separate part in the process with each of the regulatory codes addressing a different level of development, going from the very general (land use plan) to the very specific (building code). Land Use Plan Provides a generalized map of the community showing where broad types of uses should be allowed, with more specific guidance in the accompanying text; establishes corridors for the construction of new streets and roads. Subdivision Ordinance Governs the division of land and establishes minimum requirements for improvements such as streets, sidewalks and drainage detention areas; used for review of developments up to 1½ miles beyond the city limits. Staff Commentary: Current ordinance adopted in 2007 Zoning Ordinance Governs the site-specific designation of allowed uses on individual parcels of land, as well as parking and landscaping requirements, location of buildings, location and size of signs, traffic circulation and access; current ordinance adopted in 1993, updated in 1997. Ordinance is based on the concept of performance zoning which allows maximum flexibility for the developer while at the same time resulting in the most specific designation of what is allowed on a particularly parcel. In addition, incorporating performance requirements into the overall mix of zoning requirements can make seemingly incompatible uses compatible. Staff Commentary: • Current ordinance adopted in 2008; updated regularly as per state statutes. • The zoning ordinance is adopted for the purposes of: o protecting and promoting the public health, safety and general welfare; o implementing adopted plans and policies o enhancing residents’ quality of life o protecting the character of established residential neighborhoods o maintaining economically vibrant as well as visually attractive business and commercial areas o retaining and expanding the city’s business and employment base o promoting mixed-use, pedestrian-oriented development patterns o accommodating pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use Page 1 of 19 ROCKFORD 2020 PLAN: 2014 Review Current Conditions Data Land Use o maintaining orderly and compatible development patterns that promote an appropriate mix of land uses and protect and conserve property values o ensuring adequate light, air, privacy and access to property o promoting environmentally responsible development practices o promoting rehabilitation and reuse of older buildings o maintaining a range of housing choices and options Building Code Governs construction and/or renovation of structures; the City adopts the most recent editions of BOCA and International Codes for Building, One and Two Family Dwellings, Electrical, Mechanical, Fire Prevention, and Property Maintenance with local amendments; and the Illinois Plumbing Code and Illinois Accessibility Code. The efficient functioning of each of these regulations requires the cooperative efforts of several departments of city government. This is something the City has worked very hard to achieve and plans to improve in the years ahead, partly with the aid of technology. Development of a computerized geographic information system (GIS) will enable all departments to share information, thus minimizing the chances of their working at cross purposes because of conflicting information. This should not only improve staff efficiency, but also provide developers with a more direct path through the regulatory maze. The following pages describe how the land use planning decisions were made in preparing this plan, as well as further steps that will need to be taken to implement the plan. Staff Commentary: • Development of a computerized geographic information system (WINGIS) and sharing information through ROCKSTAT has enabled all departments to share information, thus minimizing the chances of their working at cross purposes because of conflicting information. Basic Concepts The land use section of the original Year 2000 Plan begins by alluding to the complexity of the development process, concluding with the statement that “. our land use pattern did not come about by accident; it is the result of public decisions — plans, laws and expenditures — coupled with private investment choices.” Making land use decisions hasn’t gotten any easier in the 15-20 years; if anything, it’s gotten even more complex. Now, in addition to all the standard land use issues planners have always faced, we also need to incorporate recent decisions and trends ranging from such things as brownfields and riverfront development to big box retailers and the need for affordable housing and vacant storefronts will keep moving outward. The same forces affecting older parts of Rockford will affect what is now the fringe area a generation or two later. In other words, today’s winners will become tomorrow’s losers. We also need to consider plans that are being made by other jurisdictions near Rockford or that include Rockford, such as the Rock River Reclamation District (while they need to take our plans into consideration as well). This is done to a certain extent within the regional transportation planning process, but needs to be expanded to cover all land use issues. All of these things came into play in the creation of this plan and the map that goes with it. Page 2 of 19 ROCKFORD 2020 PLAN: 2014 Review Current Conditions Data Land Use Staff Commentary: • Development of a computerized geographic information system (WINGIS) and sharing information through ROCKSTAT has enabled all departments to share information, thus minimizing the chances of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • National Register of Historic Places Weekly Lists for 1997
    National Register of Historic Places 1997 Weekly Lists WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 12/23/96 THROUGH 12/27/96 .................................... 3 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 12/30/96 THROUGH 1/03/97 ...................................... 5 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/06/97 THROUGH 1/10/97 ........................................ 8 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/13/97 THROUGH 1/17/97 ...................................... 12 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/20/97 THROUGH 1/25/97 ...................................... 14 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 1/27/97 THROUGH 1/31/97 ...................................... 16 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/03/97 THROUGH 2/07/97 ...................................... 19 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/10/97 THROUGH 2/14/97 ...................................... 21 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/17/97 THROUGH 2/21/97 ...................................... 25 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 2/24/97 THROUGH 2/28/97 ...................................... 28 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/03/97 THROUGH 3/08/97 ...................................... 32 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/10/97 THROUGH 3/14/97 ...................................... 34 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/17/97 THROUGH 3/21/97 ...................................... 36 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/24/97 THROUGH 3/28/97 ...................................... 39 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 3/31/97 THROUGH 4/04/97 ...................................... 41 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 4/07/97 THROUGH 4/11/97 ...................................... 43 WEEKLY LIST OF ACTIONS TAKEN ON PROPERTIES: 4/14/97 THROUGH 4/18/97 .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Kennebunk Historic Preservation Overlay District Design Guidelines
    Kennebunk Historic Preservation Overlay District Design Guidelines The Historic Preservation Commission Town of Kennebunk, Maine Turk Tracey & Larry Architects, LLC Portland, Maine 2002 This project is funded in part by a grant from the Maine Historic Preservation Commission to the Town of Kennebunk. Maine Historic Preservation Commission 55 Capitol Street State House Station 65 Augusta, Maine 04333-0065 Earle G. Shettleworth, Jr., Director Kirk F. Mohney, Assistant Director Cover photographs courtesy of The Brick Store Museum August 2002 The Kennebunk Historic Preservation Overlay District Design Guidelines INTRODUCTION I. THE KENNEBUNK HISTORIC PRESERVATION OVERLAY DISTRICT . 3 District Background Architecture Colonial Federal Greek Revival Gothic Revival Italianate Second Empire Queen Anne Colonial Revival Contemporary II. WORKING WITH THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION . 21 Procedure for Obtaining a Certificate of Appropriateness Summary of Submission Materials III. DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR PRESERVATION, REHABILITATION, RECONSTRUCTION AND RESTORATION . 25 Foundations Siding Brick Roof Features Cornices and Friezes Drainage Systems Entrance Surrounds and Doors Window Features The Kennebunk Historic Preservation Overlay District Design Guidelines Porches Storefronts, Religious, Commercial and Civil Buildings Barns, Garages and Outbuildings IV. GUIDELINES FOR SITES/FEATURES . 57 Historic Landscapes Plantings Fences and Walls Walkways, Driveways, Patios and Parking Lots Swimming Pools Lighting Signs V. GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION . 65 Additions Roofline Additions Fire Escapes Accessibility Considerations New Buildings VI. GUIDELINES FOR DEMOLITION . 71 APPENDIX Glossary of Architectural Terms Period Garden Plant List Bibliography Credits The Kennebunk Historic Preservation Overlay District Design Guidelines INTRODUCTION The goal of these guidelines is to preserve and protect the historic sites and structures in the Kennebunk National Register Historic District and the Kennebunk Historic Preservation Overlay District (District).
    [Show full text]
  • ADAMS COUNTY Camp Point F
    NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES IN ILLINOIS (As of 2/16/2018) *NHL=National Historic Landmark *AD=Additional documentation received/approved by National Park Service *If a property is noted as DEMOLISHED, information indicates that it no longer stands but it has not been officially removed from the National Register. *Footnotes indicate the associated Multiple Property Submission (listing found at end of document) ADAMS COUNTY Camp Point F. D. Thomas House, 321 N. Ohio St. (7/28/1983) Clayton vicinity John Roy Site, address restricted (5/22/1978) Golden Exchange Bank, Quincy St. (2/12/1987) Golden vicinity Ebenezer Methodist Episcopal Chapel and Cemetery, northwest of Golden (6/4/1984) Mendon vicinity Lewis Round Barn, 2007 E. 1250th St. (1/29/2003) Payson vicinity Fall Creek Stone Arch Bridge, 1.2 miles northeast of Fall Creek-Payson Rd. (11/7/1996) Quincy Coca-Cola Bottling Company Building, 616 N. 24th St. (2/7/1997) Downtown Quincy Historic District, roughly bounded by Hampshire, Jersey, 4th & 8th Sts. (4/7/1983) Robert W. Gardner House, 613 Broadway St. (6/20/1979) S. J. Lesem Building, 135-137 N. 3rd St. (11/22/1999) Lock and Dam No. 21 Historic District32, 0.5 miles west of IL 57 (3/10/2004) Morgan-Wells House, 421 Jersey St. (11/16/1977) Richard F. Newcomb House, 1601 Maine St. (6/3/1982) One-Thirty North Eighth Building, 130 N. 8th St. (2/9/1984) Quincy East End Historic District, roughly bounded by Hampshire, 24th, State & 12th Sts. (11/14/1985) Quincy Northwest Historic District, roughly bounded by Broadway, N.
    [Show full text]
  • List of National Register Properties
    NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES IN ILLINOIS (As of 11/9/2018) *NHL=National Historic Landmark *AD=Additional documentation received/approved by National Park Service *If a property is noted as DEMOLISHED, information indicates that it no longer stands but it has not been officially removed from the National Register. *Footnotes indicate the associated Multiple Property Submission (listing found at end of document) ADAMS COUNTY Camp Point F. D. Thomas House, 321 N. Ohio St. (7/28/1983) Clayton vicinity John Roy Site, address restricted (5/22/1978) Golden Exchange Bank, Quincy St. (2/12/1987) Golden vicinity Ebenezer Methodist Episcopal Chapel and Cemetery, northwest of Golden (6/4/1984) Mendon vicinity Lewis Round Barn, 2007 E. 1250th St. (1/29/2003) Payson vicinity Fall Creek Stone Arch Bridge, 1.2 miles northeast of Fall Creek-Payson Rd. (11/7/1996) Quincy Coca-Cola Bottling Company Building, 616 N. 24th St. (2/7/1997) Downtown Quincy Historic District, roughly bounded by Hampshire, Jersey, 4th & 8th Sts. (4/7/1983) Robert W. Gardner House, 613 Broadway St. (6/20/1979) S. J. Lesem Building, 135-137 N. 3rd St. (11/22/1999) Lock and Dam No. 21 Historic District32, 0.5 miles west of IL 57 (3/10/2004) Morgan-Wells House, 421 Jersey St. (11/16/1977) DEMOLISHED C. 2017 Richard F. Newcomb House, 1601 Maine St. (6/3/1982) One-Thirty North Eighth Building, 130 N. 8th St. (2/9/1984) Quincy East End Historic District, roughly bounded by Hampshire, 24th, State & 12th Sts. (11/14/1985) Quincy Northwest Historic District, roughly bounded by Broadway, N.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Single Property Listings Illinois
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES SINGLE PROPERTY LISTINGS ILLINOIS FINDING AID One LaSalle Street Building (One North LaSalle), Cook County, Illinois, 99001378 Photo by Susan Baldwin, Baldwin Historic Properties Prepared by National Park Service Intermountain Region Museum Services Program Tucson, Arizona May 2015 National Register of Historic Places – Single Property Listings - Illinois 2 National Register of Historic Places – Single Property Listings - Illinois Scope and Content Note: The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is the official list of the Nation's historic places worthy of preservation. Authorized by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the National Park Service's National Register of Historic Places is part of a national program to coordinate and support public and private efforts to identify, evaluate, and protect America's historic and archeological resources. - From the National Register of Historic Places site: http://www.nps.gov/nr/about.htm The Single Property listing records from Illinois are comprised of nomination forms (signed, legal documents verifying the status of the properties as listed in the National Register) photographs, maps, correspondence, memorandums, and ephemera which document the efforts to recognize individual properties that are historically significant to their community and/or state. Arrangement: The Single Property listing records are arranged by county and therein alphabetically by property name. Within the physical files, researchers will find the records arranged in the following way: Nomination Form, Photographs, Maps, Correspondence, and then Other documentation. Extent: The NRHP Single Property Listings for Illinois totals 43 Linear Feet. Processing: The NRHP Single Property listing records for Illinois were processed and cataloged at the Intermountain Region Museum Services Center by Leslie Matthaei, Jessica Peters, Ryan Murray, Caitlin Godlewski, and Jennifer Newby.
    [Show full text]
  • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
    V VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, CANADA The city of Vancouver is truly of the 20th century. When the small town of Granville was incorporated as the city of Vancouver in 1886, it had more in common with American cities west of the Rocky Mountains than with the rest of Canada. San Francisco had served as Vancouver’s main link to the east before the completion of Canada’s transcontinental railway in 1887. Within five years the community of 1000 had grown to nearly 14,000 and the young city became a supply depot and investment center for the Klondike gold rush of 1897–98. From these boomtown beginnings, metropolitan Vancouver is now home to more than 1.8 million people. During the early 20th century, rapid growth fueled construction of neighborhoods along the street railway and interurban lines. Before 1910 many homes were constructed of a prefabricated, insulated, four-foot modular system, designed and manufactured by the B.C.Mills, Timber, and Trading Company. Known as Vancouver Boxes, these efficient and economical houses were characterized by a single story set on a high foundation, a hip roof with dormer windows, and a broad front veranda. From 1910 until the mid-1920s, the most popular house for middle- and lower-class families was a variant of the California bungalow, typified by front gables, exposed rafter ends, and wall brackets, and often chimneys, porch piers, and foundations of rough brick or stone. These Craftsman homes, a small-scale version of the Queen Anne style, were popular amongst the suburban working classes. At one point South Vancouver was expanding at a rate of 200 families per month, all housed in California bungalows.
    [Show full text]
  • The House Beautiful: a Voice in the Wilderness in the Age of Dens 11 Mass Consumption and the Road to Mccarthyism 15 Elizabeth Gordon: Life Before House Beautiful 20
    Tilting at Modern: Elizabeth Gordon’s “The Threat to the Next America” By Kathleen LaMoine Corbett A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Andrew M. Shanken, Chair Professor Kathleen James-Chakraborty Professor Galen Cranz Professor Laurie A. Wilkie Fall 2010 Abstract Tilting at Modern: Elizabeth Gordon’s “The Threat to the Next America” by Kathleen LaMoine Corbett Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture University of California, Berkeley Professor Andrew Shanken, Chair This dissertation addresses the ways that gender, politics, and social factors were exploited and expressed in the controversy surrounding the April 1953 House Beautiful editorial, “The Threat to the Next America.” House Beautiful’s editor, Elizabeth Gordon, wrote and published this editorial as a response to ongoing institutional promotion of experimental modern residential architecture, which fell under the umbrella of the International Style, a term that came from a 1932 exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art. Gordon warned her readers that the practitioners of the International Style, which she deplored as “barren,” were designing and promoting unlivable housing. She specifically condemned German immigrant architects Walter Gropius and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, as well as French architect Le Corbusier. “The Threat to the Next America” was laden with terms and phrasing that exploited American fears of communism, which in that year were at a fever pitch due to the well-publicized “witch hunts” conducted by Senator Joseph McCarthy and the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
    [Show full text]
  • Illinois March 2008 NATIONAL REGISTER of HISTORIC PLACES
    SEC II – IL Tech Guide Cultural Resources - 1 NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES IN ILLINOIS Adams County Camp Point F. D. Thomas House, 321 N. Ohio St. (7-28-83) Clayton vicinity Lewis Round Barn, northwest of Clayton (8-16-84) John Roy Site, south of Clayton (5-22-78) Golden Exchange Bank, Quincy St. (2-12-87) Golden vicinity Ebenezer Methodist Episcopal Chapel and Cemetery, northwest of Golden (6-4-84) Mendon vicinity Lewis Round Barn, 2007 E. 1250th St. (1-29-03) Payson vicinity Fall Creek Stone Arch Bridge, 1.2 mi. northeast of Fall Creek-Payson Rd. (11-7-96) Quincy Coca-Cola Bottling Company Building, 616 N. 24th St. (2-7-97) Downtown Quincy Historic District, roughly bounded by Hampshire, Jersey, Fourth, and Eighth Sts. (4-7-83) Robert W. Gardner House, 613 Broadway St. (6-20-79) S. J. Lesem Building, 135-37 N. Third St. (11-22-99) Lock and Dam No. 21 Historic District32, .5 mi W of IL 57 (3-10-04) Morgan-Wells House, 421 Jersey St. (11-16-77) Richard F. Newcomb House, 1601 Maine St. (6-3-82) One-Thirty North Eighth Building, 130 N. Eighth St. (2-9-84) Quincy East End Historic District, roughly bounded by Hampshire,24th, State, and Twelfth Sts. (11-14-85) Quincy Northwest Historic District, roughly bounded by Broadway and N. Second, Locust, and N. Twelfth Sts. (5-11-00) South Side German Historic District, roughly bounded by Sixth,Twelfth, Washington, Jersey, and York Sts. (5-22-92). Boundary increase, roughly bounded by Jefferson, S.
    [Show full text]