What are your thoughts on the Introduction, Subarea, and Standards?
There are too many subareas to fully grasp. It strikes me that MUCH of the area that is still standing should be part of a historic district. This is where Littleton basically started. 60 years ago the library was still a library and the Town Hall was still a town hall. I find, at least about the library, some dismissive language. Too few of the Carnegie libraries remain standing and this one should be cherished and protected. I support a stronger and more carefully enforced historic district. What used to be the Heckethorn building on the east end of main street just before what used to be railroad tracks is a good example of how to protect the historic facade and revive the inner life of a building. No matter how tempting, there must be a limit on restaurants and bars in the area without any other entertainment venues, other than drinking.
It would be helpful if the various zoning and codes referred to as links in the draft were actually links. Even though this is a draft those links are fixed and could be provided at this stage.
What are your thoughts on Section 1: Urban Design and Site Plan?
I have a problem with orienting to Santa Fe and general rules about orientation of entrances. That undoes the Carnegie entrance and ignores the fact that Santa Fe is a busy highway with limited access. One of the more idiotic things along limited access busy roads is business/restaurants doors facing the street forcing ALL customers to walk sometimes long distances in all kinds of weather. Orientation should depend on location.
YES, this is important 1.1.6 Subarea 3: permeable. Why is this a problem - 1.2.7 For any buildings with residential units, primary residential entrances from a parking lot are prohibited. This could mean long walks with groceries and other goods. 1.2.10 Each block face shall have multiple building entries - this is most unclear.
Have you been to Longmont? That is a more relevant example than many of the others put forth especially in use of alleys and providing parking.
What are your thoughts on Section 2: Architecture?
The charts before the narrative are pretty useless. That said, this is very important: 2.1.3N New buildings and additions to buildings shall possess an architectural character that respects the traditional design principles of older buildings along Alamo Avenue and/or Main Street. These principles can be applied to both commercial and residential buildings. I am pleased in general with the historic preservation/compatibility elements.
The discussion of parking garages is almost laughable. This is the CRITICAL problem and not one solved by standards.
The rest of this section is very dry but needed for the necessities of modern structures. At leas you don't have to design for outhouses. At least I hope not.
What are your thoughts on Section 3: Landscape Architecture?
3.1.1 Public and private open space shall be landscaped with a variety of plant materials and hard surfaces.
3.1.2 All areas of the site not covered by buildings, structures, parking areas, service areas, walks, bike ways, plazas and other impervious-surfaced functional areas, shall be landscaped. IMPERVIOUS surfaces should be, where ever possible be permeable. The increased cost is minimal compared to long term savings in stormwater requirements. This should apply to new construction and any reconstruction.
Not sure where there are private detention systems and drainage areas in the Downtown. The only ones I know of are city property and are nicely landscaped but not especially drought resistant.
All new landscape should be low water use drought resistant and designed to reduce heat islands [which mean NOT rocks and NOT pavement.
Lighting should be energy efficient but NOT the harsh white LEDs xcel energy favors. Some attempt to minimize light in the night sky should be attempted.
What are your thoughts on Section 4: Signs?
This is great specificity and it would be a shame to stifle all creativity in the name of consistency. Not sure where that amendment might occur but it would be nice to allow a bit a creative signage within general guidelines.
What are your thoughts on the Downtown Design Standards as a whole?
This is a fine example why I never wanted to be a planner. The detail is overwhelming and I think the plan needs to be very very careful not to destroy the variety inherent in an area that has grown and changed over more than a century. It would be too easy to impose a bland homogeniety on an interestingly diverse area
OpenLittleton is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in OpenLittleton is voluntary. The responses in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials.
Translate
What are your thoughts on the Introduction, Subarea, and Standards?
There are too many subareas to fully grasp. It strikes me that MUCH of the area that is still standing should be part of a historic district. This is where Littleton basically started. 60 years ago the library was still a library and the Town Hall was still a town hall. I find, at least about the library, some dismissive language. Too few of the Carnegie libraries remain standing and this one should be cherished and protected. I support a stronger and more carefully enforced historic district. What used to be the Heckethorn building on the east end of main street just before what used to be railroad tracks is a good example of how to protect the historic facade and revive the inner life of a building. No matter how tempting, there must be a limit on restaurants and bars in the area without any other entertainment venues, other than drinking.
It would be helpful if the various zoning and codes referred to as links in the draft were actually links. Even though this is a draft those links are fixed and could be provided at this stage.
What are your thoughts on Section 1: Urban Design and Site Plan?
I have a problem with orienting to Santa Fe and general rules about orientation of entrances. That undoes the Carnegie entrance and ignores the fact that Santa Fe is a busy highway with limited access. One of the more idiotic things along limited access busy roads is business/restaurants doors facing the street forcing ALL customers to walk sometimes long distances in all kinds of weather. Orientation should depend on location.
YES, this is important 1.1.6 Subarea 3: permeable. Why is this a problem - 1.2.7 For any buildings with residential units, primary residential entrances from a parking lot are prohibited. This could mean long walks with groceries and other goods. 1.2.10 Each block face shall have multiple building entries - this is most unclear.
Have you been to Longmont? That is a more relevant example than many of the others put forth especially in use of alleys and providing parking.
What are your thoughts on Section 2: Architecture?
The charts before the narrative are pretty useless. That said, this is very important: 2.1.3N New buildings and additions to buildings shall possess an architectural character that respects the traditional design principles of older buildings along Alamo Avenue and/or Main Street. These principles can be applied to both commercial and residential buildings. I am pleased in general with the historic preservation/compatibility elements.
The discussion of parking garages is almost laughable. This is the CRITICAL problem and not one solved by standards.
The rest of this section is very dry but needed for the necessities of modern structures. At leas you don't have to design for outhouses. At least I hope not.
What are your thoughts on Section 3: Landscape Architecture?
3.1.1 Public and private open space shall be landscaped with a variety of plant materials and hard surfaces.
3.1.2 All areas of the site not covered by buildings, structures, parking areas, service areas, walks, bike ways, plazas and other impervious-surfaced functional areas, shall be landscaped. IMPERVIOUS surfaces should be, where ever possible be permeable. The increased cost is minimal compared to long term savings in stormwater requirements. This should apply to new construction and any reconstruction.
Not sure where there are private detention systems and drainage areas in the Downtown. The only ones I know of are city property and are nicely landscaped but not especially drought resistant.
All new landscape should be low water use drought resistant and designed to reduce heat islands [which mean NOT rocks and NOT pavement.
Lighting should be energy efficient but NOT the harsh white LEDs xcel energy favors. Some attempt to minimize light in the night sky should be attempted.
What are your thoughts on Section 4: Signs?
This is great specificity and it would be a shame to stifle all creativity in the name of consistency. Not sure where that amendment might occur but it would be nice to allow a bit a creative signage within general guidelines.
What are your thoughts on the Downtown Design Standards as a whole?
This is a fine example why I never wanted to be a planner. The detail is overwhelming and I think the plan needs to be very very careful not to destroy the variety inherent in an area that has grown and changed over more than a century. It would be too easy to impose a bland homogeniety on an interestingly diverse area