UP 510 

Envision Urbana Recommendations for Urbana’s Planning Process 

Planners: Mahmood Al Wahaibi, Celía Burke, Alejandro Campos, Richa Singh, Gavin Wang, Amanda Wolfe  

 

 

The purpose of this report is to briefly describe the assessment completed on changes in the Crystal Lake/King Park Neighborhood since the release of the Urbana Comprehensive Plan in 2005, describe the future scenarios for urbana and give our final recommendations for either an update to the comprehensive plan or a new, future comprehensive plan. Envision Urbana uses knowledge from the past and present to plan ahead and ensure that growth is fostered in a way that maintains a good quality of life of Urbana’s residents. The report discusses the existing gaps in the plan based on the preliminary assessment of the Crystal Lake Park and King Park neighborhoods and proceeds with recommendations to mitigate these gaps through a scenario building exercise. The recommendations were based off these analyses and how the future plan might be more engaged with the community and narrowly focused.

 

 

+  

 Assessment Tool 

Background  

The Urbana Comprehensive Plan, last updated in 2005, is meant to provide “goals and objectives by which land use, neighborhood preservation, economic development, transportation, social, environmental and quality of life decisions are made within the City and properties within 1--1/2 miles of the City limits.” The plan has since seen a number of amendments and additions including: the bicycle master plan, the hazard mitigation plan, and the downtown plan. Much time has passed, and presumably the issues that first informed the plan and development approaches have changed. However, these changes have not been noted in any updated comprehensive plans and have not noted areas where there was little to no success.

In assessing the comprehensive plan in relation to our neighborhoods, Crystal Lake Park and King Park, we created a number of indicators to determine what changed since the adoption of the plan, and what did not. In deciding the indicators we first reviewed the comprehensive plan document and the context for the neighborhoods. These neighborhoods are located in West Urbana, just north of Downtown. They contain mostly single family residential, a large amount of park space, some commercial, multifamily and industrial zones. They are not only included in the comprehensive plan, but also many smaller scale and regional plans included in the system of plans in Urbana. For example, they contain Cunningham Ave, which has a corridor plan, as well as Lakeside Terrace Redevelopment Plan, while King Park itself is included in broader Urbana Park District Plans. These different local plans also have to consider the regional plans such as the Long Range Transportation Plan for Champaign County (Sustainable Choices 2040).

Source: ESRI Story Map: sidewalk data collected by CUUATS

Indicators  

The comprehensive plan has the four main goals of: mobility, sensible growth, quality of life, and infrastructure and services. The main focus of mobility was to improve safety, accessibility and multi-modal modes of transport. The sensible growth objectives of the

 2 

+  

plan focus on new growth in Urbana in a compact and contiguous fashion, with the intentions of preserving individual neighborhood characteristics. This goal is also to ensure the sustainable growth of the city into the future. They were also interested in improving the quality of life for all people who live in Urbana, and ensuring access to services and proper infrastructure in the city. Based off these four main goals we created a series of indicators to analyze each of these. For mobility we looked at the completed transportation projects, sidewalk conditions inventory, commute times, and the amount of multi-modal options in the area. For sensible growth, the indicators we used to assess this goal were home values over time and current locations of public housing, as well as the number of housing units in these neighborhood census block groups over time to determine where the growth is occurring, and locations of infill development and vacant spaces. For quality of life we utilized heatmaps to track Twitter/ Instagram feeds as an indicator of activity in and around Downtown Urbana. These maps spatially assess the available amenities around the neighborhood in relationship to the residents. Finally, the service and infrastructure sections looked at images from the community and demographic analysis. For all of these, we also compared the projected future land uses (from 2005) to the current land uses and 2005 to 2017 aerial images.

Source: ESRI Story Map (social explorer inset) created by the group

What did we learn?

Our neighborhood assessment provided many details about what has and hasn’t changed in our neighborhoods. For instance, we found that the lakeside redevelopment was successfully implemented along with the aquatics park center, but the planned Cunningham Avenue improvements have not occurred, and many of the land uses envisioned for the future were not implemented. However, the main takeaways we gained were from the overall assessment process. In future planning we cannot forge ahead with plans without first analyzing and understanding the city at the neighborhood scale, as many neighborhoods are facing unique issues that a plan should consider, and they may already have small scale plans in place. More specifically, the plan’s goal of sensible growth would include directing specific growth to Cunningham Avenue through infill projects. However, besides some student housing on University Avenue, we did not see these visions come to fruition. This gap in plan making and plan implementation is a major critique of comprehensive plans. It is important to either keep realistic goals in the comprehensive plan or have more directed supporting plans to better prioritize projects. Otherwise the

 3 

+  

community is seeing all of these specific goals without actual implementation, and they do not understand why we are making plans that cannot be achieved. Barriers to plan implementation exist, such as funding, economic competition, etc., and these should be more clearly explained to reduce this confusion around the lack of implementation for a comprehensive plan. These takeaways guided us through our Scenario Building so we create more focused future recommendations in the process of updating Urbana’s plan.  

Scenario Building 

The Scenario building exercise for the Urbana Comprehensive Plan update reflects the concerns and wishes of the identified stakeholders of Urbana. This process was used to identify the key issues important to the Urbana community. We explored the existing gaps and devised actions necessary to mitigate these gaps. The input gathered through two separate workshops was used to arrive at potential future scenarios for Urbana and define actions to aid its development.

Identifying future uncertainties

First we identified the key driving forces of Urbana, which cover three broad themes, namely Economic, Infrastructure and Community Participation.

Driving Forces for Urbana

Economic Infrastructure Community Participation

Tax Revenue and Funding source for Urbana

Transit Accessibility Public Engagement

Maintaining balance between the local and regional scale business to support the economy

Infrastructure upkeep - Pedestrian walkways etc.

Housing variety

Building scenarios

After identifying the key driving forces for the different communities in Urbana, we proposed four different scenarios as a general indication of how Urbana could evolve over the coming years. Two of the scenarios were intentionally extreme case stories. Scenario A was a utopian vision of Urbana while the Scenario B represented a dystopian vision. Scenario C & D reflected much more realistic descriptions of possible futures for the community. The purpose of this was to clearly define what Urbana should be working towards, what they need to avoid, and what obstacles may occur in the realistic scenarios. The following were the scenarios created:

● Scenario A - Utopian Urbana This scenario assumed that all the key driving forces in the broad categories of Economics, Infrastructure/ Services and Community would work in favor of building a well rounded future for the residents of Urbana. This scenario was intentionally designed to assume the

 4 

+  

best possible outcomes in terms of business stability in downtown Urbana, transit accessibility, housing variety for the residents and community engagement.

● Scenario B - Dystopian Urbana Although there was an obvious consensus that this scenario would never actually play out, we still discussed its possibility to understand the extremities of what the Urbana comprehensive plan is dealing with. This scenario revolved around the Urbana downtown being devoid of any funding from the city, all the local businesses moving out of the city, the transportation infrastructure not being able to serve the residents effectively and a general lack of any community / civic life in the city. Having discussed the extreme scenarios A and B, we realised that economy, infrastructure and community are closely related and affect each other significantly. A lacking investment on any of these fronts might lead to an overall failure in terms of realizing the proposed vision. Discussed below, scenario C and D test this possibility and how it might affect the development in Urbana community.

● Scenario C - Connected to nothing This scenario discussed the possibility of improvement in the transportation and infrastructure services in Urbana, offering better connectivity to the residents throughout the city, but a subsequent decline in the downtown Urbana business scene, a general lack of affordable housing options in the residential areas of the city and an overall loss of economic interest in the neighborhoods. If this scenario were to play out, it would be challenging to gain the investments needed to maintain such improved transportation infrastructure in the long run.

● Scenario D - Vibrant Island This scenario offered a 180 degree spin on scenario C as it focussed on development of the vital urban centers within Urbana with most of the local and regional businesses being concentrated in Urbana’s Downtown. It also discussed the possibility of Urbana, as a city, being competitive with nearby Champaign’s Downtown as an emerging driver for commercial investment. However, transit connections and level of infrastructure improvements are not able to keep up with this rapid development and there is still a lack of cohesive ties between economic prosperity and residents’ access to this development. Although the market demand for Urbana has grown, it comes at a price as residents are not able to participate in this growth. Engaging stakeholders After the scenarios were defined, we looked at them through the lense of various stakeholders and included them in the creation of actions that should occur to bring Urbana closer to the best case scenario. This engagement process involved recognizing their values, aspirations and reflecting their interests into our developed scenarios and comprehensive plans update.

 5 

+  

Six groups of representatives were presented at the workshop and expressed their aspirations for the community. They are: West Urbana Neighborhood Association, Urbana Seniors Club, Urbana Planning Staff, Farm Bureau, Urbana Downtown Business Association and University of Illinois. We summarize their aspirations in the table below:

Interests of Stakeholders

Stakeholder Interests

West Urbana Neighborhood

Association

- Keep the unique character of Urbana Historical District - Limit multi-story apartment and student housing development near Lincoln Ave. - Limit the eastward expansion of the University - Upkeep the infrastructure in the area - Build a vibrant Downtown for recreation and leisure

Urbana Senior Club

- Promote expansion of recreational facilities - Build more walking trails - Promote the accessibility to Carle hospital - Build a safer community

Urbana Planning Staff

- Bring more incentives for the growth of businesses, especially large businesses - Improve the transportation and accessibility in the community

Urbana Downtown Business Association

- Prioritize infill development in Downtown Urbana - Promote small local specialty businesses - Promote accessibility to Downtown

Farm Bureau

- Protect farms in the surrounding area by limiting urban expansion - Permanent mechanism allowing farmers to sell products in downtown area - Better integration for farm and other industries

University of Illinois

- Make room for the future growth of the University - Encourage the development of student housing - Promote accessibility to the University - Build a safer community

Building consensus

We worked towards recognizing the fact that there are various conflicts among different stakeholders, especially those over multiple uses of the land. However, after explaining the

 6 

+  

scenarios to the group of stakeholders and describing how each scenario might benefit them, the groups were able to debate their concerns and work towards some census of goals for the greater good of the community. We found that although each group of stakeholders had different individual concerns and goals that discussing these and coming to a few compromises allowed for a general acceptance of the final ideas for action in Urbana. Therefore, we identified goals and objectives that are likely to satisfy the aspirations of many of the stakeholders in the community. After the discussions with stakeholders and considering the existing developing conditions and trends in the Urbana Comprehensive Plan (City of Urbana, 2005), we propose three main goals that should be prioritized:

Goals and Existing Gaps

Goals Existing Gaps

Promote infill development, especially in Downtown Urbana.

- Underused land and building in Downtown Urbana - Excessive parking lots in Downtown Urbana - Lack of businesses in many key areas, i.e. North Lincoln Ave. and Philo Rd. Business Area.

Improve the accessibility of key areas in the Urbana

- Generally inadequate bus frequency and coverage during evenings and weekends. - Limited bus routes to University and Downtown - Inadequate walking and biking facilities

Build a safer and healthier community

- Inadequate street lighting at night. - Limited accessibility to Carle hospital, especially for the emergency cases - Lack of adequate infrastructure to support pedestrians.

 

Recommendations 

The recommendations below represent the objectives going forward in Urbana development. They are a reflection of insights gleaned from the progress of the Urbana Comprehensive Plan, as well as our Scenario Building process. As such, our recommendations for future development include both the steps needed to reach our most ideal scenario cases as well as what has been neglected from the original 2005 plan. They encompass all of the goals laid out in the previous section, bringing together both past and present priorities that seek to effectively create growth for the future.  

 7 

+  

Promote infill development

The comprehensive plan emphasizes the importance of a healthy downtown for Urbana to thrive. As a matter of fact, the connectivity of the downtown area to the other parts of Urbana is seen as a crucial element for the revitalization of the downtown area. Furthermore, the comprehensive plan stresses infill development to promote more compact development where it is needed. For instance, the comprehensive plan stated that rejuvenation of Lincoln Square, creation of housing in downtown, utilization of TIFs to promote development, connection with the university, and promotion of outdoor events are main elements to promote infill development.

In comparison, our workshop defines the importance of similar elements to promote infill development especially in the downtown area. But, we believe that Urbana should introduce a priority list of places within the downtown area that clearly states what type of infill development is needed in each location with specific guidelines attached to each location. Also, providing tax-break incentives for developers who express their interest in these places without solely relying on TIFs could be instrumental in promoting development. More importantly, Urbana should actively seek developers by having a dedicated team (made up of city officials and other leaders) reach out to developers and offer a systematic form of coordination based on potential public-private partnership.

Farmer’s Market

The establishment of a permanent farmers’ market in the downtown area is an important bid to incorporate the farmers’ community in the downtown business community. We believe that this step is going to give farmers a tangible stake in the development of downtown and give them the chance to participate within the local businesses chain. The Farmers’ Market would serve as a catalyst to supply neighboring grocery stores and restaurants with local fresh produce. Furthermore, the place most suited for this permanent farmers market would be Lincoln Square, as part of the planned rejuvenation of the mall in the comprehensive plan.

Student Housing + Local Business Partnerships

There is student housing available on N. Lincoln Avenue that is very cut off from the University of Illinois campus. This isolation would probably be easier for students to work with if the transportation was better developed in this area and if more amenities, especially grocery stores, were available. Instead there is a great need to accommodate students there, as well as along University Avenue and Cunningham Avenue. This provides an opportunity to spur more mixed-use development similar to those along Green Street in Champaign. On the other hand, having a higher student population on both streets can support the development of local business and achieve the comprehensive plan goals of creating a business corridor along Cunningham Avenue. In the end, the growth of both feed one another, providing a win-win situation regardless.

 8 

+  

Infrastructure Improvement

The comprehensive plan calls for a more bicycle and pedestrian friendly neighborhood. Through implementation of bike lanes and better designed intersections, people are encouraged to walk more. Residents can safely walk or bike to their destinations, relying less on cars and providing an improved quality of life. Though the 2005 plan called for more bike lanes, observation of the map below infers that bike lanes are still lacking within the Crystal Lake and King Park neighborhood areas. In fact, there is only one new bicycle lane present in our area, located on Fairview and Goodwin and pictured below (the solid blue lines on the map).

Source: Google Maps, Street view (www.googlemaps.com)

Source: Google Maps, (www.googlemaps.com)

Overall, the major intersections in the community are heavily auto-oriented. A couple of examples are on Lincoln and University Avenues, especially the intersections on University, near Carle Hospital. The picture below shows the lack of protected areas for pedestrians between the sidewalks and the cars. The intersections are long and intimidating for walkers and bikers to cross. A more inclusive, multi-purpose design for the intersection

 9 

+  

will make the area safer for the residents who are not car owners. Along with the bike lanes, the infrastructure will be greatly improved and it will provide a safer community.

Source: Google Maps, Street view (www.googlemaps.com)

Provide adequate street lights

To further meet and maintain the Urbana Comprehensive Plan goals on safety, the lighting on main roads like Lincoln Avenue as well as smaller, neighborhood streets should be increased.

Source: Google Maps, Street view (www.googlemaps.com) The picture above is an image of Lincoln Ave. from Google Maps. Though harder to see, upon closer inspection it is clear that there are lights on the left side of the street, closest to King Park. On the other side of the street, near residences, there is no visible lighting. This would not be of great concern if this was not a neighborhood trend. Examinations of surrounding roads indicates that this is a major issue in the area. Dark streets are dangerous, particularly in neighborhoods, and can contribute to high traffic accident and crime rates. Promote accessibility to Carle hospital 

Carle Hospital is the largest employer in the community. Its close proximity to the King Park and Crystal Lake neighborhoods make it great not only for employment reasons, but also for nearby residents who need quick access to the hospital. While this is promising, it does not negate the challenges that a lack of street and sidewalk maintenance has on such access. Especially for those in the neighborhood with disabilities, the poor conditions of the

 10 

+  

sidewalks are hazardous. As part of the continued commitment to safety from the Comprehensive Plan, it is important to fix the sidewalks and streets. This improved access can help to ensure that Carle Hospital is not only a regional powerhouse, but a world-class facility as well.

Source: Google Maps, Street view (www.googlemaps.com)

Source: Google Maps, Street view (www.googlemaps.com)

Speaker Series

Since there are often long periods of time between the research of a comprehensive plan and its actual implementation, it is important to rely on the system of plans of a city that support each other over time until the creation of a comprehensive plan update. What made the Urbana Comprehensive Plan’s process so strong in 2005 was its community engagement in the plan making process, however, the engagement falls off for the whole community after the completion of the plan. This is expected as engaging with the community takes both time and resources, and planners eventually have to prioritize other plans being made, such as neighborhood plans, and the engagement for that process. However we feel that a low cost, low commitment speaker series would be one way to fill out some of the gaps in engagement. By utilizing the strong partnership Urbana has with the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, hosting a speaker series would vastly improve this gap in full community engagement in planning during the “implementation” time of the comprehensive plan. We imagine there would be one speaker per month or every two weeks, invited from the university to discuss a topic of research they have completed in the community or of a relevant issue to the community with respect to planning. For example, a professor or student could come and talk about historic preservation in

 11 

+  

urbana and how it has shaped the community. We feel this would vastly improve the communication between planners and their communities as well as the communities’ understanding of planning and how to get involved. This would also ensure more frequent communication between the city and the community. After completing the process of assessing the comprehensive plan, and through our own experiences, we felt that the community often misunderstands what planning is and how they can become involved in improving or making changes they want to see come to life. By frequently engaging with the residents in this way, they can also ask questions about areas of concern or where they feel there is lack of implementation of the plans. This idea mostly stems from our experiences in attending community meetings where there seems a general confusion about what the point of these meetings is and why they should even care about planning when their concerns aren’t being addressed. Hopefully, with more opportunities for informal engagement between planners and Urbana, residents can begin to feel more involved. The other inspiration for this was the comprehensive plans and zoning department from Austin which is where they had a similar speaker series, however, due to this unique asset Urbana has with the influence the University has, we came up with the idea to involve academics, bringing people closer to planners and giving them more opportunities to get involved and to learn about the unique issues in their city.

Conclusions 

The city of Urbana has made tremendous efforts to create a comprehensive plan that can preserve the historic character of the city and promote development. The Crystal Lake Park and King Park neighborhoods are inseparable parts of the urban fabric of the city and our projected scenarios try to capture the city-wide impact of our recommendations. The health of the Downtown and mobility are the essential elements that paint the visioning image of Urbana.

Hopkins has emphasized that innovation is the main key for successful plans and replication is only a short-lived success that fades along with other urban trends over time. Therefore, our re-envisioning of Urbana is based on the values of the community by translating their aspirations into a tangible and yet balanced reality.

We hope this vision of Urbana can serve as a catalyst for policy-makers to bridge the gap between the comprehensive plan and what is needed on the ground. Furthermore, we hope that this can strengthen and grow the channel of communication between the city and its people by empowering the public to assist the City of Urbana in navigating through to a better future.  

 12