Date: January 15, 2008
Place: Foster Township Municipal Building
Project: City of Bradford Master Plan
Client: City of Bradford
Time: 11:00 am-1:30 pm
MCF No.: 44506002
Attendees:
Livingston Alexander, University of Pittsburgh at Bradford
Sara Andrews, City of Bradford OECD
Greg Booth, Zippo
Linda Devlin, ANF Visitors Bureau
Rick Esch, University of Pittsburgh at Bradford
Mike Glesk, Bradford Area Alliance
Harvey Golubock, ARG
Chris Hauser, Downtown Bradford Revitalization Corp
Rob Huber, Bradford Travel
Carey Kaber, Foster Township
Bill Leven, Futures
*** McDowell, Bradford Area Alliance
Carolyn Newhouse
Shane Oschman, Northwest Savings
John Peterson, City of Bradford
Brad Preston, Sawyer Evangelical Church
Tom Riel, City of Bradford
Sandy Romanowski, Bradford Area School District
Marcie Schellhammer, Bradford Era
Marty Wilder, Bradford Era
Simon Tripp, Impact Economics
Roberta Sarraf, Zoning/Planning Consultant
Albert Filoni, MacLachlan, Cornelius & Filoni, Inc.
Ken Lee, MacLachlan, Cornelius & Filoni, Inc.
Amy Maceyko, MacLachlan, Cornelius & Filoni, Inc.
Purpose: To review recent planning meeting, discuss commercial zoning districts, discuss emerging economic development strategies and plan public forum for next Bradford trip.
Items Discussed:
1. Mr. Filoni began by highlighting the meetings that the planning team has attended during this trip.
a. The consultants spoke with real estate agents working on a local development deal. The details are not public, but the team is hopeful that the project will
consider the best interests of Bradford in the design / planning process.
b. Building owners around Veteran’s Square see promise in both the ideas to expand the square and consider an elevator core that could serve multiple buildings
to make the upper floors more rentable. The group discussed the idea of making the parking behind that block of buildings more organized and into one large
lot instead of several disjointed parking areas. This will require cooperation, but could provide designated parking for the nearby buildings as well as public
parking for people coming to Main Street. The cost of elevator maintenance over time is somewhat of a bigger concern than the initial cost for installation.
Marketing for newly renovated upper floor spaces will be critical as well.
c. There was a lunch meeting discussion about ways to use trees and plantings to make the exits off of 219 more attractive.
d. Mr. Tripp had a meeting with the vocational teachers at the high school. They had a good dialogue and he thinks they are very enthusiastic but are dealing
with extremely confined spaces.
e. While Mr. Tripp was at the high school, the rest of the team met with Ms. Wilder at the Bradford Era. She commented that the newspaper could help
publicize both the website and the upcoming public forum.
f. The Zoning committee discussed the character of commercial development areas in the three municipalities and the goals for these areas. Most discussion
about goals is needed.
g. The Economic Development Committee has begun developing strategies based on the analysis that has been done and then priorities will need to be
established.
h. The Downtown Business and Regional Strategy Committee discussed retail strategies and how zoning affects commercial development.
i. The planning team made a presentation to the Bradford Area Alliance this morning to familiarize them with the process and the preliminary ideas that have
been developed. The group suggested that the planning team talk to the East Bradford Business Association and get the new Bradford Township Supervisor,
Gayle Bauer, involved in the master plan committees.
j. Mr. Filoni wrapped up by commenting that the planning team didn’t feel quite as exhausted at the end of yesterday’s meetings and he thinks it is partially
because the meetings have been mostly positive and it feels like there is good momentum for the plan and for positive change in Bradford.
2. Ms. Maceyko reviewed the comments from the break-out discussions held at the end of the last meeting. These comments are posted in a separate document.
3. There are 6 main items/focus areas relating to downtown that keep coming up. The planning team is making lists like these and in coming trips we’ll need to review these lists for completeness and then begin to prioritize the actions that need to be taken.
a. New Zoning Code
b. Cleaning Up
c. Gateways
d. Main Street Enhancement
e. Pine Street Development
f. Continuing Campus Drive
4. Ms. Sarraf reviewed the main types of commercial zoning districts. These are described in terms of general character of development, not specific businesses
that are permitted or disallowed.
a. Neighborhood Commercial
1. Pedestrian and vehicle oriented development
2. Accommodates small businesses (floor area limitation) on individual lots
3. Customary minimum lot size = 10,000 s.f.
4. Usually 1-story commercial buildings, 1-2 story office buildings
5. Each lot has separate access to the public street
b. Downtown Business District
1. Pedestrian oriented development
2. May include residential uses
3. Accommodates multiple uses in one building or one lot
4. Usually involves small lots, “zero” side yards, minimal front setbacks
5. Often multi-story buildings
c. Highway / General Commercial
1. Vehicle oriented development
2. Accommodates individual businesses on separate lots
3. Customary minimum lot size = 10,000 s.f. to 21,780 s.f. (half –acre)
4. Usually 1-2 story buildings
5. Every lot has separate access to the public street
d. Shopping Center
1. Accommodates “strip centers” or planned shopping centers
2. Includes multiple businesses on the same site, often includes “outparcels”
3. Designed with shared access, shared parking and shared signage
4. Mnimizes the number of points of access to the public street
5. All parking is provided on site.
5. Ms. Sarraf reviewed the existing commercial uses and existing commercial zoning districts. Some areas have characteristics of different commercial district types even though they have the same zoning designation. With the new code, are there some areas that should go back to being residential only instead of allowing some commercial uses and conversion of homes into businesses. The R4-A district on East Main Street allows some commercial uses that could be competitive with the businesses desired for Main Street and the downtown core of Bradford. The Zoning Committee was non-committal about whether this should be changed, but the DBRS Committee was almost unanimous in wanting outlying areas to be non-competitive with the downtown core.
6. Downtown building owners have concerns about spending money to renovate their upper floors for offices or apartments without knowing whether anyone will rent the space when it is complete. Having occupied upper floors makes downtown more vibrant and draws people to it. Sprawl has the opposite effect on downtown. There are some uses and stores that are more appropriate to areas like Fosterbrook, and those businesses should stay there. But uses that are appropriate for an urban core need to be encouraged to be downtown. This is an issue that affects all three municipalities and requires the “cooperation” of all three. The planning team is concerned that there aren’t any leaders from Bradford Township at this meeting for important issues like this. It would also be good to talk with more business owners on East Main Street since that corridor seems to be a significant part of the commercial district discussion.
7. Ms. Sarraf clarified that existing non-conforming uses would be able to be maintained once a new zoning code is enacted and this approval can be passed along with property rights in PA. This process is not about trying to limit land use or business opportunities, but it is more about limiting the size of allowable businesses and how they connect with their surroundings. She also pointed out that all of this work will mean nothing if the city, the zoning board and the political will of the people doesn’t maintain the new zoning regulations after the planning team leaves. If variances are always granted and guidelines ignored, then the zoning code doesn’t mean anything.
8. Mr. Peterson commented that the zoning board members are volunteered and a period of retraining them would be a very good idea. They think they are doing something good for the community by allowing variances. He is also anxious for a new zoning code that is not a pyramid construction. There is concern that a space crunch will cause the construction of residential units in manufacturing zones, which is allowed by the current zoning code.
9. Mr. Tripp reviewed the strategic elements of the economic development plan thus far.
a. Labor, Cluster Industries, New Growth Industries, Education, Infrastructure, Quality of Place, and Organization and Leadership are the major categories in
which the strategies fall.
b. There is concern that the labor productivity for the region is low. It could mean that investment in technology is needed or that there is a labor issue or a high
percentage of workers with higher salaries.
c. Mr. Tripp will investigate the $ generated / employee and see if that is a factor in the productivity issue.
d. There was also a comment that some of the local manufacturers have made a decision to keep some things hand crafted (e.g. Case). Could there be enough
of this to be affecting the productivity number?
e. Mr. Tripp said that these could be affecting some companies numbers, but it is a still a macro issue that needs to be addressed.
f. The stigma associated with vocational education is an obstacle. A 4-year college education isn’t the right answer for every student and other options are
needed. There are few 2-year programs available locally. There is a gap for those jobs where high school isn’t enough and a 4-year program is too much.
g. Other things to consider are boosting the supply chain, examining available investment capitol, working on succession strategies for private companies,
creating networking opportunities for entrepreneurs, encouraging regional cooperation and making sure that leadership is established for the long term.
h. Infrastructure isn’t a major issue, but there are small changes that could make improvements.
i. There are 5 main strategies in the current draft and each main strategy will have a list of specific action items.
j. Mr. Preston commented that all five strategies deal with the importance of connectivity – social networking, etc.
10. Mr. Filoni commented that as we begin talking about action items the group also needs to be thinking about establishing priorities, determining costs, thinking about where money could come from, and establishing some sort of body that will outlive the planning process and oversee implementation of the plan.
11. Mr. Golubock commented that local manufacturers need to take a leadership role in addition to the governmental representatives that are/will be involved. Support needs to be given to both high school and University efforts, and government grants can’t do it all.
12. Dr. Alexander stated that community colleges typically get 1/3rd of their funding from the local region, so these kind of ideas need to be understood fully before being recommended in a public document. At the same time, Mr. Glesk doesn’t feel that any idea should be discounted just because of the cost. Long term plans aren’t made with money in the bank. This is a part of the reason that public input and consensus on the plan is so critical. For example, the zoning board isn’t sticking their neck out when they approve the new zoning code because the code has already been aired to the public through this process.
13. Maybe a structure like the Trails Association has would work for implementation of the master plan. It has a committed group of volunteers that meet regularly and ensure that the process continues. Maybe the group would meet quarterly to access progress and keep the momentum going.
14. The group moved on to a discussion of the public forum to be held during the next planning team visit in March.
a. The goal is to present an overview of what we’ve done so far and where we are in the process, as well as getting some feedback from those who haven’t had a
chance to speak to the planning team yet.
b. The meeting should focus on the positives in Bradford and the potential that the planning team sees in the Tuna Valley. There should not be a list of what is
wrong or even what needs to be fixed, as that is too likely to start an unproductive complaint session.
c. Use facts to show that things are good and talk about how they could be great.
d. The meeting should be organized in a way that audience members feel free to contribute and ask questions, without allowing it to become a free for all.
e. Sharing success stories of how other places have overcome challenges and the experiences that the planning team has been a part of should be part of the
presentation.
f. Part of the challenge will be just to get people to come to the meeting. There will be a full page ad in the paper.
g. It would be nice to get young people there. Should it be held in the high school auditorium? Mr. Filoni is wary of a place that is too big and forces a situation
where the planning team is “preaching” to the audience. Some place smaller that allows for more interaction would be better. Ms. Romanowski will look into
using the room where the school board meets. It has technology and no fixed seating.
h. There should be a way for the public to write down comments in addition to being able to speak up in the meeting.
i. The team will send press releases to the newspaper with some of the issues to be discussed. Hopefully that will generate some interest and prepare audience
members to think about Bradford in advance of the meeting.
j. Maybe a similar presentation for the high school students since they are unlikely to come to the evening forum?
15. If any steering committee members would like to suggest other members of the Bradford community that the planning team should talk to, please let Ms. Andrews or Ms. Maceyko know.
With no further items for discussion, the meeting was adjourned. The foregoing constitutes the major items accepted by the attendees. If there are any additions or corrections to these minutes, please notify the Architect.
Respectfully submitted,
MacLachlan, Cornelius & Filoni, Inc.
Amy P. Maceyko, AIA, LEED AP