North Carolina State University
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study Prepared by: Nicholas Kuhn, PLA, CPRP
Acknowledgments Par cipants and Advisors Ken Bowers, AICP, City of Raleigh Deputy Planning & Development Director Stephen Bentley, Assistant Director, City of Raleigh Parks, Recrea on and Cultural Resources Department Roberta Fox, AIA, ASLA, formerly Assitant Planning Director, Principal Urban Designer for the City of Raleigh Eric J. Lamb, PE, Transporta on Planning Manager, City of Raleigh Transporta on Department Joe Michael, AIA, Principal Urban Designer, City of Raleigh Urban Design Center North Carolina State University Gene Bressler, FASLA, Emeritus Professor of Landscape Architecture Meg Calkin, FASLA, Professor and Head of the Department of Landscape Architecture Charles Flink II, FASLA, Professor of Prac ce in Landscape Architecture Celen Pasalar, PhD, Assistant Dean for Research and Extension, Assistant Professor in Landscape Architecture Carla Radoslovich Delcambre, ASLA, Assitant Professor in Landscape Architecture
Prepared by: Nicholas Kuhn, PLA, CPRP nick.kuhn@kimley-horn.com Kimley-Horn Prac ce Builder Parks Planning and Design Prac ce Phone: (984) 275-2386
Notes: Though the proposed design solu ons illustrated within this report are based upon research and analysis of the site and innova ons in design and materials, the final solu on will be different as public engagement is needed as well as addi onal technical exper se to develop a community-based design. This report is meant to elevate the poten al for the North Capital Boulevard Park site to align with the importance and possible benefits that a holis c approach to the park's design may provide the residents of the City of Raleigh. Reproduc on or use of any images, text or parts of this report are not permited unless expressed wri en permission by the author, Nicholas Kuhn, has been obtained.
Published: July, 2020
2
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Table of Contents 1. Process Oriented Design ...........................................................................6 1.1 Purpose and Methodology ................................................................................. 9 1.2 Significance of Parks .......................................................................................... 11 1.3 Alignment with a Greater Vision: Guiding Documents ..................................... 12
2. Site Layers................................................................................................22 2.1 Natural ............................................................................................................... 23 2.2 Human ................................................................................................................ 29
3. Framework...............................................................................................40 3.1 Great Parks ......................................................................................................... 41 3.2 Goals and ObjecƟves .......................................................................................... 54 3.3 Site Program ....................................................................................................... 57
4. Master Plan .............................................................................................58 4.1 Master Plan ........................................................................................................ 59 4.2 Next Steps .......................................................................................................... 65
Sources .......................................................................................................66
Broad Street Park, Dublin, OH, example of a passive, floodplain park space. Image by MKSK
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
3
Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 Figure 14 Figure 15 Figure 16 Figure 17 Figure 18 Figure 19 Figure 20 Figure 21 Figure 22 Figure 23 Figure 24 Figure 25 Figure 26 Figure 27 Figure 28 Figure 29
4
Park Site - Future North Capital Boulevard Park ..............................................................7 Study Area and Site Context .............................................................................................8 Process Diagram ............................................................................................................. 10 Sample of Exis ng City and Regional Plans ................................................................... 12 City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan - Urban Form Map ......................................14 Capital Boulevard Corridor Study - North Capital Boulevard Corridor Plan ............... 15 Capital Boulevard Corridor Study - Illustra ve Corridor Concept ................................16 Capital Area Greenway Plan and Design Guide: Cross City Greenways Trail Map .......17 Wake County Transit Master Plan - Frequent, Reliable Urban Mobility Plan .............. 18 Wake County Transit Master Plan - Example of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) sta on ........ 18 Raleigh System Plan - Neighborhood Parks Access Level of Service Analysis ............. 20 Walkable Midtown Plan: Waterfront District ................................................................21 Example of nonpoint source storm water drainage ..................................................... 23 Example of nonpoint source storm water drainage from adjacent parking ............... 23 Example of exis ng water pollu on in Pigeon House Branch Creek ............................ 23 Drainage Basins .............................................................................................................. 25 Floodways and Floodplain ..............................................................................................26 Topography.......................................................................................................................27 Landcover ....................................................................................................................... 28 Aerial Image of study area, April 24, 1938 .................................................................... 29 Aerial Image of study area, 1959 ................................................................................... 29 Aerial Image of study area, 1971 ................................................................................... 30 Zoning ..............................................................................................................................31 Future Land Use ..............................................................................................................32 Site Parcels and Underu lized Proper es ..................................................................... 36 Transporta on Network .................................................................................................37 Imperviousness .............................................................................................................. 38 Historic Fourth Ward Park Partners ...............................................................................47 Park Inunda on Diagram ............................................................................................... 64
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Great parks are more than just places to play. When careful planning and design come together, parks can provide tremendous environmental, economic and social benefits to a community while balancing the needs of all people for all mes. Eleva ng this ideal, parks should be designed with nature, be beau ful, and promote the well-being of people while seeking to be financially sustainable. When these principles are seamlessly integrated, great parks are formed.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
5
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Chapter 1
Process Oriented Design
1.0 - Site Overview This plan explores the opportuni es and design innova ons for the development of an urban park, known as North Capital Boulevard Park (NCBP). The approximately 20.2 acre site is parallel to Capital Blvd. (US 401) in the City of Raleigh. The boundary of the site is established as the median of Capital Blvd. between Atlan c Ave. and Crabtree Blvd. (Figure 1). The overall study area encompasses approximately 295 acres of transi onal, non-residen al land uses surrounding the future park site. This area is roughly bounded by the exis ng CSX Rail-line to the west, Hodges Rd. to the north and parcels of non-residen al land uses to the east and south (Figure 2).
View of Site from Capital Blvd. west bound. Image by Nick Kuhn
6
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Future East End Market PD
Future Raleigh Iron Works development
To I-440
Dockside 1053
Atlan c Ave.
Capital Blvd.
Future Wake County Public Schools High School
(west bound)
Park Site (20.2 acres)
Capital Blvd. (east bound)
Fenton St. To Downtown
Figure 1 Park Site - Future North Capital Boulevard Park. Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
7
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Six Forks Rd. Wake Forest Rd. I-440
Hodges St.
Atlan c Ave.
CSX Railroad
Whitaker Mills Rd.
Crabtree Blvd.
Capital Blvd.
Study Area Site Raleigh Blvd. Lions Park Wake Forest Rd.
Oakwood Park
Peace St.
Downtown
Figure 2 Study Area and Site Context Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
8
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
1.1 - Purpose and Methodology The purpose of this document is to outline an implementable master plan for the future development of North Capital Boulevard Park. Development of NCBP would result in the transforma on of a collec on of underu lized commercial proper es into a dynamic new public park space that integrates environmentally sensi ve lands with innova ve design solu ons. Specific goals of this master plan effort include the following: Master Plan Goals: 1. Build upon the recommenda ons of area plans, studies, and ordinances to develop a master plan that advances the vision of the City and corridor; 2. Incorporate context-sensi ve design solu ons; 3. Highlight environmentally sensi ve landscapes through the restora on of the Pigeon House Branch Creek; 4. Iden fy opportuni es to enhance the public's knowledge of environmentally sensi ve lands and urban watersheds; 5. Outline community-wide benefits associated with urban park spaces; and 6. Iden fy future implementa on ac ons and responsibili es. This report is a product of known factors and assump ons at the me analyses were completed. This report does not represent an absolute plan or intent to proceed with the project. Instead it creates the founda on for future efforts and serves as reference for decision makers. Changes within the project environment including transi ons in land ownership, permi ng requirements, etc. will result in divergence from the presented recommenda ons.
Image (right): Historic Fourth Ward Park, Atlanta GA. Image by The Sintoses - Atlanta Beltline.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
9
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Methodology This report analyzes opportuni es and challenges for a future mul -objec ve urban park space, North Capital Boulevard Park, located along Capital Blvd. between Atlan c Ave. and Crabtree Blvd. The future park will provide a vital open space and gateway feature to North Downtown Raleigh neighborhoods, comple ng an important ac on item for the Capital Boulevard Corridor Study.
A group of stakeholders with regulatory and ownership interests in the corridor were engaged to provide input into design considera ons. As a non-City of Raleigh project, full public engagement policies were not incorporated into the recommenda ons in this report. As such, future planning and design ini a ves should u lize full public engagement prac ces to ensure broad support for the development of the park by area residents, business owners and visitors.
The report develops a cohesive design that seeks to connects to surrounding neighborhoods through a systema c method of research and iden fica on of community needs. Analysis includes quan ta ve, qualita ve and observa onal reviews of corridor specific, city-wide and county plans and ordinances, as well as exis ng condi ons of the site, see Figure 3.
1
Process Steps
2
Process Steps
3
SITE ANALYSIS
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
DESIGN & IMPLEMENTATION
Analysis of exisƟng condiƟons and city plans
EvaluaƟon based on input from stakeholders through interviews
Development of park design and next steps
Guiding Documents Corridor Specific Plans, Downtown Area Plans, City-wide Plans, Wake County Plans Regional TransportaƟon Plans
Human and Natural Environments Historic Uses, Zoning, Land Uses, Site Parcels TransportaƟon Network, Imperviousness Floodplain/ Floodway, Topography, Landcover
Stakeholder Input
Goals and Program
Design Development
City of Raleigh Parks, RecreaƟon and Cultural Resources Department TransportaƟon Department Urban Design Center City Planning Department
DefiniƟon of Project Goals and ObjecƟves
Master Plan Development
Establishment of Site Program
InnovaƟons in Design
Master Plan
Final Concept Development Next Steps
Figure 3 Process Diagram
10
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
1.2 - The Significance of Parks With more research in the fields of parks, public health, urban planning, and landscape architecture, as well as increasing advocacy over the last decade, the posi ve contribu ons of parks are being recognized across a wide range of disciplines. One such organiza on is The Na onal Recrea on and Parks Associa on (NRPA) which has iden fied contribu ons that parks provide to healthy 16 and vibrant communi es . Categories of contribu on as iden fied by NRPA include the following:
Economic Impact Parks provide some of the best returns on investment a community can make. Studies have documented the wide-reaching impacts parks have economically on communi es from sustaining or improving property values, to encouraging redevelopment or job crea on, parks make for great public investments. Parks play a key role in a rac ng and retaining businesses and entrepreneurs seeking a community with a high quality of life.
Physical Health Simply put, communi es with more parks are healthier. Studies by the Center for Disease Control (CDC), as well as academic and other public research have concluded that me spent outdoors comple ng physical ac vi es lead to lower rates of chronic disease, lower rates of obesity and longer, richer life spans.
Resiliency
Social Func on
Social Equity
Parks are social des na ons. By providing comfortable op ons to sit, relax and socialize, parks commonly becomes the mee ng loca ons for neighbors. Research documents that communi es with parks have more cohesion among neighbors leading to less isola on of atrisk popula ons and the elderly.
Mental Health For many people, a relaxing walk in a park is an unparalleled stress reliever. Studies have shown that having access to nature or open space can reduce stress, improve cogni ve func ons and reduce depression and anxiety.
Youth Development Commonly an under-represented segment of the popula on when tackling the challenges of society, youth can respond posi vely to being introduced to life-skills early through extracurricular ac vi es, free play and ar s c expression in parks.
In addi on to the contribu ons recognized by NRPA, many communi es are seeking to leverage the environmental benefits of parks and open space to make neighborhoods more resilient to the impacts of climate change, natural disasters or energy scarcity.
Ensuring that all people have access to the benefits of local parks and recrea on provides a greater sense of community, social cohesion, and helps to break down poten al barriers between people of different cultural backgrounds. Social equity is essen al to providing a social environment that serves people of all ages and promotes cultural diversity. Safe, equitable communi es a ract people with a wide variety of needs, and encourage par cipa on in community building. Through the development of this plan, the North Downtown Raleigh neighborhoods have the opportunity to recognize these benefits via the careful cra ing of North Capital Boulevard Park. This plan represents a step towards this opportunity.
Environmental Parks are where the impacts of urban environments meet the sensi vi es of nature. When developed to be sustainable and resilient, parks can provide net-posi ve impacts to water quality and quan ty, and healthy habitat restora on.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
11
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
1.3 - Alignment with a Greater Vision: Guiding Documents In an effort to achieve alignment with other City and regional efforts, and promote a concerted effort towards a common vision, a review of guiding documents and plans that may influence the planning and design of the North Capital Boulevard Park was completed. Below is a list of significant documents that express community vision, context, mutually suppor ve efforts, and current City and County ini a ves cri cal to the development of a master plan for the park. Documents reviewed include: • City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan i. Greenprint ii. Urban Form • City of Raleigh Strategic Plan • City of Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance • Capital Boulevard Corridor Study • Blount-Person Corridor Study • Peace Street Visioning Study • Downtown Master Plan • Wake County Transit Master Plan • City of Raleigh Parks, Recrea on and Cultural Resources System Plan • Capital Area Greenway Planning and Design Guide • Walkable Midtown Plan (Midtown-St. Albans Area Plan) The following informa on includes summaries of select guiding document and their relevance to this master plan effort.
The City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Adopted by the City of Raleigh in 2009, this comprehensive planning document establishes policies that respond to the requirements and aspira ons of the City’s residents, and accordingly includes ac on items focused on social, economic, and physical development of the city. The plan includes guidance and references for six strategic vision themes: • • • • • •
Economic Property and Equity Expanding Housing Choices Managing Our Growth Coordina ng Land Use and Transporta on Greenprint Raleigh Growing Successful Neighborhoods and Communi es Figure 4 Sample of Exis ng City and Regional Plans
12
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
The 2030 Comprehensive Plan iden fies eight major challenges to suppor ng the con nued growth and balanced developed of the city. The development of a new 20 acre park in the Capital Boulevard corridor may help to address most of the challenges included in the 2030 Comp Plan, including: 1. Addressing the need for walkable, neighborhood parks in exis ng and newer parts of the City; 2. Acquiring adequate land for future park development; 3. Developing recrea onal facili es in close proximity to all residents, equitably distributed throughout the City; 4. Enhancing access to and awareness of Raleigh’s recrea on and natural resource opportuni es; 5. Providing be er interconnec vity between the parks, greenways, and open space system locally and regionally; 6. Providing best prac ce management and stewardship of Raleigh’s natural resources; and 7. Integra ng the parks, recrea on and cultural resources system into a broader context of green infrastructure to maximize ecosystem conserva on. Relevance to this Plan: The Comprehensive Plan iden fies the study area as the following: a Priority Area for Economic Development area, a City Growth Center (Figure 5), a Transit Emphasis Corridor, a Priority Transit Corridor, within a 1/2 mile of a Fixed-Guideway Transit loca on, a Greenway Corridor with hydric soils, a Community Park search area, and Community and Neighborhood MixedUse Future Land Uses. With extensive overlapping of priority policies and recommenda ons for transporta on, land use and economic development, the study area is conducive for redevelopment and increased emphasis in the Raleigh community.
Raleigh Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) The city's UDO was adopted in 2013 and promotes a walkable, bikeable, transit-friendly city with high density, mixed-use districts in select loca ons. The document contains guidelines governing future development with the following objec ves that have alignment with the North Capital Boulevard Park concept: 1. Improve the built environment and human habitat; 2. Conserve and protect the city’s natural beauty and se ng, including trees, scenic vistas, and cultural and historic resources; 3. Ensure that new development conserves energy, land, and natural resources;
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
4. Protect water quality within watershed cri cal areas, the general watershed areas of designated water supply watersheds and other watershed districts; 5. Encourage environmentally responsible development prac ces; 6. Promote development pa erns that support safe, effec ve, and mul -modal transporta on op ons, including auto, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, and therefore minimize vehicle traffic by providing for a mixture of land uses, walkability, and compact community form; 7. Provide neighborhoods with a variety of housing types to serve the needs of a diverse popula on; 8. Promote the greater health benefits of a pedestrianoriented environment; 9. Reinforce the character and quality of neighborhoods; 10. Remove barriers and provide incen ves for walkable projects; 11. Encourage compact development; 12. Ensure that adequate facili es are constructed to serve new development; and 13. Provide for orderly growth and development of suitable neighborhoods with adequate transporta on networks, drainage and u li es and appropriate building sites. Relevance to this Plan: The study area provides opportuni es to achieve several objec ves centered on the improvement to the built and natural habitats that encompass the future park site. Exis ng land use is primarily mixed-use light industrial and commercial within the study area with zoning that will allow for 3-5 stories and up to seven stories of mixed-use development in areas.
Capital Boulevard Corridor Study Adopted by the City of Raleigh in 2012, the Capital Boulevard Corridor Study includes recommenda ons for the development of a new park named ‘North Boulevard Park’ that would be realized through the eventual replacement and consolida on of Capital Blvd. into a single set of traffic lanes and the restora on of the Pigeon House Branch Creek. The plan recommends that the project by ed to the replacement of a set of bridges associated with Atlan c Ave. and Capital Blvd. ‘some me in the next 10-15 years.’ The project is included in the third phase ‘North Boulevard’ of overall work for the corridor and totals approximately $22.25M in costs (2011 figures).
13
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Site Study Area Inset
Site
Figure 5 City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan - Urban Form Map
14
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Relevance to this Plan: The Capital Boulevard Corridor Plan is the most specific study completed by the city of the study area and is the ini al planning effort to document a vision of a new park within the Capital Blvd. area (Figure 6). The development of the future North Capital Boulevard Park is the catalyst in the Plan for redevelopment of new neighborhoods to the west and east of the park site as well as the recommended consolida on of Capital Boulevard to the western alignment of the current roadway (Figure 7).
Wake County Transit Master Plan Adopted by Wake County in 2016, the Wake County Transit Master Plan establishes four 'big moves' meant to expand and improve the quality of transit services in
the County. The first ac on is to call 'Connect Regionally' and focuses on development of 37-mile commuter rail line along the North Carolina Railroad from Durham to Johnston County. The only poten al impact to the future North Boulevard Park area is a future op onal extension to Wake Forest which would pass immediately west of the park site and is included in the study area. The plan is unclear of specific sta on loca ons, especially for the op onal future routes; however, the City of Raleigh currently maintains transporta on plans which include a transit sta on within 1/2 mile of the park site. This would have the poten al to provide regional connec vity to the study area. The second 'big move' is called 'Connect All Wake County Communi es.' In this step, a reduc on in head mes
Figure 6 Capital Boulevard Corridor Study - North Capital Boulevard Corridor Plan
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
15
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Study Area
Figure 7 Capital Boulevard Corridor Study - Illustra ve Corridor Concept
16
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
along primary routes would be included. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) infrastructure would be included which would be u lized by other non-BRT transit to decrease traffic impacts. This step is poten ally of significant impact to the future park site as the northern BRT line from Downtown would travel north along Capital Blvd. and would terminate at the southern end of the park site. Considera on for the future BRT terminus and its infrastructure needs should be give during the planning and design of the future park. The third move is tled 'Frequent, Reliable Urban Transit' and focuses on the enhancement of bus and BRT service to establish reduced head mes in primary corridors (Figure 9). The study area serves as a northern hub for these services as a terminus of the BRT service (Figure 10) and enhanced bus service along Capital Blvd., Atlan c Ave. and Six Forks Rd. Relevance to this Plan: The Wake County Transit Master Plan may have significant impacts to the future park site and study area through the implementa on of addi onal transit service to the area and development of a BRT to bus transit hub at the southern end of the park site.
Enhanced transit service to the area further advances the poten al for extensive redevelopment in the area.
Capital Area Greenways Plan and Design Guide Adopted by the City of Raleigh in 2014, the Capital Area Greenway (CAG) Planning and Design Guide intends to assist the City in the planning, design, and engineering of greenway trail facili es. The Guide supplements the City of Raleigh Parks, Recrea on and Cultural Resources System Plan and is intended to be used simultaneously when planning and designing greenways and greenway trails (Figure 8). The guide includes defini on of a greenway system that establishes a hierarchy of trail types. Cross City Greenway Trails are main routes crossing the city and connec ng to other jurisdic ons. This type of greenway trail is designed to accommodate the highest level of usage and provision of ameni es for users. The future park site is shown as part of a planned Cross City Greenway Trail that connects two other exis ng Cross City Greenway Trails. Cross City Greenways Trails may be 10-14' in width and lighted in non-residen al areas in order to promote use as primary
Site
Study Area Inset
Figure 8 Capital Area Greenway Plan and Design Guide: Cross City Greenways Trail Map
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
17
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Site
Figure 9 Wake County Transit Master Plan - Big Move 3 / Frequent, Reliable Urban Mobility Plan
Figure 10 Wake County Transit Master Plan - Example of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) sta on
18
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
commuter routes. Trails may be sited adjacent to major roadways and due to heavy usage and street crossings may be grade-separated. Relevance to this Plan: The CAG Planning and Design Guide has significant impacts to the planning and design of the future North Boulevard Park. Recommenda ons include the future rou ng of a Cross City Greenway Trail through the site which would connect two other Cross City Greenways Trails: Walnut Creek Greenway and Crabtree Creek Greenway. Design considera ons should be given to rou ng the trail within the park and safe crossings of Wake Forest Rd., Atlan c Ave. and Crabtree Blvd. which may need to be grade-separated.
City of Raleigh Parks, Recrea on and Cultural Resources System Plan Approved in 2014, the City of Raleigh Parks, Recrea on and Cultural Resources System Plan (System Plan) is a supplement to the City of Raleigh 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Expanding upon the vision of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the System Plan is a long-range planning document that is meant to help shape the direc on, development and delivery of the city’s parks, recrea on and cultural resource facili es and services over the next 20 years. The document iden fies the top needs for park and recrea on facili es and ac vi es determined through a comprehensive public involvement process. The plan iden fies top needs as small neighborhood parks, greenway trails and dog parks and ac vi es as fitness and wellness, lake-related and senior programming. The future park has the poten al to provide all of these services and facili es. The System Plan includes an access level of service analysis which includes the loca on of exis ng park facili es and the walk-shed of each. Figure 11 includes the access level of service for neighborhood parks with a 1/2mile and 1-mile walk-sheds shown. Of note is the lack of access to neighborhood parks within the study area. With a general lack of residen al land use, the lack of access does not have large impacts, however, with the rezoning of the study area to include mixed-use land uses, new residents to the area will lack access to neighborhood park ameni es. In addi on, the System Plan iden fies a series of goals and ac ons items for Growth Centers which includes the en re study area. These ac ons items includes the
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
following which may impact the planning and design of the future North Capital Boulevard Park: • Establish return-on-investment metrics for urban parks; • Iden fy methods or strategies that bolster current funds for acquisi on and development of urban parks, facili es, greenways or programming; • Partner with City of Oaks Founda on on parks acquisi on and funding in growth areas; • Inventory and evaluate access to parks in current and future Growth Centers and poten al partnerships; • Integrate new park search criteria into transit planning in corridor studies and sta on areas and focus park planning and acquisi on in Growth Centers when opportuni es become available; • Plan and develop new urban parks in growth areas as needed; • Iden fy and emphasize urban parks that preserve, protect and restore cultural and natural resources; • Partner with private organiza ons and businesses for maintenance of urban parks, spaces and greenways; • Iden fy opportuni es to collaborate with State of North Carolina to meet local and city-wide needs for recrea on and open spaces; • Seek opportuni es for partnerships to enhance urban street tree canopy; and • Implement North Blvd. Park, Capital Blvd./Deveroux Meadows Park projects. Several ac ons listed above can be accomplished through the advancement of a plan, design and development of the future park. As one of the city's largest 'Growth Centers,' the en re study area is under pressure for redevelopment which includes proposals already under considera on by the City that include mixed-use. Relevance to this Plan: The System Plan includes iden fica on of a lack of access to neighborhood park as well as a series of recrea on ac vi es in the area. Due to the rezoning of most of the study area to mixed-use land uses, future residen al development will lack access to core recrea on ac vi es and facili es. The introduc on of residen al land uses at moderate to high density levels (3-7 stories with 10-50+ units per acre) will not only bring new needs to the area for park and recrea on space but will create unique urban challenges to providing these services.
19
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
Site
Figure 11 Raleigh Parks, Recrea on and Cultural Resources System Plan - Neighborhood Parks Access Level of Service Analysis
20
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
PROCESS ORIENTED DESIGN
City of Raleigh: Walkable Midtown - Midtown/St. Albans Area Plan Bridging the I-440 and rapidly growing 'Midtown' area of Raleigh, this area plan sought to establish a vision for the neighborhood as it transi ons into a mixed-use des na on for the region. At its core, the plan builds upon previous planning efforts and adds layers of sustainability, connec vity and housing affordability and types to the long-range vision. The plan includes seven (7) 'big moves:' • Crossing the Beltline (I-440): Adding two new mul modal/pedestrian crossings of the I-440 barrier; • Green Streets: Making Midtown streets more green (trees/plan ngs) and blue with improved stormwater treatments; • Connected Streets: Improving the network of streets for be er intersec on opera ons and bike/ped connec ons; • Serious Transit: Enhancing transit headway ming and connec vity to regional des na ons as the Midtown area becomes a housing and employment center for the City; • The Midtown Ring: Comple ng a network of greenway trails, complete streets and bike lanes that connect residents to des na ons through the area; • Midtown Waterfront District: Establishes a new waterfront mixed-use district along the Crabtree Creek area; and • Midtown Living/Midtown Works: Iden fies new areas where mix-use development can be ed to transit and open space near older neighborhoods. A highlight of the Midtown Waterfront District concept is the poten al crea on of a new signature 10-acre public space (Figure 12). The new park space would be mostly passive (poten ally not mee ng area recrea on/athle c needs), and e into the exis ng greenway trail. The acquisi on and conversion of flood-prone parcels along Crabtree Creek into a “storm-resistant park” provides mul ple benefits. Key benefits include: • The crea on of an iden ty-crea ng public space for the Midtown-St. Albans area; • A major amenity for the community, City residents, and visitors; • Dual servicer as a significant stormwater facility; • Removing the poten al for vulnerable development in a sensi ve, flood-prone area; and • The poten al for “greenway-oriented development” alongside the park.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
The project creates the possibility of a waterway restora on effort that improves the appearance and func on of the Crabtree. In addi on to performing that work, the city can support the Crabtree and the waterfront area by facilita ng the crea on of a “friends of” group that can provide enthusiasm and, perhaps, funding. Relevance to this Plan: The proposed Waterfront District park space is highly comparable in concept to the North Capital Boulevard Park. As noted in the Midtown Plan the new space would serve as a, 'place where urban life and ac vity will take occur along the water’s edge, a place that serves as a des na on. A restored and opened-up waterway, and a storm-resistant and runoff-absorbing park will combine with housing and retail to create a place unlike any other in the City.' North Capital Boulevard Park has the poten al to contribute even more of an impact for the City of Raleigh as it includes all the above, plus the benefits of serving as an educa onal center with the future adjacent high school and as a gateway elements for the northern downtown area.
Image of proposed Waterfront District (Midtown Plan)
Figure 12 Proposed new Waterfront District park space.
21
SITE LAYERS
Chapter 2
Site Layers
Parks have o en been planned and designed with a heavy reliance on the owner or managing agency to define ac vi es and programs intended for the site. The Process Oriented Design approach iden fied previously was developed to provide a means for the City of Raleigh to create a cohesive design that connects the future park to the surrounding neighborhoods. This is achieved through a systema c method of research and iden fica on of community needs through a review of complimentary plans, studies and stakeholder input. The following analysis u lizes review of natural and human-based condi ons and influences on the site.
View of Site from Capital Boulevard east bound. Image by Nick Kuhn
22
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
2.1 - Natural Floodplains/Floodways The Pigeon House Branch Creek forms a central spine through the future park site. The creek serves as a natural community asset but suffers from high impervious areas within the almost 2,900 acre basin that includes the northern half of Downtown Raleigh. Within the site, a minor tributary, Cemetery Branch, located in the eastern area of the drainage basin, meets with Pigeon House Branch. The site also is located near the confluence of Pigeon House Branch Creek with the Crabtree Creek which includes some of the largest expanses of protected floodplains in the City. Providing addi onal floodplain and floodway capacity within the park for stormwater would help reduce impacts from a highly impervious basin into the Crabtree Creek (Figure 16).
to a Pigeon House Branch bed or banks, disturbance to a wetland, placement of material within a stream or wetland necessary for construc on and temporary impacts. As an urban drainage basin, the Pigeon House Branch Creek experiences nonpoint source pollu on from storm water drainage (Figures 13-15). Through observa ons of the future park site, a no ceable amount of debris could be iden fied in the creek on several occasions. Sand bars and large debris fields were noted through the length of the creek within the park site.
Local regula ons include the Raleigh UDO, Ar cle 9.3. Flood-prone Area Regula ons which regulates new structures, addi ons or changes to exis ng structures, grading, filling, or any other man-made change within the floodplain. Most of the future park site falls within the flood-prone area (100-Year Floodplain) (Figure 17) and is subject to the city's Ordinance. The City has worked diligently in the past ten years to secure grant funding to purchase and remove many of the parcels and structures located within the 100-Year Floodplain in the future park site. The remaining parcels and structures are small with future poten al flood impacts minimal. A few parcels are located outside the 100-Year and 500-Year Floodplains, which will likely increase costs to purchase these sites and businesses due to their viability for con nued use without significant threat from flooding. Poten al design solu ons that directly interacts with the Pigeon House Branch Creek would require extensive regulatory review and permi ng. Surface waters and wetlands are considered “waters of the United States” according to 33 CFR Part 328.3 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regula ons. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers manages the permit review process for all proposed ac vi es that impact these waters under Sec on 404 of the Clear Water Act (33 USC 1344). Within North Carolina, the North Carolina Division of Water Resources issues all water quality cer fica ons according to Sec on 401 of the Clean Water Act (North Carolina General Statutes Chapter 143 Ar cle 21, Part 1). A Sec on 404/401 Water Quality Cer fica on would be required if there is any disturbance
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
View of Pigeon House Branch Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn
23
SITE LAYERS
Topography
Figure 13 Example of non-point source stormwater drainage into Pigeon House Branch. Image by Nick Kuhn.
The park site ranges in eleva on from a high point of 216 feet above sea level to a series of low points at 192 feet within the Pigeon House Branch creek-bed (Figure 18). The Pigeon House Branch Creek has a high low point in the southern por on of the park site at 206 feet and a low point in the northern por on of the site at 192 feet. This represents a total of ten feet of eleva on drop across the nearly 1/2 mile length within the future park site; however, the majority of the drop occurs in the southern area of the site. From the southern limits to the Fenton St. culvert, the creek drops eight feet in eleva on which represents a 0.5% channel slope while from Fenton St. to the Capital Blvd. culvert the creek drops a further two feet, resul ng in a less than 0.2% channel slope. The Pigeon House Branch Creek channel is typically 8-12 feet below surrounding grade. The creek has steep bank slopes which greatly reduces the floodway capacity for the creek as well as limits general access. Future design of the park may consider solu ons to reduce the steepness of the banks and increase both floodway capacity as well as provide opportuni es to interact with the creek safely.
Landcover
Figure 14 Example of non-point source stormwater drainage from adjacent parking lot into Pigeon House Branch. Image by Nick Kuhn.
The general landcover for the study area is high to medium intensity development (Figure 19) which is consistent with the imperviousness of the area. An important element for considera on in any design for the park is to increase the tree canopy throughout the en re site as much as possible in order to decrease the heat island effect in the area a ributed to the high level of pavement and non-reflec ve materials. The site can greatly advance the city's overall goal of increasing tree canopy in urban areas and can serve as a local pilot test loca on to document the benefits of reducing development landcover in areas.
Figure 15 Example of exis ng water pollu on in Pigeon House Branch Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn.
24
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
Six Forks Rd. Wake Forest Rd. I-440
Hodges St.
Atlan c Ave.
CSX Railroad
Whitaker Mills Rd.
Crabtree Blvd.
Capital Blvd.
Study Area Site Raleigh Blvd. Lions Park Wake Forest Rd.
Oakwood Park
Peace St.
Downtown
Figure 16 Drainage Basins
Pigeon House Branch Creek
Walnut Creek
Crabtree Creek
Big Branch Creek
Bridges Branch Creek
Marsh Creek
Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
25
SITE LAYERS
To I-440
Atlan c Ave.
Capital Blvd. (west bound)
Park Site Capital Blvd. (east bound)
Fenton St. To Downtown
Floodway
Figure 17 Floodways and Floodplains
Parcel Boundaries
100-Year Floodplain (1% annual chance) 500-Year Floodplain (0.2% annual chance) Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
26
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
To I-440
Atlan c Ave.
+204' +LP 192'
Capital Blvd.
+204'
(west bound)
Park Site
+LP 194' Capital Blvd.
+208'
(east bound)
+196' Fenton St. To Downtown
+200' +208'
+208'
+204' +206'
Figure 18 Topography
+HP 216'
0-200 Foot Eleva on
251-275 Foot Eleva on
201-225 Foot Eleva on
276-300 Foot Eleva on
226-250 Foot Eleva on Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
27
SITE LAYERS
Six Forks Rd. Wake Forest Rd. I-440
Hodges St.
Atlan c Ave.
CSX Railroad
Whitaker Mills Rd.
Crabtree Blvd.
Capital Blvd.
Study Area Site Raleigh Blvd. Lions Park Wake Forest Rd.
Oakwood Park
Peace St.
Downtown
Figure 19 Landcover
High Intensity Development
Developed Open Space
Medium Intensity Development
Open Water
Low Intensity Development
Forest
Pigeon House Branch Creek Drainage Basin
Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
28
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
2.2 - Human Historic Uses Prior to the 1930s, the future park site was used for agricultural land use as seen in Figure 20. During this period, the en re site was undeveloped with minimum tree canopy. The eastern boundary of the future park site, now delineated by east bound Capital Blvd., was formed by Old Louisburg Rd. which connected directly to Wake Forest Rd. Most of the study area was not annexed into the City of Raleigh un l between 1940 and 1959. The Seaboard Air Line Railroad, now CSX, is visible as well as the Wilmington line of the Atlan c Coast Line Railroad. The Pigeon House Branch Creek is visible with much of the alignment as today. Wake Forest Rd. can be seen leading north from an underpass for the Seaboard Air Line Railroad. By the late 1950s, most of the site was developed and the current alignment of Capital Blvd. had been completed Figure 21. The Woodcrest residen al neighborhood can be seen to the east of the park site while the industrial parcels are under development along Atlan c Ave. The area immediately west of the park site remained mostly undeveloped.
Figure 20 Aerial Image of study area, April 24, 1938. Park site is shown as red outline. Aerial by: USDA Historical Aerial Photos UNC Libraries, courtesy of the North Carolina Office of Archives and History.
The early 1970s marked full development of both the future park site as well as most of the study area Figure 22. Lions Park can be seen as developed in the southeast corner of the aerial. Most of the transporta on network was completed by this me, except for the Atlan c Ave. overpass of the Atlan c Coast Line. In review of building records for parcels included in the future park site, most structures were completed in the late 1950s through the late 1960s. Several of the original structures have been demolished as the city has purchased flood-prone parcels and demolished exis ng structures. Few of the original buildings from the 1950s remain in the park site, while the surrounding parcels are facing increasing pressures for redevelopment. Projects include the Dock 1035 (originally built in 1955 by A&P Grocery as a regional distribu on facility) and the Peden Steel site which has a proposed development by Grubb Ventures that will include over 200,000 SF of development and will introduce the first residen al units into the primarily industrial study area.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Figure 21 Aerial Image of study area, 1959. Park site is shown as red outline. Aerial by: USDA Historical Aerial Photos UNC Libraries, courtesy of the North Carolina Office of Archives and History.
29
SITE LAYERS
Exis ng Zoning Exis ng land uses within the study area have remained consistent for the last 50 years; primarily commercial and light industrial. Recently the zoning for most of the study area, including the future park site, changed through the implementa on of the City's UDO. Most of the study area has retained its primary land use such as commercial, industrial, or residen al; however the zoning was changed to include mixed-use op ons (Figure 23). The new zoning of the study area includes the following: IX-(Industrial Mixed Use): This district is intended to provide for a variety of light industrial and manufacturing uses while allowing for retail, service and commercial ac vity and limited housing opportuni es. To help ensure that land is reserved for manufacturing and employment, residen al uses are limited to the upper stories of mixed use buildings. The height is limited to three stories. This zoning includes the future park site and most of the parcels located to the west and north of the site. Figure 22 Aerial Image of study area, 1971. Park site is shown as red outline. Aerial by: USDA Historical Aerial Photos UNC Libraries, courtesy of the North Carolina Office of Archives and History.
NX-(Neighborhood Mixed Use): This district is intended to provide for a variety of residen al, retail, service and commercial uses all within walking distance of residen al neighborhoods. Height is limited to three stories. This zoning is primarily located south of the future park site around the intersec on of Wake Forest Rd. and Atlan c Blvd. CX-(Commercial Mixed Use): This district is intended to provide for a variety of residen al, retail, service and commercial uses. While CX Zoning accommodates commercial uses, the inclusion of residen al and employment uses are strongly encouraged in order to promote live-work and mixed use opportuni es. The height limit is seven stories for this zone. Two areas of CX zoning exist, at the parcels owned by Grubb Ventures located to the northwest of the park site and the parcels located to the northeast. This zoning allows for the highest level of development within the study area. RX-(Residen al Mixed Use): This is a mixed residen al district intended to provide for a variety of residen al building types and housing op ons at density in excess of 10 dwelling units per acre. RX Zoning can serve as a land use transi on between other mixed use districts and residen al neighborhoods. Height limits are up to three stories.
30
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
To I-440
Atlan c Ave.
Capital Blvd. (west bound)
Park Site Capital Blvd. (east bound)
Fenton St. To Downtown
Figure 23 Zoning
IX - Industrial Mixed-Use
NX - Neighborhood Mixed-Use
CX - Commercial Mixed-Use
RX - Residen al Mixed-Use
OX - Office Mixed-Use
R-10 - Residen al-10
Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
31
SITE LAYERS
To I-440
Atlan c Ave.
Capital Blvd.
Park Site
(west bound)
Capital Blvd. (east bound)
Fenton St. To Downtown
Figure 24 Future Land Use
PPOS - Parks and Public Open Space
BCS - Business /Commercial Services
CMU - Community Mixed-Use
MDR - Medium Density Residen al
NMU - Neighborhood Mixed-Use
LDR - Low Density Residen al
RMU - Regional Mixed-Use
Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
32
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
The following zoning is concentrated outside the study area and does not represent impacts to the development of the future park: R-10 (Residen al-10): Subject to the density restric on of 10 units per acre, R-10 allows single-unit living in a detached house with a minimum lot size of 4,000 SF and 2-unit living in an a ached house with a minimum lot size of 6,000 SF. Mul -unit living is also allowed in a townhouse or apartment building. OX-(Office Mixed Use): This district is intended to provide for a variety of office and employment uses while allowing for housing and ancillary retail. Height limits are up to three stories.
Future Land Uses Future land uses (FLU) for the study area are consistent with the recent rezoning of most parcels (Figure 24). Emphasis is placed on the area serving community-wide needs through mixed-uses with select areas of high employment of business and commercial uses. In addi on, the future park site contains the designa on of greenway lands along the Pigeon House Branch Creek with 50 foot buffers on either side of the creek. This further delineates the need for preserva on of floodplain within the park site. The following are future land uses iden fied within the study area and their descrip ons: (PPOS) Parks and Public Open Spaces: This land use type applies to permanent open space intended for recrea onal or resource conserva on uses. Included are neighborhood, community , and regional parks and greenways. Poten al greenway corridors designated in the Comprehensive Plan and subject to regula on under the City code are included. (CMU) Community Mixed-Use: This category applies to medium -sized shopping centers and larger pedestrian-oriented retail districts such as Cameron Village. Typical commercial uses include largeform at supermarkets, larger drug stores, department stores and variety stores, clothing stores, banks, offices, restaurants, movie theaters, hotels, and similar uses that draw from mul ple neighborhoods. Development intensi es could be higher than in Neighborhood Center areas, with mid-rise buildings as well as low rise buildings. Where residen al development occurs, ground floor retail would be encouraged and minimum building heights
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
might be applied in transit-rich areas. Heights would generally be in the three to five story range, although addi onal height up to 12 stories would be appropriate in Transit Oriented Development (TOD) areas and at the core of mixed-use centers. Note: The current FLU for the study area allows up to seven stories; however, long-range transporta on plans have previously iden fied the area as a transit emphasis corridor with planned BRT with enhanced bus transit as well as poten al commuter rail services. This could poten ally create the opportunity for TOD type redevelopment with higher densi es than currently permi ed by the City. (NMU) Neighborhood Mixed-Use: This land use type applies to neighborhood shopping centers and pedestrian-oriented retail districts. The service area of the type of retail found in these districts is generally a one-mile radius or less. Typical uses would include corner stores or convenience stores, restaurants, bakeries, supermarkets (other than super-stores/ centers), drug stores, dry cleaners, small professional offices, retail banking, and similar uses that serve the immediately surrounding neighborhood. Residen al and mixed-use projects with upper story housing are also supported by this designa on. Where residen al development complements commercial uses, it would generally be in the medium-density range. (BCS) Business and Commercial Services: This category is for higher-impact or “heavy ” commercial ac vi es that would not be compa ble with residen al uses, or that have loca onal needs (such as frontage along freeways, expressways, or other major streets) that are not conducive to mixed-use development. Examples would include auto dealerships, auto repair and service businesses, lumberyards, nurseries, contractor suppliers, warehousing, printers, truckstops, distribu on centers, and other uses that are quasi-industrial or highway oriented in character. Housing would be limited, but live-work units or housing combined with an employment genera ng ground floor may be permi ed in certain loca ons. Note: A significant amount of the parcels in the northern por on of the study area are designated as BCS future land use. This is likely due to the presence of access to I-440 via Capital Blvd. Though this uses exis ng transporta on infrastructure well, the best use of this land may be for the con nued development of a Community Mixed-Use Center and poten ally for Office and Residen al Mixed-Use as
33
SITE LAYERS
con nued high intensity commercial use is not conducive to adjacent CMU and High Density Residen al bordered by Atlan c Ave., I-440 and the future Six Forks Rd. extension. Further transi on of the BCS parcels to higher intensity mixed-use designa on could help resolve two deficiencies that Downtown Raleigh and North Hills currently have: limited large parcels for redevelopment with large flexible floorplates in the 5-12 story range, as well as the poten al to include affordable housing op ons within mixed-use development. (MDR) Medium Density Residen al: This category applies to garden apartments, townhomes, condominiums, and suburban style apartment complexes. and typically applies to older neighborhoods with a mix of single-family and mul -family housing.
Site Parcels There are 15 individual parcels that total 17.12 acres of land within the future park site (Figure 25). With realignment of the east-bound Capital Blvd. lanes to the west, an addi onal 2-3 acres of Right-of-Way (ROW) could be contributed to the park for a total of 19-20 acres of parkland. The following informa on provides current ownership and value data for each of the park site parcels:
1 1604 Capital Blvd.
Owner: State of North Carolina Acreage: 0.42 Taxable Value: $65,862 (land); exempt Ownership Since: 1983 1617 Capital Blvd.
(MODR) Moderate Density Residen al: This category applies to some of the area's older single family residen al neighborhoods, outside the general study area for this plan. Other housing types including townhouses and mul family dwellings would be consistent with this designa on as long as an overall gross density not exceeding 14 units per acre was maintained. Gross density in these areas would be 6 to 14 units per acre typically. The future land use found within the site is exclusively Community Mixed-Use (CMU) or Parks and Public Open Space (PPOS). The future park will require an update to both the current zoning and future land use designa ons during the planning stage to allow for the development of a neighborhood park. The overwhelming designa on of land uses allowing for mixed-use development within the study area and beyond indicates poten al for significant changes to the current development fabric of the area and the increase in urban lifestyle needs such as walkable streets, access to parks and recrea on, and access to groceries and other daily needs. With recent changes to zoning and future land use designa ons in the study area, over 199.2 acres of land now has the ability to include residen al land uses as mixed-use developments. Note: The Wake County Public School System purchased 10.9 acres of land zoned as Commercial Mixed-Use in 2016. Upon full realiza on of the current land development poten al for the remaining 199.2 acres between 3,985 (at 20 units per acre for all 199.2 acres) and 5,135 (with 50 units per acre for parcels currently zoned CMU and 20 units per acre for all others) addi onal housing units could be developed.
34
2 Owner: Truckers Terminal Two LLC Acreage: 1.1 Taxable Value: $153,985 (buildings); $360,086 (land) Ownership Since: 2015; built 1989 1611 Capital Blvd.
3 Owner: T&W Family Proper es LLC Acreage: Segmented from primary parcel Taxable Value: unknown Ownership Since: 2007 1621 Capital Blvd.
4 Owner: Truckers Terminal Two LLC Acreage: 2.04 Taxable Value: $455,322 (buildings); $799,758 (land) Ownership Since: 2015; built 1988 1625 Capital Blvd.
5 Owner: City of Raleigh Acreage: 2.44 Taxable Value: $573,944 (land); exempt Ownership Since: 2015 1719 Capital Blvd.
6 Owner: James Lee Acreage: 0.18 Taxable Value: $27,012 (buildings); $56,455 (land) Ownership Since: 1992; built 1968
7 1634 Capital Blvd.
Owner: Farid Najafi Acreage: 0.50 Taxable Value: $75,403 (buildings); $232,299 (land) Ownership Since: 1997; built 1969
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
8 4 Fenton St.
Owner: T&D Proper es Rentals LLC Acreage: 0.68 Taxable Value: $191,846 (buildings); $266,589 (land) Ownership Since: 2009; built 1967 1783 Capital Blvd.
9 Owner: Knox Land Development LLC Acreage: 1.6 Taxable Value: $85,801 (buildings); $533,174 (land) Ownership Since: 2014; built 2005 15 Fenton St.
10 Owner: Farid Najafi Acreage: 0.20 Taxable Value: $60,836 (buildings); $75,344 (land) Ownership Since: 2001; built 1958
11
1801 Capital Blvd. Owner: City of Raleigh Acreage: 0.21 Taxable Value: $86,241 (land); exempt Ownership Since: 2015 1817 Capital Blvd.
12 Owner: City of Raleigh Acreage: 3.32 Taxable Value: $1,301,591 (land); exempt Ownership Since: 2014 1827 Capital Blvd.
13 Owner: City of Raleigh Acreage: 2.67 Taxable Value: $1,046,745 (land); exempt Ownership Since: 2012 1831 Capital Blvd.
14 Owner: Maghadass Inc. Acreage: 1.11 Taxable Value: $230,674 (buildings); $435,168 (land) Ownership Since: 2016, built 1968 1839 Capital Blvd.
15 Owner: Center Investments (First Na onal Banks) Acreage: 0.64 Taxable Value: $379,053 (buildings); $250,902 (land) Ownership Since: 1963; built 1961 Total acreage owned by City of Raleigh: 8.65 (50% of park site total without ROW). All taxable values are 2018 figures.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Total taxable value of site parcels: $7,668,703 (40% currently exempt); The taxable income to Wake County for the parcels currently not exempt is approximately $41,871 annually. Through acquisi on of flood-prone parcels, the City of Raleigh has reduced approximately 40% of annual tax revenues from the future park site parcels. Many of the parcel are currently underu lized proper es which are conducive to redevelopment. Underu lized parcels are classified as non-residen al parcels where the improved value of land is less than 40% of the total value of the property. Approximately 91% of the acreage is currently underu lized proper es while a number of surrounding parcels also meet this criteria (Figure 25).
Transporta on Network The current transporta on network around the future park site is almost exclusively automobile-oriented with limited or no exis ng facili es for pedestrian or bicycle uses. Exis ng freight railroad is operated within the study area by CSX. The Capital Blvd. corridor has been engineered into primary commuter route into and out of Downtown Raleigh. The segment of Capital Blvd. between Wake Forest Rd. and Peace St. is the most heavily traveled roadway within the I-440 loop based on 2015 Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) figures by NCDOT with over 60,000 AADTs. The segment of Capital Blvd. surrounding the future park site drops in AADTs with 20,000 east bound and 19,000 west bound. Atlan c Ave. has a AADT of 23,000 while Wake Forest Rd. has 14,000 AADT. This shows that a high number of commuters use the Atlan c Ave. corridor to access Capital Blvd. into Downtown. Future transporta on op ons will expand significantly within the study area in the next 10-30 years (Figure 26). The following are planned transporta on projects within the study area: • Replacement of the Atlan c Ave./Wake Forest Rd. intersec on with Capital Blvd.; • Enhanced Bus Transit Service along Wake Forest Rd., Atlan c Ave. and Capital Blvd.; • Implementa on of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service with terminus approximately located at southern end of future park; • Development of a Cross City Greenway Trail along Capital Blvd. corridor;
35
SITE LAYERS
Future Raleigh Iron Works development
Future East End Market PD
Dockside 1053
To I-440
Atlan c Ave.
15 Capital Blvd.
14
(east bound)
13 10
Capital Blvd.
12
(west bound)
7
6 3
To Downtown
1
8
Future Wake County Public School System High School
Park Site
9 5
11 Fenton St.
4
2
Parcel Boundaries
Figure 25 Site Parcels and Underu lized Proper es
Underu lized Parcels
Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
Future School Site
36
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
Future Planned Commuter Rail Sta on Exis ng Capital Blvd. - 37,000 AADT
Exis ng Atlan c Ave. - 23,000 AADT
Sta on 1/ 2M il e
Atlan c Ave.
Se rv ice Ar ea
Exis ng West Bound Capital Blvd. - 19,000 AADT Proposed Consolidated Capital Blvd. Route
a St
on
1/
2
M
S il e
er
v
A ice
re
a Park Site
Fenton St.
To Downtown
Exis ng East Bound Capital Blvd. - 20,000 AADT Future Planned BRT Sta on Exis ng Capital Blvd. - 60,000 AADT Future Planned Traffic Roundabout Exis ng Wake Forest Rd. - 14,000 AADT
Figure 26 Transporta on Network
Future Park Site
Future Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
Automobile Routes
Exis ng Freight Railroad
Future Greenway Trail
Future High Speed Rail
Future Enhanced Bus Transit 1/2 Mile Transit Sta on Service Area
Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
37
SITE LAYERS
Six Forks Rd. Wake Forest Rd. I-440
Hodges St.
Atlan c Ave.
CSX Railroad
Whitaker Mills Rd.
Crabtree Blvd.
Capital Blvd.
Study Area Site Raleigh Blvd. Lions Park Wake Forest Rd.
Oakwood Park
Peace St.
Downtown
Figure 27 Imperviousness
76% - 100% Imperviousness
1% - 25% Imperviousness
51% - 75% Imperviousness
Pigeon House Branch Creek Drainage Basin
26% - 50% Imperviousness Data Sources: City of Raleigh, Wake County
38
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SITE LAYERS
• Poten al implementa on of a traffic roundabout at Wake Forest Rd., Brookside Dr., Automo ve Way, and Atlan c Ave. with pedestrian enhancements; • Poten al improvements to pedestrian facili es along Atlan c Ave., north of Wake Forest Blvd.; • Poten al commuter rail sta on at Whitaker Mills Rd. and exis ng CSX rail line; and • Poten al High Speed Rail corridor along exis ng CSX rail line. In addi on to the future regional transporta on connec vity improvements, the City will need to include requirements for addi onal neighborhood streets to help with the increased local traffic produced by new mixeduse development. Establishing a walkable street network for the area will help create a desirable new neighborhood for Raleigh and provide for improved walking and biking access to the future park.
Imperviousness The study area for this plan includes land with extremely high intensity of impervious land uses (Figure 27). Urban areas typically vary between 40-60% imperviousness which can be taxing to the storm water system as large storm events can create rapid urban flooding. Numerous areas directly adjacent to the future park site are at the highest level of impervious land use with over 75% of the total area consis ng of paved or roofed surfaces. The Pigeon House Branch Creek drainage basin has some of the highest percentages of impervious land uses in all of the Raleigh area and as such, experiences some of the most frequent urban flooding issues. The Pigeon House Branch Creek was channelized as early as the 1930s to minimize the floodway width of the creek. This, on top of the high imperviousness of the drainage basin has created a stream bed that will rapidly rise 10-12' from minor storm events. A primary goal of the future park should be to minimize the addi on of impervious surfaces within the park and to assist with crea ng addi onal stormwater storage capacity on the site. By crea ng addi onal stormwater storage, the park can help to reduce the rapid urban flood condi ons downstream while also helping to slow the velocity of the water, allowing for sediment and debris to se le.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Summary of Findings: Through the analyses of both human and natural systems throughout the Study Area, the following summary findings have been iden fied and should be considered in the design of NCBP: • Most of the future park site is a flood-prone area (100-Year Floodplain). • Addi onal floodplain / floodway capacity within the park would reduce impacts to the Crabtree Creek. • Impacts to Pigeon House Branch Creek would require extensive regulatory review and permi ng. • Steepness of the creek's banks should be reduced with considera on towards providing safe public access and/or interac on with water. • The park should seek to increase tree canopy as much as possible to help decrease heat island effects. • Few of the original structures from the 1950s remain in the park site, while the surrounding parcels are facing increasing pressures for redevelopment. • Repurposing of exis ng buildings such as Dock 1035 and the Peden Steel site, both by Grubb Ventures, may accelerate in the future. • Recent rezoning through implementa on of the City's UDO has resulted in the addi on of mixed-use zoning throughout most of the study area. • Between 3,985 and 5,135 addi onal housing units could be developed in the Study Area. • Pigeon House Branch Creek includes 50 foot buffers on either side of the creek, further limi ng future development opportuni es. • With realignment of east-bound Capital Blvd. lanes to the west, an addi onal 2-3 acres of Right-of-Way (ROW) could be contributed to the park. • Approximately 91% of the acreage is currently underu lized proper es. • Through acquisi on of flood-prone parcels, the City of Raleigh has reduced approximately 40% of annual tax revenues from the future park site. • The exis ng transporta on network around the future park site is almost exclusively automobileoriented with limited or no exis ng facili es for pedestrian or bicycle uses. • Future transporta on op ons will expand significantly within the study area in the next 10-30 years. • Establish a walkable street network for the area. • Minimize addi onal impervious surfaces and create stormwater storage capacity on the site to reduce the rapid urban flood condi ons downstream.
39
FRAMEWORK
Chapter 3
Framework
The design of great park spaces should begin with an evalua on of precedent sites. Though each park is unique, the exercise leads to the ability to iden fy lessons learned while also providing aspira onal and inspira onal informa on. Findings can also have direct impact on the development of the program and design of the future North Capital Boulevard Park. The following analysis iden fies lessons learned which contribute in the establishment of project goals, objec ves and recommenda ons.
LI le Sugar Creek Greenway, Charlo e, NC; example of a highly used and sustainably designed park space. Image by Nick Kuhn
40
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
3.1 - Great Parks
The Evolving Role of Parks
Great parks are more than just places to play. When careful planning and design come together, parks can provide tremendous environmental, economic and social benefits to a community and be beau ful at the same me. NRPA notes that in order to achieve this broad level of benefits, parks must be thought of more than just fixed places2. Great parks must be designed to balance the needs of all people for all mes. Eleva ng this ideal, parks should be designed with nature and promote the well-being of people while seeking to be financially sustainable for immediate and future needs. NRPA outlines several design principles, cultural influences and trends that contribute to the success of great parks, however, during the early stages of planning and design, three powerful principles can concisely capture the same intent:
Parks play an indispensable role in crea ng healthy, vibrant, and livable ci es and communi es that are capable of successfully a rac ng capital, crea ve talent and cultural assets within an increasingly compe ve global marketplace.
Inclusive: Great parks shall be inclusive and equitable. Through the design of welcoming spaces, visitors of all ages, cultures and genders must feel invited and safe. Parks that response to their physical and social surroundings allow for a heightened level of context sensi vity and flexibility to adapt to ever changing needs, therefore promo ng longevity within a community. As democra c spaces, great parks bring emo ons to visitors and create life-long memories to those that are affected.
Over the last 50 years, extensive research has been conducted on parks' roles in communi es. At the foreground of this research is Dr. Galen Cranz with the University of California – Berkeley. Dr. Cranz has studied the evolu on of parks through design, purpose and func on and has documented the benefits to communi es by segmen ng key transi ons into a series of park planning and design eras.
Beau ful: Great parks shall be beau ful. By weaving a community’s fabric of cultures together, great parks spaces are recognized by all and form a fundamental founda on to human purpose and experience. The integra on of meless design principles can o en bring long las ng impacts to the enjoyment of spaces. Whether through sensory pleasure elevated by the use of rhythm or propor on, or tac le experiences through the textures of a plan ng or the warmth of the sun in an open space, great parks intertwine emo on and pleasure within the quality of a space to bring about beauty. Sustainable: Great parks exemplify environmentally responsible strategies. Park spaces that focus on the three pillars of sustainability; environmental, economic and social well-being are o en resilient and maintainable through minimum reliance on resources and contribute mul ple benefits to community infrastructure and character. Crea on of great park spaces through a truly holis c approach, means designing a symphony between nature and humans. Through the embodiment of this principle, great parks work with the environment to serve all people and create an enduring legacy celebrated by users.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Over me, the func ons of parks within the American cultural environment have changed but with one consistent factor; the demands placed upon parks by communi es served and by community officials have consistently increased. The effort to iden fy the changing roles of parks is intended to elevate the design and func on of the future North Boulevard Park to maximize its roles in the surrounding community.
Over the last two centuries, parks in the United States have established a dis nct path that separates func on from European design roots. Beginning with the Pleasure Ground era of the mid-19th century, parks were developed to reflect a natural, countryside landscape but without the perceived dangers of the wilderness. With many of today's largest urban parks developed during this era such as Central Park in New York City and Forest Park in St. Louis, the vision was of civilized nature within
Example of Pleasure Grounds park, Jackson Park, Chicago. Courtesy of Chicago Parks District
41
FRAMEWORK
a city. Most parks of this era had a purpose of providing mental and physical reprieve from harsh and polluted city lifestyles. A notable downside was that few individuals, other than the wealthy, could visit these parks due to the lack of ability to travel the distances required. This led to many working-class residents having few opportuni es to enjoy the benefits provided by these new parks. As a brief but impac ul subset to the Pleasure Ground era, during the late-19th century, ci es began to harness the design principles and goals of the large parks and adap ng them to small urban parcels. The purpose was to bring the benefits of open space to where people lived, closer to the ci es. This adapta on was concurrent with a growing effort to promote safe places for children to play, out of the busy streets of ci es full of carriages and the newly invented automobile. With the purpose of parks expanding from providing a healthy reprieve from the ills of the urban environment to include social reform and assimila on of a growing immigrate popula on, a new movement in parks, the Reform Park, evolved.
With the rise of city planner Robert Moses in New York City, a new park era rose when he proclaimed, “We’ll make no more absurd claims about what can be accomplished with parks, but rather, fulfill the mandate to provide recrea on services.” This declara on which meant to limit the environmental benefits associated with earlier periods, ushered in the era of Recrea on that lasted un l the mid-1960s. In a striking opposi on to the early eras, parks were now a recognized governmental service. In order to build a healthy, physically fit genera on of servicemen, recrea on became a top na onal priority. Posi ve outcomes from this era were that park advocates no longer had to document the social reform and assimila on benefits to jus fy expenditures on parks. The downside was; boring parks with li le to no ar s c vision and extensive impacts to environmentally sensi ve lands that s ll plague many ci es.
Example of a Reform Park in Chicago, 1912. Courtesy of Library of Congress.
Example of a Recrea on Park at Jones Beach, New York City. Courtesy of Associated Press
During the Reform Park era, which lasted un l the early years of the Great Depression, a sharp transforma on of the design and func on of parks occurred. New parks were no longer located on the edge of ci es; instead many were bounded on all sides by streets and newly zoned residen al parcels. Parks were smaller with most ranging from a few city blocks square to a single block. The gentle planned countryside character of parks changed into symmetrical blocks of recrea onal ameni es that included athle c fields, courts and fieldhouses. For many of the working class, these parks were the first me a public space was provided close to their homes for a purpose other than working or transporta on.
As a symptom of the Recrea on Park era and the mandated governmental funding of parks, ci es began to experience difficul es in managing large assemblages of individual parks and miscellaneous proper es. A new ideology began to take root, one based on the influence of theore cal works by landscape architects and planners such as Ian McHarg and Jane Jacobs. This new approach was based on the concept that the aggrega on of parks and open spaces were a func oning ‘system’ of environmental resources, and when combined, these spaces have a higher recrea onal and social value to communi es. This era, called The Open Space System,
42
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
As the post-industrial economy has con nued to evolve and society has adapted, parks have become more than just recrea on ameni es that passively contribute to communi es. Parks and open spaces are now the economic drivers and place-defining elements at the core of communi es. Well designed and resourceful parks have become engines for a rac ng people and businesses seeking to benefit from a high quality of life.
Example of an Open Space System Park at Paley Park, New York City, Courtesy of Clifford Goodwill
promoted crea ve uses of parks with ar s c and social programming and an expansion in purpose of parks to include revitaliza on, civic par cipa on, and the arts. Dr. Cranz’s more recent work includes iden fica on of a new, emerging era for parks. Coined as the Sustainable Park era, this era expands the purpose of parks even further to include ecological health, resource conserva on, and psychological relief. Parks of this new era, marked by the beginning of the 21st century, seek to move beyond simply striking a balance between produc on and consump on of resources, and more towards becoming net-posi ve contributors to communi es.
Shi s in the priori es of the crea ve class, one of the key economic and social driving forces in post-industrial ci es, as defined by noted urbanist Richard Florida of the University of Toronto, have placed a much heavier importance on parks and recrea on opportuni es as a necessity for a high-quality of life. The changing trends in recrea on demand driven by these affluent, knowledgebased workers, coupled with the simultaneous impacts of aging popula ons, growing inequity among households, and the highest immigra on level in a hundred years, have resulted in the need for parks that benefit a wide spectrum of users that value parks as a cri cal component of their lifestyle. Parks con nue to evolve in response to ever changing needs of popula ons served, global health concerns, social unrest, strengthening environmental regula ons, limited financial resources and advancements in materials and techniques. Though the eras iden fied by Dr. Cranz provide a concise linear explora on of parks, the evolu on of park designs include a wide range of adapta on within each period. The following sec on evaluates two precedent projects with similar site condi ons, challenges and opportuni es to the North Capital Boulevard Park site. The parks selected highlight elements of the Sustainable Park era as defined by Dr. Cranz. The parks were selected based on a na onal search of urban spaces that demonstrate a high level of success measured through visitor feedback, professional recogni on through industry and communitybased awards, and innova on in design techniques and processes. Research included direct observa ons of each park site. Lessons learned relevant to the North Capital Boulevard Park project are iden fied at the end of each evalua on.
Example of a Sustainable Park, Canal Park in Washington DC, Courtesy of LandscapePreformance.org
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
43
FRAMEWORK
Case Study: Historic Fourth Ward Park, Atlanta, GA Reimaging Parks as Stormwater Infrastructure
Splash Pad at Historic Fourth Ward Park, Altanta, GA; Image by Christopher T. Mar n
The func on of Historic Fourth Ward Park (HFWP) can be outlined rather simply, the site serves as a neighborhood park and stormwater deten on area. However, the history of the site and complexity of its design and func on has made the park a new jewel of the Atlanta park system. The site is located adjacent to the Atlanta Beltline which spurred redevelopment interests in the Old Fourth Ward area including development of the park. The loca on was first known in the 1860s as Ponce de Leon Springs, a representa ve name for the site otherwise known as John Armistead’s beech grove which was two miles from downtown Atlanta. The early owner took advantage of the springs as a revitalizing source by charging 10-cents per visit and included transporta on via an omnibus from downtown. It was not un l the 1930’s that the area retained the name ‘Old Fourth Ward’ when the number of wards were reduced across the city. In 1903, the Ponce de Leon Amusement Park opened on the northern area of the future park site and included a theater, merry-go-round, penny arcade and restaurants. Adding to the a rac on of the area, the Ponce de Leon Ballpark opened in 1907 to the north of the current park. The ballpark hosted the Atlanta Crackers and Black Crackers un l the 1960s, both predecessors to the current
44
Atlanta Braves. Much of the current park area served as parking lot over the next several decades.8 Further development included the Sears Roebuck’s Southern Regional Distribu on Center which was built over the springs. The 2.1 million SF facility was the largest brick building by size in the Southeastern U.S. and operated un l 1987. Upon opening of the facility, Sears
1947 Aerial of northern area of park site. Large bulding is current Ponce City Market, Parking lot south of Ponce de Leon Blvd. is the northern extent of park. Aerial courtesy of Historic Fourth Ward Park Conservancy.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
hosted a farmer’s market on site un l the late 1940s as a means to showcase the area's produce and cra s and draw shoppers to the large complex. Between the 1960s and 1980s the demographics of the Old Fourth Ward changes drama cally, losing popula on, from a peak of 21,000 to only 7,000 by the 1980s. Increased crime, vacant buildings, and a cultural shi from urban shopping to suburban malls, brought about the end of the Sears Roebuck facility.8 In 1989, the City of Atlanta purchased the facility for $12M and operated it as ‘City Hall East’ un l 2001. Housing the city’s police, fire and 911 opera ons, the building was only 10% used. With rising maintenance costs and on-going issues with water damage from the springs, the City sold the facility for $27M in 2010 to Jamestown Proper es which launched Atlanta’s largest reuse project in history. The $300M redevelopment of the Na onal Register of Historic Places building opened in 2014 as Ponce City Market and included 259 apartments and over 1M square feet of retail and commercial office space.8
By 2008, the Historic Fourth Ward Park Conservancy was formed as a non-profit en ty to focus on the development, enhancement and maintenance of the park. In early 2009, ABI completed a redesign of the park and developed new phasing priori es. A team lead by EDAW/ AECOM and Arcadis developed a series of op ons for the park based upon local community input. The resultant Atlanta Beltline Master Plan: Sub-Area 5 for the Historic Fourth Ward Park included recommenda ons for phasing, materials, and program, therefore establishing a set of design guidelines for the future park.8 In late 2009, the first phase of construc on began and included a 2.5-acre lake and amphitheater located in the central por on of the park site. Within two years, Phase 2 of the park development began and included a splashpad, playground and skate park located in the southern area of the park. Future phases include acquisi on and construc on of addi onal parcels which linked two separate areas of the park in the southern por on together and create a larger 30-acre park.8
As a catalyst to the redevelopment of Ponce City Market, Bill Hisenhauser, a local stormwater ac vist, gathered a group of local residents in 2003 to discuss op ons for improving the stormwater issues of the Clear Creek basin, which includes the northern areas of the park. Tying back to the federal consent decree against the City of Atlanta to improve sewer and storm water issues, the group developed a concept that centered around development of a new 35-acre park which included a sustainable storm water deten on pond.14 Progress on development of a future park quickly took off. By 2005, Mayor Shirley Franklin formed the Beltline Coali on and a Tax Alloca on District, similar to a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) district. Working with the Trust for Public Land (TPL), the first ten acres were purchased and plans for an addi onal seven acres completed. In 2006, the City of Atlanta established the Atlanta Beltline, Inc. (ABI) to lead development of the 22-mile corridor adjacent to the future park site known as the Beltline. One of the first ac ons by the ABI was to establish the 17.5 acre Old Fourth Ward site as the first park of the larger Beltline project. In alignment with ABI, a communitybased planning group was formed which included area developers with interest in the park. The Park Area Coali on (PAC) worked directly with ABI to develop new plans for the park site, reduced from the original 35-acres and also secured a $8M dona on from the Woodruff Founda on for addi onal land acquisi on.8
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Concept 'A' for the Historic Fourth Ward Park adopted in March, 2009. Atlanta Beltline, Inc., developed by EDAW/AECOM, Arcadis and ADP.
45
FRAMEWORK
Areas of Innova on: Storm Water: Ini ally the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management es mated improvements needed within the Clear Creek basin to solve storm water problems with a cost between $40-70M. The Department planned to add an overflow tunnel adjacent to an exis ng sewer trunk and separate sanitary and storm waters to increase capacity from a two-year storm event to a 100year event. By 2003, influenced by ideas that emerged from the group lead by Bill Hisenhauser, a park centered around a storm water deten on pond evolved and was believed to achieve the same goals with es mated cost of only $23M.14 Far less than earlier gray engineering solu ons. At the center of the park, a two-acre stormwater deten on pond was constructed by the City’s Department of Watershed Management. The pond serves as the primary stormwater run-off deten on area and has a capacity to retain 26-acre feet of storm water. As a redundant safety feature against flooding, the pond is connected to the Clear Creek truck sewer which is a 9' by 9' culvert and included installa on of an addi onal 1,000 linear feet of 6' by 3' box culvert. Overall, the site has the capacity to detain stormwater flow for a 100year storm event within the 800-acre drainage basin, reducing the peak flow of the Highland Avenue Combined Sewer Trunk. Two horizontal lines of river pebble in the granite deten on basin walls mark water levels achieved by different size rain events. Flow into the Highland Avenue trunk is made by a 24” line which slows discharge. Backflow preventors were installed to ensure sanitary sewer water would not enter the park pond. 14
Temporary flooding at Historic Fourth Ward Park in 2014. Image by Historic Fourth Ward Park Conservancy.
46
In addi on to the stormwater deten on capacity of the park, the exis ng springs produce over 425 gallons of water per minute which is used for irriga on throughout the park. A ten-foot waterfall and a stone water cascade were developed to help aerate the recycled water contained in the pond.14 Though the design of the park includes a year-round deten on pond with scenic views, a top request during public engagement14, the water is not suitable for swimming or drinking. To discourage contact with the water, plan ngs include the use of prickly species to prevent human and pets from entering the water. Addi onally, most areas near the pond include barriers and cable railing. The lower walkways are designed to be temporarily submerged when a 100-year storm event occurs. Partnerships: A key contributor to the success of the park’s development were the partnerships and support groups formed with the expressed common goal of seeing the park realized. The ini al Park Area Coali on provided pro bono services to iden fy and nego ate the purchase of the first parcels for the park by TPL. The PAC had early support of City Council and the Mayor which resulted in quicker implementa on. Adjacent developers had long sought the city to take ac on in solving the storm water issues within the Clear Creek basin. Essen ally, redevelopment in the Historic Fourth Ward was being held back compared to the rest of the city due to high risks of flooding. By suppor ng the development of the park as a stormwater solu on, City Council and the Mayor were suppor ng redevelopment needs. With developer support, the city was able to realize several of its goals for the neighborhood: historic preserva on, job crea on and redevelopment. By 2016, the Old Fourth Ward neighborhood had already received over $400M in new private investment immediately adjacent to the park which represented an 800% return on invest for the city. Addi onally, the $300M redevelopment of the Ponce City Market represented the largest private investment in a reuse building in Atlanta. Figure 28 depicts the unique nature of the partnerships in support of the Historic Fourth Ward Park.8 Sustainablilty First: Star ng with ini al solu ons from Bill Hisenhauser and the local group, the idea of the Historic Fourth Ward Park centered around a sustainable solu on to the local stormwater problem. Begun with a typical approach to providing increased stormwater capacity and mee ng the terms of the federal consent decree, the project grew to include park spaces, na ve plan ngs,
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
scenic water elements and walking paths, resul ng in genera ng adjacent revitaliza on, high-density urban development and an innova ve solu on for a combined sewer overflow problem. This approach to solving storm water problems has now become a new standard for the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management to maximize infrastructure investment and focus on environmental, economic and social sustainability.15 The City of Atlanta and ABI received a Gold Envision Award from the Ins tute for Sustainable Infrastructure in 2016 for the project. The award recognizes the project’s unique approach to solving a common urban storm water problem while improving community livability in Atlanta. In addi on to the stormwater improvements, the award recognizes the resource conserva on of the project with use of na ve plan ngs and a self-sustained irriga on system with a 20,000 gallon cistern, along with the tremendous economic benefits the project has provided to the surrounding neighborhood.15 In all, the park is the recipient of over a dozen awards from such organiza ons as the American Council of Engineering Companies, American Society of Landscape Architects, the Urban Land Ins tute, U.S. Environmental Protec on Agency, and the Na onal Brownfield Associa on.
Bill Hisenhauser & Developers (Planning) Trust for Public Land (TPL) (AcquisiƟon)
Beltline Coali on (Funding, AcquisiƟon) Park Area Coali on (PAC) (Funding, Planning) Atlanta Beltline, Inc. (Funding, AcquisiƟon, Design, OperaƟons)
Top: Aerial from 1993 of the Historic Fourth Ward area. Bo om: Aerial from 2018 of same area, park is outlined in red. Aerials Courtesy of Historic Fourth Ward Park Conservancy.
Residents (Planning/Design)
Historic Fourth Ward Park
Historic Fourth Ward Park Conservancy (Funding, Development, Improvements, Maintenance)
City of Atlanta Council & Mayor (Governing, Funding) City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management (Funding, Design, ConstrucƟon) City of Atlanta Department of Parks and Recrea on (Design, OperaƟons)
Figure 28 Depic on of key partners and roles in the development of the Historic Fourth Ward Park.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
47
FRAMEWORK
Case Study: Li le Sugar Creek Greenway, Charlo e, NC Uncapping Nature
Independence Blvd. overpass of the Li le Sugar Creek Greenway, Charlo e, NC. Image by Nick Kuhn
The Li le Sugar Creek Greenway provides for a core func on, connec vity. Similar to the Historic Fourth Ward Park described earlier, the greenway balances its core func on with high-quality design and a focus on sustainable development and improved water quality. For these reasons, the Li le Sugar Creek Greenway serves as a stellar case study for North Capital Boulevard Park. The area around the Li le Sugar Creek was first se led by the Sugaree Indians in the 1600s. The closest transla on of the Sugaree name means ‘people of the river of water which is unfit to drink.’ Through a combina on of the Indian Wars and diseases, the Sugaree were weakened and forced to move with the Catawba Indians to a se lement closer to the South Carolina border. Following the reloca on of the Sugaree, Scotch-Irish immigrates se led the area in the 1750s and in 1768 established the town of Charlo e. Thomas Polk (Grandfather of US President James Polk) surveyed the original layout of the town.9,10 The Li le Sugar Creek drains a 51-square mile basin into the Sugar Creek and then the Catawba River. Its numerous tributaries range from seepage from the ground, to clear spring water from saprolite at the Hezekiah Alexander
48
House, located approximately five miles east of the current Li le Sugar Creek Greenway area.9 Gold fever struck the region in 1799 when the mineral was discovered in the nearby Li le Meadow Creek. Growth of the town occurred and in 1837 a U.S. Mint was founded in Charlo e. By 1849 the interest in gold shi ed to California and the region focused on co on produc on. As the new city grew, Li le Sugar Creek became the waste dumping area due to the city having no storm or sewer systems. The first sewer lines were laid in 1876 and the city did not open it’s first sewage treatment plant un l 1903. By the 1860s the first railroad connected Charlo e to the region with tracks along the bank of the Li le Sugar Creek, leading popula on to grow to nearly 5,000. With the focus on co on, the need to locally process the crop grew and in the 1880s the first mills were built along the Li le Sugar Creek. Land along the creek had been mostly undeveloped and was quickly turned into inexpensive housing for mill workers. Over the next several decades the creek served an u litarian use by producing power to mills, lakes were created for fire insurance purposes, and the creek con nued to be used as a dumping ground for industry within the city.9,10
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
In the 1890s residen al development grew around the Li le Sugar Creek as the downtown (Uptown) area became too crowded. Some neighborhoods were specifically built for blacks while others such as the Elizabeth neighborhood (circa 1905) were developed for the wealthy white industrialists. In the early 1900s many of the new suburbs were connected to the downtown area by streetcars. Most of the new development occurred within the floodplain of the Li le Sugar Creek. Landscape Architect John Nolen was the first person to suggest the crea on of a greenway along the Li le Sugar Creek in 1911 as part of his development of the Myers Park neighborhood. His vision expanded to include a citywide network of greenways connec ng all neighborhoods throughout the city.10 By 1911, flooding became a serious issue within the newly developed areas, leading the City to dredge the creek to create a 20-30-foot-wide by 8-11-foot-deep canal. The dredging also served to straighten the creek and allowed the city to ‘reclaim’ over 20,000 acres of developable lands along the Li le Sugar Creek and other tributaries. With the city and residents view of the creek as a nuisance due to flooding, the community con nued to treat the area as a wasteland. In the early 20th century the con nued sewage and storm runoff contributed to the creek having a vile odor. In an effort to mask the problem, the City hung perfumed barrels over the sides of bridges along the Li le Sugar Creek to cover the smell. Efforts to hide the smell also included the use of chlorine and regular fogging of the creek with DDT.9 By the 1940s, the City developed Independence Blvd. which crossed the Li le Sugar Creek. The City widen the arterial roadway in the early 1950s. The widening included the first efforts to completely hide the creek by piping it under the roadway. In 1959, the Charlo etown Mall by Rouse Proper es, opened along the creek and consisted of the first enclosed mall in the Southeast and only fourth in the en re country. A key feature of the mall was the further channelizing and covering of the creek. Unfortunately, the success of the Charlo etown Mall was short lived. By the early 1970s the mall was losing business to new malls in suburban areas. By the 1980s, even renova on of the mall could not bring business back and the mall because a discount shopping center and by the late 1980s most stores had closed. The mall was officially closed and demolished in 2006.9 As the Charlo etown Mall opened and then declined, a new movement started to take hold in Charlo e, a movement focused on the perils the community had
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Wayfinding signage along the Li le Sugar Creek Greenway illustra ng the Phase 1 area. Gray area in middle of map highlights the Metropolitan development. Image by Nick Kuhn
unleashed upon area streams and greenway. Not un l 1956 did the city enforce an ordinance that required businesses to treat their wastewater before spillage into area creeks. In 1969, the Charlo e News inves gated illegal pollu on along the creek and documented the milky and cloudy water common along Li le Sugar Creek. Even the City of Charlo e was a polluter, dumping untreated sewage into a tributary of Li le Sugar Creek. This inves ga on caught the a en on of a chemistry professor at Davidson College, Jim Mar n, who would later be a U.S. Representa ve for the area and served as North Carolina Governor from 1985 to 1993. Jim Mar n at
49
FRAMEWORK
the me was a County Commissioner and led the crea on of the Mecklenburg County Department of Environmental Protec on in 1970, two years before the federal Clean Water Act (1972). By 1996, the County approved a resolu on that established one of the most advanced stormwater management programs in the Southeast region.9 At the same me, a Charlo e City Council member, Jerry Tu le, became inspired by San Antonio’s River Walk and proposed an urban waterfront along the Sugar Creek. In 1974, the County studied the feasibility of developing a greenway trail system and by 1980 developed a master plan. The idea of a comprehensive greenway network through the County was first developed by Joan Sigmon as a student at University of North Carolina at Charlo e and called Sugar Creek Project 70. By 1991, Charlo e had con nued to grow around its urban core, unlike most ci es in the country, and the County was forced to update the greenway master plan to create new corridors. The update to the plan led to a successful bond referendum which provided $40M towards property acquisi on and construc on of the first sec on (12.5 mile) of the Li le Sugar Creek Greenway. With the funding in place, the County developed a 10-year growth plan and worked closely with the North Carolina Department of Transporta on (NCDOT) to complete the greenway which is part of the regional Carolina Tread Trail.9,10 In 2002, the first concrete caps over the creek were demolished and by 2006, the Charlo etown Mall and two blocks of channelized and capped creek were removed. Pappas Proper es, Ltd., proposed a development that included the Metropolitan, the City’s first mixeduse project. Pappas noted that the catalyst for their development was the restora on of Li le Sugar Creek by the County. The project was completed in 2012 and included the demoli on of the remaining cap over the creek, reloca on and upgrade to area sewer lines to allow for the dechanneling of the creek. This provided a more natural course of flow for a larger meandering stream and larger floodplain. The floodplain and banks were planted with na ve species allowing for stabiliza on of the newly reformed streambed and growth of wildlife habitats.10
Before and A er images illustra ng prior condi ons and stream restora on efforts as shown on signage along Li le Sugar Creek Greenway. Image by Nick Kuhn.
Examples of forebays along Li le Sugar Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn.
Examples of use of resilient materials within the floodplain of the Li le Sugar Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn.
50
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
Areas of Innova on Stream Restora on: The Li le Sugar Creek Greenway design u lizes techniques to create healthy and successful stream habitats while balancing recrea on access along the greenway trail and the aesthe cs of open spaces and plazas. The first phase of development includes three (3) dis nct and interrelated habitats for streams; the riffle, the pool and the floodplain as noted by the U.S. Environmental Protec on Agency (EPA). The riffle habitat is an area with fast moving water, typically over a bed of rocks and pebbles. This habitat is home to macroinvertebrates which are small organisms with no backbone and are typically visible to the nakedeye. These organisms include dragonfly, mayfly and caddisfly and are excellent indicators of water quality as these species can not live in polluted waters (EPA). The pool habitat is an area of the stream that typically contains deep waters (2-5+ feet) that slows the water and allows for a habitat for fish and macroinvertebrates that cannot swim and a source for food. The depth of the pool allows for a healthier environment for fish, par cularly during the hot summer months. Addi onally, pools are an excellent habitat for wading and diving birds such as ducks and heron (EPA). The floodplain habitat makes up the largest area of the stream habitats and is a dis nct ecosystem. In their simplest form, floodplains provide an area for flood waters to overflow. Benefits of floodplains include slowing down flood waters, reducing damage and filtering out pollutants. As a habitat, floodplains provide a natural environment for species to thrive with occasional inunda on (EPA). Together these habitats include the forma on of wetlands which improve water quality and provide cri cal habitat for plant and animal species such as turtles, aqua c insects and birds. Wetland plants provide food and cover for young animals while also providing a beau ful aesthe c along the greenway (EPA). The crea on of wetlands required extensive engineering to capture adjacent storm water runoff and improve its quality before reaching the stream. A key element to this was the crea on of a system of forebays, which are linear seasonal pools used to slow down storm runoff, collect large materials and trash, and reduce sediment. These features form the first barrier of protec on for a healthy wetland habitat. Turtle Mounds were designed as part the Li le Sugar Creek streambed to separate the forebays
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
from the deeper year-round pool habitats with an added benefit of wildlife forging along the embankments. During the restora on of the streambed, na ve plant species were used extensively. The na ve plants provide mul ple benefits through stabiliza on of the stream banks, shading for the stream, filtering of pollutants, and habitat and food resources for animals. Private Development: Similar in importance to the development of the Historic Fourth Ward Park in Atlanta, private developers were a key part of the comple on of the Li le Sugar Creek Greenway. Pappas Proper es noted that the County’s efforts to restore the creek was the catalyst for the redevelopment of the former Charlo etown Mall property. The benefit to the community was the construc on of the city’s largest mixed-used developments, at the me, complete with a corporate headquarters, retail, restaurants, and housing. While the focus on the County’s Stormwater Management Services may have been on cleaning up a historically problema c por on of the creek, the economic and social benefits created may even outweigh the ini al environmental goals. With the successful comple on of the 1.2-mile Phase 1 of the Li le Creek Greenway along Kings Drive, public desire for more stream restora on projects has increased significantly. The County updated their greenway master plan in 2008 and is again upda ng it currently (2020). The area around Phase 1 now consists of premium housing and businesses, year-round events such as weekly farmer’s markets and the annual Kings Drive Art Walk. Funding: The development of Phase 1 of the Li le Sugar Creek Greenway included an extensive partnership network and sourcing of funding. Along with Mecklenburg County and the City of Charlo e, non-profits played a significant role in the funding, planning, design and construc on of the project. These organiza ons include the Li le Sugar Creek Ac on Commi ee, Partners for Parks, Arts and Science Council, among many others.10 Funding for the $43M Phase 1 project included $5.3M from NCDOT for the greenway trail, a NC Clean Water Management Trust Fund (CWMTF) grant for $1.895M, a NC Division of Water Resources Grant for $575,000, public art dona ons of $500,000, with the most significant funding source being general revenue bonds for approximately $32M. Within two years of development of Phase 1, the project had a return on investment of over $120M, or 3:1 for every dollar spent on the project with private investment.9,10
51
FRAMEWORK
Lessons Learned Applicable to North Capital Boulevard Park The iden fica on of lessons learned is an important step in the evalua on of case studies. Lessons learned help to iden fy where other, similar projects have succeeded and failed in achieving goals or objec ves. In order to improve, learning from these lessons is vital. The following lists iden fy lessons learned from each of the two cases studies which should be carried forward in the future planning and design of North Capital Boulevard Park. Designing a Floodway in a Park: • U lizes techniques to create healthy and successful stream habitats while balancing recrea on access along the greenway trail and the aesthe cs of open spaces. • Include three (3) dis nct and interrelated habitats for streams; the riffle, the pool and the floodplain. • Design to include habitats for macroinvertebrates which are small organisms with no backbone and are typically visible to the naked-eye. These organisms include dragonfly, mayfly and caddisfly and are excellent indicators of water quality as these species can not live in polluted waters.
Examples of forebays along Li le Sugar Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn.
52
• Include a pool habitat that contains deep waters (2-5+ feet) that slows the water and allows for a habitat for fish and other organisms that cannot swim and a source for food. • The depth of the pool allows for a healthier environment for fish, par cularly during the hot summer months and encourages birds. • The floodplain habitat should make up the largest area of the stream habitats and is a dis nct ecosystem. • Benefits of floodplains include slowing down flood waters, reducing damage and filtering out pollutants. • The crea on of wetlands required extensive engineering to capture adjacent storm water runoff and improve its quality before reaching the stream. • Incorporate a system of forebays, which are linear seasonal pools used to slow down storm runoff, collect large materials and trash, and reduce sediment. • Analysis the capacity for stormwater in context to overall watershed. Designing with Flood Water: • Scenic views of the water were a top request from the public and integrated into the design of the overall park space. • Stormwater deten on is typically not suitable for swimming or drinking. • To discourage contact with the water, plan ngs may use prickly species or plants with thorns or dense branching to prevent human and pets from entering the water. • Use physical barriers and cable railing to discourage access to stormwater deten on areas, where needed. • Design walkways and public spaces within the floodway or floodplain to be temporarily submerged. • Efforts should be taken to use materials on submersible surfaces that can be power-washed or cleaned with equipment. • Include ar s c features such as rockwork, color banding, or other artwork which can measure or provide indica on of flood levels. • As a redundant safety feature against flooding, include overflow stormwater deten on areas or connec ons to stormwater drainage system. • Include a water feature that aerates recycled stormwater within a deten on area. • U lize a cistern (below-grade) for storage of filtered stormwater for irriga on use.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
• Include access to hose bids through the park for access to water to pressure-wash surfaces that have been submerged in flood water. • Include signage through out park to inform users of the dangers of rapid flash floods and to iden fy areas at risk of flooding.
• Obtain early support of City Council and Mayor to encourage quick implementa on of the project. • Poli cal support of the project many encourage future private investment through the public investment in infrastructure and reduc on in flooding risks. • Maximize infrastructure investment and focus on environmental, economic and social sustainability. • Partner with local and state water quality agencies to ensure design solu ons can achieve desired outcomes and enhance poten al funding sources. • While the focus may be to clean up a historically problema c por on of the creek, the economic and social benefits created may outweigh the ini al environmental goals. • Non-profits should play a significant role in the funding, planning, design and construc on of the project. • Target for a posi ve return on investment (ROI) within a defined period of me. • Promote the poten al for mul ple benefits associated with the project.
Examples flood warning signage along Li le Sugar Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn.
Design Using Na ve/Sustainable Materials: • Na ve plants provide mul ple benefits through stabiliza on of stream banks, shading for streams, filtering of pollutants, and habitat and food resources for animals. • Use of na ve plant species can reduce irriga on needs and promote pollinators. • Use of sustainable, flood resistant materials should be a priority. • Walking surfaces should be durable and made to resist slipping. • Include educa onal signage through out the park to inform visitors of the benefits of na ve, pollinator friendly plan ngs and wetlands.
Example of safe proximity to water using durable flood resistant materials along Li le Sugar Creek. Image by Nick Kuhn.
Harness Support: • Key contributors to the success of the park’s development should be partners and support groups formed with the expressed common goal of seeing the park realized.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
53
FRAMEWORK
3.2- Goals and Objec ves The future North Capital Boulevard Park has the poten al to evoke the history and natural features of the area with a linear stormwater and wetland system that balances environmental restora on with access to a neighborhood park and recrea on ameni es. The park should be an environmentally-sensi ve open space that minimizes its footprint through the incorpora on of low impact design elements such as use of recycled materials and the reduc on of and improvement to the quality of storm runoff for the en re Pigeon House Branch Creek basin. As a flood-prone area, the design of a full park storm water management system is a cri cal element of the future park. Increasing the capacity of the site's floodway through development of new wetland basins will reduce runoff into the Crabtree Creek drainage basin and improve water quality. In addi on, the management of stormwater runoff in the park can provide for the park's water needs through irriga on, fountains or other water needs. New residen al development within walking distance of the park will include unique urban lifestyle needs for open space and recrea on ameni es. Striking a balance between environmental restora on and providing access to recrea on should be a primary goal of the park through innova ve design solu ons.
A successful urban wetland park such as the Wilma H. Schiermeier Olentangy River Wetland Research Park in Columbus, Ohio provides an example of a learning environment balancing the unique urban needs for open space and trails. This 52-acre urban research site is situated adjacent to the Olentangy River and consists of two experimental wetland basins 13. Applica on of such solu ons to the North Capital Boulevard Park site with adap on to the local needs of the surrounding and future neighborhoods for ac ve and passive recrea on can be achieved. The goals and objec ves for North Capital Boulevard Park are organized into the three pillars of a sustainable community as follows:
Environmental Goals and Objec ves Goal 1: Design to reduce environmental impacts and where possible reduce impacts from surrounding proper es.
• Capture and treats runoff from the site and neighboring streets to reduce stormwater quan ty and improve water quality of runoff into the Pigeon House Branch and Crabtree Creeks. • Reduce potable water use by mee ng the park’s needs for landscape irriga on, fountains, etc. through stormwater reuse. • Reduce energy consump on by using exterior light fixtures that use less power. • U lize resilient materials and techniques to construct the park.
Example of an urban wetland park. Wilma H. Schiermeier Olentangy River Wetland Research Park in Columbus, Ohio. Image courtesy of www.wetlandsofdis nc on.org
54
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
Example of an urban greenway trail with vendor pads adjacent to a thoroughfare. Li le Sugar Creek, Charlo e, NC. Image by Nick Kuhn
• Divert material from landfills by recycling 100% of concrete, brick, block, and asphalt during construc on and demoli on. Goal 2: Designed to increase biodiversity in a sustained manner through enhancements and protec on of natural resources.
• Restore and re-create ecosystems which were historically present in the Pigeon House Branch basin. • Provide appropriate buffers to protect sensi ve environmental resources from incompa ble land uses. • Balance the demands of environmental restora on and protec on with ac ve uses of open space and recrea on. Goal 3: Support ongoing educa on and interpre ve learning experiences of the site's natural resources.
• Develop a stormwater management system that educates visitors to the challenges of water quan ty and quality management. • Provide interpre ve informa on on the restored and natural habitats, as well as the efforts undertaken by the City to implement these strategies.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
• Develop a strong learning rela onship between the future High School and the park to encourage outdoor learning laboratories. • Design and manage the park to encourage access to all types of water ac vi es and uses deemed appropriate and safe for public access. Goal 4: Strive to provide the highest water quality through the design and management of natural and man-made resources.
• Regularly monitor water quality to ensure acceptable standards are exceeded. • Develop a Pigeon House Branch watershed plan that iden fies ac ons and programs that can be undertaken to enhance the water quality in the site as well as running through the site.
Social Goals and Objec ves Goal 5: Promotes and ensures safe and enjoyable access for all park users.
• Minimize nega ve impacts and conflicts caused by transporta on uses surrounding the site.
55
FRAMEWORK
• Provide walk, bike, transit and drive-to access for all users to the site. • Ensure public access is not impeded or discouraged through redevelopment or development of surrounding proper es or transporta on infrastructure. • Provide a safe greenway trail route within the park. Goal 6: Provides year-round ac vi es and programs for persons of all abili es.
• Address the compe ng needs of providing access for area residents and the programming of communi es events. • Provide cost effec ve solu ons for hos ng special events that do not compromise the quality of the surrounding neighborhoods. • Provide complete accessibility to learning and recrea onal opportuni es throughout the site. • Develop well-designed and posi ve environments that welcome all visitors. • Design spaces for socializing and small group events. • Provide for opportuni es to incorporate public art into the design and func on of the park.
Goal 9: Provide mul ple benefits through leverage of the park's contribu ons to the community.
• Iden fy partnerships and volunteers for the opera on and maintenance of the park space. • Seek addi onal funding opportuni es ed to storm water management, environmental restora on and transporta on improvements for use to development and/or operate the park. • Harness poten al increase to property values to subsidize the development and opera ons of the park.
Goal 7: Meets the needs and challenges of an urban lifestyle for all ages and household types.
• Provide a diversity of ac ve and passive park and recrea on opportuni es that are appropriate for the site configura on and environmental sensi vity. • Include ameni es that meet the daily needs of an urban lifestyle. • Develop natural play opportuni es for mul ple age groups for children. • Create a park that strengthens the surrounding community image and sense of place.
Economic Goals and Objec ves Goal 8: Promotes a posi ve return on investment for the City.
• Document before and a er (at regular intervals) the economic benefits of the park space to the surrounding neighborhoods. • Manage revenues and costs generated by the park on an annual basis. • Generate non-peak revenues for the city from special events. • Analyze the poten al impact of the park on surrounding property values. • Contribute to the redevelopment and growth of the surrounding area to generate new or increased tax revenues.
56
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
FRAMEWORK
3.3 - Preliminary Site Program Through a methodical review of guiding documents, analysis of exis ng condi ons, review of case studies, and input from stakeholders, a preliminary site program can be established that advances the goals and objec ves iden fied for the park and study area. It is assumed that the program will be ve ed through a follow-up park planning process that includes extensive public involvement and led by the City of Raleigh at a future me. The program established here should be reviewed during the public planning process and prior to design if significant me between these phases exist. As the study area faces rapid redevelopment and site plans are reviewed and approved by the City, the poten al needs and priori es of new residents should be considered. As the program is ve ed through public involvement, considera on should be given during design to use materials and techniques for construc on elements that are resilient to frequent flooding and other extreme condi ons.
• • • • • • • • • • •
Outdoor classroom and learning laboratory; An interac ve fountain feature with universal access; Opportuni es to interact with creek and water pools; Na ve and drought-tolerate ecologically appropriate vegeta on; Canopy and street trees of mixed species; Vistas and overlook areas; Interpre ve signage and wayfinding; Public art elements and/or materials; Bike parking and repair sta on(s); Select area ligh ng for safety, access and security; and U lity hook-ups for special events.
The following are recommended programma c elements to be included in the North Capital Boulevard Park: • Environmentally restored Pigeon House Branch Creek with increased floodway and floodplain capacity where possible and appropriate; • Wetlands where possible and appropriate; • A con nuous Cross City Greenway Trail through the park; • Safe pedestrian and bicycle access and crossing points; • Hierarchy of pedestrian walking paths and sidewalks with various widths and/or materials; • Limit parking to on-site only; • Adjacent on-street and joint-use parking where possible; • Bridges or access across creek where required and appropriate; • Open lawn space for at-will recrea on and special events uses; • Shaded picnic spaces; • A variety of shaded sea ng loca ons and arrangements; • On-site restroom facili es; • Loca ons for day-vendors and/or food trucks; • Natural play features for mul ple age groups;
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
57
MASTER PLAN
Chapter 4
Master Plan North Capital Boulevard Park is proposed as a mul -func onal, mul -objec ve public space new to the park and recrea on system of Raleigh. Combining the aesthe cs of a beau fully designed open space with the infrastructural func on of stormwater deten on and water quality improvements, the park stands to provide mul ple benefits to the community.
Historic Fourth Ward Park, Atlanta GA. Image couresty of The Sintoses - Atlanta Beltline.
58
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
MASTER PLAN
4.1 - Master Plan The form and func on of North Capital Boulevard Park focuses on four primary types of spaces, each providing a specific role within the greater park. These are as follow: Stream Restora on At the heart of the park space is the restora on of the Pigeon House Branch Creek. Design is to include three (3) primary elements of a func onal stream: riffles, pools, and floodplains. The most extensive restora on centers on the forma on of a wide floodplain which provides a large amount of stormwater storage capacity. The design also includes the ability to improve water quality through trash collec on and filtra on, sediment control, and extensive use of na ve wetland plan ngs.
h ps://www.resourceins tuteinc.org/partners-1
Park and Recrea on Weaved into the open spaces created by the restored stream, unique park and recrea on elements provide for flexible uses of the park. These ameni es include a natural themed play feature, a universally accessible splash pad, restrooms, a lighted soccer fields, a basketball court, shelters, raised play mound, overlook bridges, extensive shaded sea ng, and a hierarchy of walking paths and greenway trail. Social Spaces Pockets of social spaces are highlighted with the park ameni es and include shaded sea ng, an amphitheater, outdoor cafe sea ng, food truck area, and shade sloped grass sea ng (next to soccer field). These spaces combine to create opportuni es for the surrounding neighborhoods to gather and celebrate community events. Addi onally, outdoor educa on classrooms are provided adjacent to a future high school site. Connec vity Mul -modal access to the park is one area that will make the park unique. Though the park serves primarily neighborhood-based needs, the area's future density allows for access by bus rapid transit, bus, poten al light rail or heavy rail in the future, vehicle parking, bikeshare, greenway trail connec ons, and pedestrian access via traffic calming techniques. The most notable improvement to the surrounding transporta on network is the consolida on of Capital Blvd. to the west side of the park, allowing for a two-lane low volume frontage street with angled parking adjacent to the park on the eastern side.
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
h ps://www.atlanta.net/partner/historic-fourth-ward-park/896/
Photo: Victor Strife/Laredo Morning Times
h ps://www.visitraleigh.com/plan-a-trip/visitraleigh-insider-blog/post/ citrix-cycle-a-bikeshare-program-for-raleigh-nc-is-now-rolling/
59
MASTER PLAN
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan The proposed concept for North Capital Boulevard Park contains over 20-acres of new park space for the City of Raleigh through the adap ve reclama on of flood-prone, underu lized developed proper es. The park provides needed space for community gatherings and athle cs for an adjacent future high school, while providing open space for surrounding parcels zoned for future mix-use medium to high-density redevelopment. At the center of the park, a restored Pigeon House Branch Creek contains elements that residents can interac ve with in close proximity while learning about the importance of wetlands and streams in our natural environments. An important element of the park is the consolida on of Capital Blvd. to the western side of the park and conver ng of the former eastbound lanes into a two-lane frontage street.
et W lan ds
Wake Fores t R d.
y Wa ve
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
on
60
mo
C re ek
c
to Au
r an c h
Se
Pig
us e B e on Ho
De nn is A ve.
MASTER PLAN M
pi t Ca
B al
le ou
va
rd
Infi l tr a on
Future High School Site
Se c on
Fen ton
St. Convergence of Eastbound Capital Blvd. to two-lane frontage street
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
61
MASTER PLAN
Wetland Sec on North Capital Boulevard Park Illustrates the cross-sec on of the southern educa onal wetland area with the restored Pigeon House Branch Creek.
Flood Capital Boulevard Pigeon House Branch Creek
Infiltra on Sec on North Capital Boulevard Park Illustrates the cross-sec on of the northern athle c field with infiltra on chambers underground for added stormwater capacity.
Capital Boulevard Pigeon House Branch Creek
62
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
MASTER PLAN
dplain Eleva on Automo ve Way (former eastbound Capital Blvd.)
Floodplain Eleva on
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Automo ve Way (former eastbound Capital Blvd.)
63
MASTER PLAN
Storm Water Storage Beyond the community benefits associated with a new park space, North Capital Boulevard Park makes advances towards a more sustainable approach to stormwater storage and water quality improvements. Within the park, there are three main stormwater storage areas; southern passive park space; northern athle c field space; and infiltra on chambers under the athle c fields (Figure 29). In total, the three areas provide for an es mated 4 million cubic feet, or 30.2 million gallons of stormwater storage, equal to 93 acre-feet. This amount of storage could reduce the peak a enua on of storm water for a one (1) inch storm event by 40% within the Pigeon House Branch Creek basin. Passive Park Area Storage The passive area stormwater storage is the largest of the three (3) spaces in terms of capacity. The intent is to contour site grading to allow for maximum above-grade stormwater storage using three (3) curved weirs designed to control the normal pool levels throughout the park. The weirs are located at the southern, mid-point and northern areas of the stream within the park. This area provides an es mated 18.3 million gallons of storage capacity.
Athle c Field Storage The athle c field stormwater storage is located in the northern half of the park and is of similar design as the passive area with a weir. One unique element of this area is the temporary inunda on of the athle c field and basketball court areas (12-24 hrs.) during storm events. This area provides an es mated 8.2 million gallons of storage capacity. Infiltra on Storage With the intent of maximizing stormwater storage capacity on site, the infiltra on area is located under the athle c field and basketball court areas and recommends use of a chamber system which provides 15% addi onal storage capacity than a typical round pipe system. This area provides for an es mated 3.725 million gallons of storage.
Ca
Athle c Field Area 1-3 . Inunda on
Au
to
m
o
ve
pi t
a
o lB
ul e
va
rd
Infiltra on Area
ay W
4-10 . Inunda on Passive Area
Figure 29 Diagram illustrates proposed inunda on areas for temporary storm water storage at North Capital Boulevard Park.
64
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
MASTER PLAN
Historic Fourth Ward Park, Atlanta GA. 2014 temporary flooding. Image by Atlanta Beltline.
4.2 - Next Steps In order to realize the poten al for the North Capital Boulevard Park, ac on items need to be defined and incrementally completed. Returning to the purpose of this report: Build upon the recommenda ons of area plans, studies, and ordinances to develop a master plan that advances the vision of the City and corridor; incorporate context-sensi ve design solu ons; highlight environmentally sensi ve landscapes through the restora on of the creek; enhance the public's knowledge of environmentally sensi ve lands and urban watersheds; outline community-wide benefits associated with urban park spaces; and iden fy future implementa on ac ons and responsibili es. Though the proposed design solu ons illustrated within this report are based upon research and analysis of the site and innova ons in design and materials, the final solu on will be different as public engagement is needed as well as addi onal technical exper se to develop a truly community-based design. This report is simply meant to elevate the poten al for the site to align with the importance and possible benefits that a holis c approach could provide. In order to begin the next steps, the following ac ons are recommended: • City of Raleigh should consider preparing an Area Plan for the study area defined in this report (or roughly equal to). The Capital Blvd. area between Wake Forest Rd. and I-440 has already experienced rapid redevelopment and exis ng zoning provides opportuni es for more density that could have tremendous impacts to surrounding neighborhoods and the north downtown gateway area. • City of Raleigh should consider developing a comprehensive feasibility study and master plan for the
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Retaining wall, Image by HDR.
North Capital Boulevard Park site to include extensive public engagement and recommenda ons on phased development of the project. Planning shall ac vely engage watershed and stormwater management evalua ons to maximize the poten al benefits of the site to the Pigeon House Branch Creek basin. City of Raleigh should con nue to collaborate with Wake County Public Schools in the planning, development and poten al integra on of the future adjacent High School. City of Raleigh should evaluate and if feasible, establish a special taxing district or Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District for the funding of future park improvements. Local business leaders and developers should promote the work of the City in development of a publicly supported master plan for the park and develop a 'Parks Ac on Commi ee's or 'Friends of NBP' group to leverage poten al future financial benefits and remaining land acquisi on needs. Friends of NBP or other community-based group should leverage available funding from City of Raleigh, Wake County, and State of North Carolina to obtain addi on private, non-profit and government funding sources. City of Raleigh should con nue to research advancements in design and materials to maximize benefits to surrounding neighborhoods and drainage basin, and u lize results as new standards for environmentally focused stormwater parks across en re parks system. City of Raleigh should be lead in the design and construc on of the park with community-based support for programming, opera ons and maintenance. City of Raleigh should document pre and post development condi ons of the site for comprehensive understanding of results and to iden fy lessons learned. Project should be registered with SITES program or comparable.
65
SOURCES
Sources 1- 1938, 1959 and 1971 Aerial Imagery via USDA Historical Aerial Photos UNC Libraries, courtesy of the North Carolina Office of Archives and History; Raleigh, North Carolina. h p://library.unc.edu/services/data/gis-usda/wake 2- Abbaté, Mike; Ford, Gina; and Webb Joseph, ' Designing the Great Park that Everyone Deserves.' NRPA, September, 2019. h ps://www.nrpa.org/parksrecrea on-magazine/2019/september/designing-the-great-park-that-everyonedeserves/ 3 - Cranz, Galen, "Changing Roles of Urban Parks: From Pleasure Garden to Open Space," Landscape Magazine, Summer 1978. 4 - Cranz, Galen and Boland, Michael, "Defining the Sustainable Park: A Fi h Model for Urban Parks," Landscape Journal, Fall 2004, pp. 102-120. 5 - Crana, Galen, 'The Poli cs of Park Design: A History of Urban Parks in America (Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1982 6 - GIS data developed by the City of Raleigh Geographic Informa on Services division. 7 - GIS data developed by Wake County Geographic Informa on Services 8 - Historic Fourth Ward Park Conservancy: h p://www.h4wpc.org/history-ofthe-area-park/ 9 - LiƩle Sugar: The Creek the City Loved to Hate, Keeping Watch, March 26, 2015: h ps://keepingwatch.org/programming/creeks/li le-sugar-creek 10 - LiƩle Sugar Creek Greenway Master Plan (2002); Mecklenburg County. h ps://www.mecknc.gov/ParkandRec/Greenways/Li leSugarCreekGreenway/ Documents/LSCG%20FACT_SHEET_.pdf 11 - NCDOT AADT Web Map, h ps://ncdot.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/ viewe r.html?webmap=b7a26d6d8abd419f8c27f58a607b25a1 12 - 'Nonpoint Source: What You Can Do?' United States Environmental Protec on Agency, h ps://www.epa.gov/nps/nonpoint-source-what-you-can-do
66
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
SOURCES
13 - Research: The Wilma H. Schiermeier Olentangy River Wetland Research Park, School of Environment and Natural Resources, The Ohio State University h ps://senr.osu.edu/research/schiermeier-olentangy-river-wetland-researchpark 14 - Podcast: Speaking of Design Ep. 2: How a Storm Sewer Project Became an Urban Oasis November 29, 2016. h ps://www.hdrinc.com/insights/speaking-design-ep-2how-storm-sewer-project-became-urban-oasis 15 - Sustainable Infrasturcture: h ps://sustainableinfrastructure.org/projectawards/historic-fourth-ward-park/ 16 - Why Parks and RecreaƟon are EssenƟal Public Service, NRPA. h ps:// www.nrpa.org/uploadedFiles/nrpa.org/Advocacy/Resources/Parks-Recrea onEssen al-Public-Services-January-2010.pdf
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
67
North Carolina State University
North Capital Boulevard Park Master Plan Study
Prepared by: Nicholas Kuhn, PLA, CPRP
