Planning Comission Agenda

Meeting Agenda State College Borough Planning Commission

Regular Meeting March 26, 2015

Room 304 / 7 p.m.

I. Call to Order

II. Roll Call

Michael Roeckel, Chair man Anita Genger, Vice-Chair woman Zoe Boniface Charles Dumas Scott Dutt Jon Eich Richard Kalin

III. Approval of Minutes – February 12, 2015 and March 3, 2015

IV. Chair Report

V. Public Hour - Hearing of Citizens

VI. Community-Wide Planning

A. Centre Region Bike Plan

In May 2012, the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) designated the Centre Region as a Bronze-level Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC). As part of the application review and designation, the LAB provided the Centre Region Council of Governments (COG) with a feedback report that listed short- and long-term recommendations to promote bicycling in the Region.

CRPA staff worked with the COG Transportation and Land Use (TLU) Committee to identify and prioritize key actions that should be advanced based on the LAB’s recommendations. It was decided that preparation of a Regional Bicycle Plan would be advanced by COG on behalf of the Region’s municipalities, with the TLU Committee providing plan oversight.

In September 2014, CRPA staff provided a presentation to the COG General Forum, which is comprised of all Centre Region elected officials. As part of the planning process, CRPA staff will also be attending municipal planning commission meetings to introduce the plan and receive input.

At the State College Borough Planning Commission meeting, staff will provide an overview of the plan components and schedule; and review existing and

Planning Commission AgendaMarch 26, 2015 of 29

proposed facilities in State College Borough. As part of the discussion, staff is looking for input on proposed bicycle facilities and programs that should be considered in the plan. Plan adoption is scheduled for December 2015.

The following information items are attached to the agenda on pages 15-26:

State College Borough Bicycle Facilities Map

State College Borough Bicycle Facilities: Existing and Proposed

Centre Region Bike Plan Public Input Tool

Centre Region Bicycle Plan Schedule Planning Commission Action: Please review the information and provide feedback to the Centre Regional Planning Agency.

B. 2015-2019 Capital Improvements Program Review

The process for preparing the next Capital Improvements Program (CIP) will kick off at the end of March. In order for staff to begin drafting the CIP for 2016-2020, staff is requesting that several of the ABC’s review the previous CIP, for 2015-2019, and provide any feedback on the projects that were previously identified.

A memo outlining projects that may be of interest to the Commission from the 2015-2019 CIP is included on pages 27-28 of the agenda. The full 2015-2019 CIP can be found on the Borough’s website at:http://www.statecollegepa.us/documentcenter/view/9395 Planning Commission Action: Review the 2015-2019 CIP and provide feedback on the projects that were previously identified that may aid staff in preparing the next CIP.

VII. Downtown Planning - none

VIII. Work Program

A. 2014 State of Planning Report

Staff will deliver the draft 2014 State of Planning Report. This report is required by the PA Municipalities Planning Code and is a summary of 2014 activities completed by the Planning Commission and Planning staff. It is anticipated that the Commission will discuss the draft during the April 1, 2015 meeting and approve the final draft during the April 9, 2015 meeting. The final report will be forwarded to Borough Council as well as regional and county planning agencies.


http://www.statecollegepa.us/documentcenter/view/9395

Below is the link for the most recent draft of the report: http://www.statecollegepa.us/DocumentCenter/View/10348 Planning Commission Action: Receive the draft State of Planning Report. Review and prepare comments to discuss with staff during the April 1 regular meeting.

IX. Official Reports and Correspondence

A. Borough Council (BC)

B. Redevelopment Authority (RDA) C. Centre Regional Planning Commission (CRPC) D. Land Development Plans E. Staff Updates

X. Upcoming Meetings

Wednesday, April 1, 2015—12 p.m. Thursday, April 9, 2015—7 p.m. Thursday, April 16, 2015—7 p.m.

XI. Adjournment


http://www.statecollegepa.us/DocumentCenter/View/10348

Meeting Minutes

State College Borough Planning Commission

February 12, 2015

The State College Borough Planning Commission met on Thursday, February 12, 2015 in the State College Municipal Building, 243 South Allen Street, State College, PA. Chair Roeckel called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.

Members Present Michael Roeckel, Chair; Anita Genger, Vice-Chair; Zoe Boniface, Charles Dumas, Scott Dutt, Jon Eich, and Richard Kalin Also Present Edward LeClear, Planning Director; Anne Messner, Planner/Zoning; Meagan Tuttle/Planner; Denise Rhoads, Staff Assistant and other interested parties Approval of Minutes A motion to approve the February 4, 2015 minutes as submitted was made by Ms. Boniface and seconded by Ms. Genger. The vote was unanimous. Chair Report Chair Roeckel had nothing to report.

Public Hour No one was present who wished to discuss items not on the agenda.

Community Planning

Zoning Ordinance Review Mr. LeClear gave a brief update on the zoning rewrite. He noted there were a number of things to get off the agenda, such as, the Property Maintenance Code, Student Home Licensing and the Nuisance Property Ordinance. He stated, on March 16, he will be presenting to Council the Student Home Licensing. The topic will help lead into the zoning rewrite. Research on what other sister towns have done shows that there has not been a comprehensive update in many years. Staff will spend time to find additional resources. He discussed the budget and the deficit that needs to be dealt with. Also, he noted, there are many different thoughts about how the rewrite should occur. He stated that staff has been working on how to do this in an efficient way. Staff really needs to get a good sense on what kind of an updated is wanted.


Mr. Roeckel asked if there was anything that the Commission could do to help in anyway. Mr. LeClear stated he would discuss that later in the meeting. Ms. Messner gave a presentation on four zoning districts: Residential Office (RO), Residential Office Overlay (ROO), Residential Office (ROA) and Planned Office (PO). First discussed was the RO district established in 1975. This was a result of the discussion and the adoption of the 1972 comprehensive plan. She noted it was established because of concerns about the transitional area adjacent to the C (Commercial District) at that time. This district was adopted to address those concerns. Next discussed was the RO-O overlay established in 2012. The location of the overlay is the 200 and all of the 300 blocks of East Beaver Avenue to create more building diversity in that area. Next discussed was the RO-A district established in 1998. This came out of a portion of the R3 zone and most of these buildings contributed to the historical district. Some were razed for apartment buildings and it had some density to it. It limits density to three-family dwellings with no more than two bedrooms per unit as well as rooming houses. It also allows non-conforming existing buildings to be reused. Next discussed was the P-O district established in 1979. It is along University Drive. Ms. Messner noted she had found some minutes stating that there had been some agreements between the Borough and landowners to allow for office buildings. The zoning wasn’t in place to allow office buildings. This was an effort to have zoning and the land use match. Ms. Messner noted there is a little bit of variety in setbacks between districts. The RO district is emulating the historic character of those areas. Those are the older parts of town. Ms. Messner also noted there is a little bit of variety in height. It does increase a little when you are in the RO district. Ms. Messner stated all districts have to follow the current parking standards. Ms. Tuttle, briefly, went over the zoning district maps. Commissioners’ comments were:

Mr. Kalin asked if staff will be going back to square one or start cleaning up each district as it stands currently. Mr. LeClear gave a brief overview of what had happened in the past in the area he came from as a point of comparison.

Ms. Boniface stated she appreciates the order but, she likes the “hodgepodge” as well.

Best Practices Research Staff’s presentation included:

PC Research Project: Engagement and Partnership 1. Initiatives to foster positive relationships between student and long


long term residents 2. Strategies for community engagement in civic and planning initiatives 3. Examples of public-private partnerships for projects which benefit the communities’ development

Policies and Regulates 1. Policies to guide future land use and development 2. Model ordinances for sustainable community/project development 3. Model ordinances for visitability/ADA access 4. Strategies for comprehensive zoning ordinance, property maintenance

code, or other regulatory updates

Research Objectives 1. What is the topic/community issue that the research relates to? 2. What is the relevant solution? 3. In what community was this solution used? Briefly describe community

characteristics. 4. Who was involved in implementing this solution? 5. What resources were utilized by those involved? 6. What are the lessons learned that are applicable to State College? 7. Useful sources 8. Once a Commission member has a presentation ready, it will be

presented to the group as a whole. A PowerPoint will be required. 9. Some resources that staff uses are: American Planning Association

Research Logistics 1. Complete research by the May 4, 2015 PC Meeting 2. Prepare a brief PowerPoint outlining the information from previous

slide; plan to give a presentation during a future PC meeting. 3. Send staff the presentation by the Friday before the meeting during

which you will be presenting 4. Potential Resources to utilize: Google, new and social media,

American Planning Association (APA) resources, individual APA state chapter websites, Knight Foundation, Planetizen, PlaceMakers, 8-80 Cities, Walkable Livable Cities Institute, Smart Growth American, Form Based Codes Institute, Municipal & University websites, etc.

NCS Peer Communities 1. Will provide the Commission with information from the National

Citizen’s Survey, National Benchmarks and Peer Communities

Research Topics – asked the Commissioners if they wanted to volunteer to research any of these topics:

1. Initiatives to foster positive relationships between student & long-term residents

2. Strategies for community engagement in civic and planning initiatives 3. Examples of public-private partnerships for projects which benefit the

community’s development (Zoe and Rich)


4. Policies to guide future land use & development (i.e. smart growth, etc) (Charles & Jon)

5. Model ordinances for sustainable community/project development (Anita, Jon and Mike)

6. Model ordinances for visitability/ADA access (Jon) 7. Strategies for comprehensive zoning ordinance, property maintenance

code, or other regulatory updates (Jon) Official Reports and Correspondence

Borough Council (BC): Mr. LeClear reported Council approved the conditional use agreement for State High.

Land Development Plans: Ms. Messner reported there are no new land development plans. Staff Updates: Ms. Messner distributed an update for the Collegiate Housing Overlay. Ms. Tuttle discussed, briefly, the collaboration between the Penn State IST Department and Borough Partnership for the Geodeliberation Project. They piloted the community issue review process with many of the Highlands neighbors about the Highlands camera project. She noted that a second community issue review pilot has been launched to discuss the Collegiate Housing Overlay. The panelist are going to be studying this ordinance for the next nine days. On February 19, the panelist will meet in person to create a citizen’s statement. Ms. Tuttle stated, if the Commissioners’ are interested, they can forgo the regular PC meeting in order to attend the February 19 panelist meeting. A motion to cancel the February 19, 2015 meeting was made by Mr. Dumas and seconded by Ms. Boniface. The vote was unanimous. Upcoming Meetings Mr. LeClear reported there will be a joint meeting on March 4, 2015 with the Planning Commission, Borough Council and the Redevelopment Authority to discuss the request by Discovery Space to either gift or sell the Verizon Building to them.

Adjournment With no further business to discuss, on a motion by Mr. Dumas, this meeting was adjourned at 7:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Denise L. Rhoads, Staff Assistant


Meeting Minutes State College Borough Planning Commission

Joint meeting with the State College Borough Council and Redevelopment Authority

Tuesday, March 3, 2015 The State College Borough Planning Commission’s joint meeting with the State College Borough Council and Redevelopment Authority met on Tuesday, March 3, 2015 in the State College Municipal Building, 243 South Allen Street, State College, PA. Chairman Roeckel called the meeting to order at Noon.

Planning Commission Members Present Michael Roeckel, Chairman; Zoe Boniface, Charles Dumas, Jon Eich, and Richard Kalin Borough Council Member Present James L. Rosenberger, President; Elizabeth A. Goreham, Mayor; Thomas E. Daubert, Theresa D. Lafer, Peter Morris and Evan Myers

Redevelopment Authority Members Present

Sally Lenker, Chairwoman; Jawaid Haider, Vice-Chairman; Silvi Lawrence and Colleen Ritter Also Present Ed LeClear, Planning & Community Development Director; Anne Messner, Planner/Zoning; Meagan Tuttle, Planner; Denise Rhoads, Staff Assistant, Ed Holmes, Public Services Manager; Thomas Fountaine, Borough Manager, Terry Williams and Lisa Welsh, Borough Solicitors and other interested parties Approval of Minutes There were no minutes to approve.

Chair Report Chairman Roeckel had nothing to report.

Public Hour No one was present who wished to discuss items not on the agenda.

Current Planning

Joint Discussion of the Planning Commission with Borough Council and the Redevelopment Authority

The topics of discussion included possible future use of the following lot(s):

Verizon Building (224 South Allen Street)

Verizon Building with First National Bank Building (224 and 222 South Allen Street)

Allen Street parking lot (236 South Allen Street) Mr. Fountaine, Borough Manager, started by welcoming everyone in attendance. He stated this meeting was to lay out background information on this topic. He discussed the Downtown Master Plan (DMP) and how this topic connects to it. He gave a brief overview of this. Mr. Fountaine noted, in 2007, the Borough bought the Verizon Building. There was a letter of intent to sell the property to Discovery Space. Mr. Fountaine stated this was put in place in 2008. He noted, due to the economy, Discovery Space could not go through with the purchase. In 2011, Penn State University (PSU) asked to rent the space from the Borough. Mr. Fountaine noted there have been other offers for the site and he stated these would be touched upon during this meeting. Mr. Holmes, Public Services Manager, gave some site specifics which included:

Mr. Holmes noted a group toured the building last evening before the Council meeting.

The lot is 10, 560 square feet.

It is 9,000 gross square feet with 7,700 square feet of leasable space.

The lease rate is $10 per square foot.

It is located between the Jeramar Building and the First National Bank (FNB) drive-through.

Borough has completed lead based paint tests, asbestos abatement, fire alarm repair, HVAC repair, and annual insurance and permitting and miscellaneous repairs by the Public Works staff.

The Borough purchased the building in 2008 for $750,000 + closing costs.

The Borough, as the owner, incurred about $83,000 in expenses to date.

The income generated from rents to date is $354,580.64.

The current balance to the Capital Reserve fund is $402,611.38. Planning staff’s overview included:

In 1990, this was intended as a focal point to reinforce the community.

In 2002, the multiple concepts included: 1) a civic, institutional center, 2) entertainment, arts, and cultural center, 3) a downtown “core” with a greater mix of non-student housing.

It also identified future uses including a Children’s Science Museum.

In the 2013 plan recommendations, the plan was to focus on the 200 block of Allen Street as a family and locally oriented corridor.

The ideas were for infill or redevelopment of multiple sites between Allen and Fraser Streets.

The plan was also looking for clear and attractive connections between the Municipal Building, Schlow Library, Memorial Field, Sidney Friedman Park and Discovery Space.

The plan also included Allen Square Concepts: 1) FNB drive-through and Verizon Building sites become public open spaces, 2) infill development on Allen Street surface parking lot and the area behind Jeramar Plaza to redevelop the post office and infill Beaver Avenue lot, 3) some of the recommended uses included: 1) non-student housing, 2) family attractions, 3) senior center, 4) open space (plaza) and 5) an incubator, co-working space.

Current Proposals

1. Discovery Space is requesting the Borough gift the building to them. Or, consider a short-term lease arrangement while developing/locating a long-term permanent home downtown.

2. Development through public/private partnership: 1) Penn Trust has expressed private development interest, through a public/private partnership with the Borough, Discovery Space and FNB to redevelop 224 S. Allen and the FNB drive-through site, 2) condominium arrangement for tenants, and 3) upper floors to include residential and structured parking within the building.

3. Penn State University Economic Development Initiative: 1) Economic Development commitment to the University and Community, interest in an off- campus incubator, and 2) requested a five-year extension of the current lease for interim location while considering a long-term/permanent home for the space.

4. 3rd Revolution (Community Maker Space): 1) requested to be part of a community wide conversation about how a community maker space can be developed downtown, 2) model may encompass goals of PSU Economic Development Initiatives, Downtown Master Plan, Discovery Space, Schlow Library and other community partners, and 3) 224 South Allen Street being one tentatively identified location.

Next discussed, Review Process which included:

Current interest in this block presents a significant opportunity for partnerships to enhance downtown. These decisions will shape the next 30+ years.

When reviewing options for the block, some guiding considerations should be: 1) how closely is the proposal aligned with Borough Council’s Strategic Plan and Adopted Downtown Master Plan(s)? (At this time, Mr. LeClear noted staff provided a slip of paper at each members seat with the four options listed and asked them to prioritize the options based on their opinion). 2) what is the requested financial and/or strategic commitment by the Borough? 3) what is the proposed timeframe? And 4) does the proposal build on partnerships that can unlock the potential of this corridor, or preclude future opportunities due to a limited scope? Can the proposal be part of a phased approached?

Potential Council Actions:

Dispose of property through sale to the highest bidder.

Gift or sell property to a non-profit organization such as proposed by Discover Space.

Continue leasing building to current or alternate tenants.

Direct the Redevelopment Authority (RDA) to undertake redevelopment of 224 S. Allen Street (Verizon Building) only.

Temporarily lease 224 S. Allen Street to current or alternative tenants; direct the RDA to undertake phased redevelopment of both 224 S. Allen Street and Allen Street parking lot.

Mr. Fountaine stated the discussion schedule called for all four of the proposers to be invited to the March 16 Council meeting to present a brief overview of their proposal. Next discussed: Roles of Agencies: Borough Council (BC)

Consider consistency of proposals in the scope of financial and strategic commitments.

Owner of the property, responsible for decision on intended actions. Planning Commission (PC)

Consider consistency of proposals in scope of local and regional plans.

If the property were to be sold, provide a formal recommendation on the sale to Borough Council as required by law.

Redevelopment Authority (RDA)

Consider ideas in the scope of Community & Economic Development Goals.

If the property was redeveloped, property transfer to the RDA who would become responsible for the RFP and redevelopment site(s).

Timeline for the Review Process included:

Receive information on the site and proposals and approval to review the schedule was on today’s agenda.

Prepare a press release to request any additional community proposals.

The review proposals in conjunction with Council Work Sessions and give a 20 minute presentation of each proposal – March

Council will discuss proposals sometime in April.

Council will make a decision sometime in May. Planning Commission Members’ Comments were: Mr. Dumas asked if the side door of the building could be accessible. Mr. Holmes stated it would be hard to do that. They would have to rely on access through the Jeramar Building. Mr. Roeckel asked how much space Discovery Space is using now. Mr. Fountaine stated they are using about 4,000 square feet of exhibit space. Mr. Roeckel also stated, if the space was gifted to Discovery Space, there should be some kind of provision, if they decide to move, so that the Borough could reclaim the building. Mr. Roeckel asked Mr. LeClear what the maximum size of the building could be. Mr. LeClear stated it could be roughly 9 stories, with owner-occupied space and some commercial space. Mr. Kalin noted, the Borough, as the current owners, should take advantage of what they would like to see for this area. Mr. Kalin noted there is obviously a lot of interest in this site and he would be interested in seeing if we can tailor it into something that the Borough would like to see.

Mr. Eich asked if it is possible to have the Borough be the developer of the property and then have the architect decide what they would want. Mr. Williams, Borough Solicitor, stated it could be, but it would end up being cost prohibitive. Mr. Kalin stated, when hearing the proposals, if would be interesting to hear what these groups could bring to the table. Mr. Eich asked when the parking study would be completed. He thought they needed to take into consideration where the new parking garage(s) would be located. Mr. Fountaine stated the actual document is available. Mr. Eich commented that the redevelopment of this site might provide a stream of revenue through the RDA or some other opportunity. Ms. Boniface noted she attended a seminar in Baltimore and heard a lot of great ideas that, perhaps, our local developers don’t know anything about. She felt they needed to consult with outside groups. Borough Council Members’ Comments were: Ms. Lafer asked if the public/private partnership could maintain part of the property as public and then the rest could be maintained by the Borough with Discovery Space only taking up part of the space with some commercial and an incubator space making up the rest. She asked if 100 percent of the space must be bought by one entity. Mr. Fountaine stated, in this case, it is owned by the municipality and the RDA would have to prepare a proposal. Mr. Fountaine stated there is a lot of flexibility, currently, where the building is concerned. Mr. Myers stated having Discovery Space near the library is a good idea. He also likes the idea of including work-force housing and a PSU incubator. Mr. Myers asked if this is something that the PC could work towards. Mr. Williams stated the PC could put together a “laundry list” of what they want to see. Ultimately, it would go to Council for approval. Mr. Rosenberger asked if the RDA had enough flexibility to negotiate a good deal and Mr. Williams stated yes. Ms. Lafer stated, she felt, everyone was basically in agreement with the vision of a multi-use for this building. She agreed with Ms. Boniface at looking outside the area for consultants. Mr. Rosenberger asked what the current tax was on this property. Mr. Fountaine stated he believes it is exempt. Mr. Rosenberger asked why it is currently tax exempt. Mr. Williams stated it is tax exempt because the Borough owns it. Mr. Rosenberger stated bringing the three groups together had been very helpful. Mr. Fountaine stated there was a need to move forward on how they are going to handle this proposal.

Redevelopment Authority Comments were: Ms. Lawrence noted the bathrooms are not ADA accessible. She also noted that when you make a change in use there are costs involved for those changes. She stated she felt it couldn’t just be a turn over. Ms. Lawrence stated they should be conscientious in each of these proposals. Dr. Haider, who is on Discovery Space Board, stated he was very interested in diversity and noted they have an opportunity to contribute to art and culture. He also stated we also need to look at the long-term costs. Ms. Lenker, Chairwoman of the RDA, stated they needed to take their time with this proposal and do it right.

This joint meeting ended at 12:57 p.m. At this time, staff commenced with the Planning Commission’s Regular Meeting. Development Plan

Two Lot Subdivision of 625 North Allen Street, Sharon and Jeffery Hyde, owner, PennTerra, Inc., Engineer Staff’s overview included:

This single lot is proposed to be subdivided into two lots.

The lot, as it exists today, is .61 acres.

This would create one lot with an existing house and allow for a vacant lot that would permit a 1-family dwelling fronting Adams Avenue.

The house faces Allen Street.

The sub-division would be from Allen Street to August Alley.

There would be a 75 foot building for each lot.

The original lot was created when the land was in Ferguson Township.

It is a non-conforming property with a porch facing Allen Street.

It has a detached garage with the driveway closest to August Alley.

Toward the center is a paved area; both of these would be moved.

The owners, at a future date, would like to construct a new home.

The extent of the density is a 1-family dwelling with an apartment. Commissioners’ comments were:

Mr. Eich asked if the trees listed on the proposal were still there. Ms. Messner stated many along August Alley have been removed. Mr. Eich asked that these changes be reflected on the updated proposal.

Ms. Boniface asked if staff had received any comments from the neighborhood yet. Ms. Messner stated they received one comment so far.

Mr. Roeckel asked if this house had to meet any zoning criteria. Ms. Messner stated it did concerning the lot, but not the setbacks.

Mr. Eich asked if there were any concerns about storm water and impervious cover. Ms. Messner stated that for residential lots that are single-family lots, they are to maintain the storm water on their lot.

Mr. Eich suggested access off August Alley be preferable. Official Reports and Correspondence Borough Council (BC): Mr. LeClear reported Council met last night and discussed the student home licensing process. They also discussed beginning the Property Maintenance Code (PMC). They also discussed having a meeting with a small interest group sometime in April. Mr. Dumas congratulated Mr. Roeckel on his presentation of the Work Plan to Council.

Design Review Board (DRB): Ms. Messner reported the DRB met today and chose a Focus on Appearance Award recipient which was given to 126 West Marylyn Avenue. They gave staff the go ahead to print the updated Design Guideline. They also chose an Ingrid Holtzman award recipient and the recipient was the Centre County Festival of Arts. This does have to be approved by the Borough Manager.

Redevelopment Authority (RDA): Mr. LeClear reported the RDA met last week along with new Real Estate Advisory Committee (REAC). He stated they are in the middle of purchasing their first property. They will be looking at what opportunities are available. It has been an opportunity to see what changes might need to be made.

Staff Updates: Staff reported the CRPA is having a Planning Education series webinar. The PC was invited to attend. This Thursday, staff will present the Collegiate Housing Overlay to CRPA. Mr. LeClear thanked CNET for all their work regarding set up for today’s meeting.

Adjournment With no further business to discuss, on a motion by Mr. Dumas, this meeting was adjourned at 1:26 p.m. Respectfully submitted by, Denise L. Rhoads, Staff Assistant

322BUSINESS

322

322BUSINESS

45

St a teCo l l e g e

B o ro ug h

B i c y c l ePA

R o u t eG

AH25b

AC18

ASC1

AC14

AH6

AC16

AC15

AC17

ASC2

AC13

Fox Alley

Holmes St

N Allen St

S Sparks St

SGarner St

S Pugh St

Bigler Rd

Bigler Rd

Pollock

Rd

W P

rosp

ect Ave

Bellaire

Ave

Un

iversi tyD

r

University Dr

Un

ive

r sit yD

r

Has

tings

Rd

Oak Pointe Cir

W W

hitehall R

d

E Ir

vin

Ave

Calder W

ay

Sunrise Ter

Mifflin Rd

EFoste

r Ave

S Buckhout St

Shortlidge Rd

PeachAlle

y

Calder

Way

Calder

Way

SAllen

St

Shortlidge Rd

West

erlyPky

Wes

terl

y Pk

y

S Pugh St

SouthHills

Ave

Waupelani

Dr

SmithfieldSt

East

erly

Pky

Maple Rd

Blue Course DrE

Ham

ilton

Ave

So

uthgateD

r

S Patterson St

E Pa

rk A

ve

McCormick Ave

E Colle

ge Ave -

SR 26

Grace

St

Oakhurst Ln

Locust Ln

S Burrowes St

Fisch

erRd

Kemm

erer R

d

DAlleyF Alley

Allen Rd

S Gill St

H Alley

S Barnard St

Campbell Rd

Robin A

lley

W H

amilt

on Ave

Osage Alley

S Barnard St

W Fairm

ont Ave

WIrv

inA

ve

C Alley

E A

dams

Ave

Co

un

tryC

lub

Rd

Oak

St

Clay L

n

HollyA

lley

Keller St

Har

tsw

ick

Ave

Staffo

rdDr

Ro

sa Ln

Elk Alley

Nim

itz

Ave

Hill Aly

Ext

No

rma

Rd

Amelia

Ave

Hed

gerowDr

Ridge

Ave

S Corl St

Ellen A

ve

Sunset Rd

E M

itchel

l Ave

William

St

Oct

ober A

lley

Hill A

lley

W Mitchell Ave

Plaza Dr

Smal

l Alle

y

August A

lley

Ever

gre

en R

d

Ferg

uson A

ve

D Alley

Harley S

t

G Alley

Metz

Ave

A Alley

I Alley

Elm

Aly

W

Hamilt

on Ave

Marig

old A

lley

Logan Ave

Crestm

ont Rd

Iris A

lley

Wal

nu

tSp

ring Ln

S

Spar

ksSt

W D

oris A

ve

Lytle

Ave

Taylor St

Waypoint Cir

R oyalC

ir

W P

ark

Ave

Keller St

U

named

W R

idge

Ave

Un

a

m

ed

WillardSt

Marylyn Ave

Peach Alle

y

Duff Dr

Robin Rd

E Beaver A

ve

Logan

Ave

Clare

nce A

ve

Curtin Rd

OB

ryanLn

Fry D

r

Fraser St

Arb

or Way

Woodland Dr

Eisenh

ower R

d

Legion Ln

Oneida St

Doru

mAve

War

ing

Ave

McC

orm

ick

Ave

McK

ea

n Rd

Mck

een R

d

Osm

ondS

t

E Beaver A

ve - SR 2

6

Oa

k

Rd

Linden Rd

Saxton

Dr

Saxton Dr

N Alley

Hill

cres

t Ave

SR 26 Ramps

Crabapp

leD

r

E

White

hall R

d

B Alley

Bayberry Dr

Ba

ybe

rry

Dr

WFa

irmont Ave

Glenn Rd

Gle

nnRd

Lytle A

lley

Burrows Rd

Har t

Cir

ElmRd

Unam

ed

SmithfieldCir

Orl

and

oA

ve

W

hite

Cou

rseDr

Bicycle Facilities

Shared Use Path

Bike Lane

Bike Route

BicyclePA Route G

Proposed Facility

Municipal Boundary

Parks & PreservesMunicipal Open SpaceState Game LandsSchool District PropertyPenn State Lands

Centre Regional Planning Agency2643 Gateway Drive

State College, PA 16801814-231-3050www.crcog.net

State College BoroughState College - Centre Region, PA

Date: 3/19/20150 0.25 0.50.125 Miles

I

Bicycle Facilities DRAFT

STAT ECO LLE G E B ORO U G H


Centre Region Bicycle Plan Schedule 2/26/2015

Month Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Task 1 Project Kick Off

Task 2 Develop Plan Goals and Objectives

Task 3 Collect Existing Data and Review League

of American Bicyclists Feedback Report

Task 4 Bicycle Demand and Awareness

Task 5 Conditions Assessment

Task 6 Bicycle Network Development

Task 7 Non-Infrastructure Strategies to Increase

Biking

Task 8 Implementation Plan

Task 9 Prepare Draft Bicycle Plan DP

Task 10 Prepare Draft Final and Final Plan FP

Task 11 Public Involvement and Outreach

Public Meeting 1 PM1

Public Meeting 2 PM2

TLU Meetings TLU TLU TLU TLU TLU TLU TLU TLU TLU

BAC Meetings BAC BAC BAC BAC BAC

Municipal Meetings

COG Meetings COG COG COG

- Public Meeting

- Because of the academic calendar these months are not suitable for general public meetings

2014 2015 2016


2/26/2015


To provide input, go to: www.crcog.net/bikes.

Centre Region Bicycle Plan Public Input Tool – March 2015 1

Centre Region Bicycle Plan

1. On average, how often do you bike?

Daily

A few times a week

A few times a month

A few times a year

Never

2. How long have you been bicycling?

Less than 1 year

1-2 years

2-5 years

5-10 years

More than 10 years

I don’t bike

3. What type of cyclist do you consider yourself?

“Strong and Fearless” (I ride regardless of conditions.)

“Enthused and Confident” (I am comfortable riding on roads with wide shoulders, bicycle lanes, and easy to navigate intersections.)

“Interested but Concerned” (I am only comfortable riding on bicycle paths away from motor vehicles.)

“No Way, No How” (I have no interest in riding bicycles.) SKIP TO QUESTION 10

4. During which seasons do you ride a bike? (Please check all that apply.)

Spring

Summer

Fall

Winter




5. Why do you bike? (Please check all that apply.)

Commute to work

Commute to school

Shopping/Errands

Fitness

Recreation

Social activities

Environmental reasons

Other (please specify)

6. How far is your typical ride?

Less than 2 miles

2-5 miles

5-10 miles

More than 10 miles

7. Do you ever ride your bike to a bus stop and take the bus?

Yes – I park my bike at or near the bus stop.

Yes – I use the bike rack on the bus.

No

8. If you live in an apartment building, where do you park your bike?

Not applicable (Skip to question 10)

At a bike rack

In a storage unit

Inside my apartment

On the front porch





9. If you live in an apartment but do not park your bike at a bike rack, why not? (Please check all that apply.)

No bike rack is available

Bike rack is too far away

Bike rack is full

Style of bike rack

Potential damage to bike

Security

Weather


10. What discourages you from biking? (Please check all that apply.)

Lack of off-street bike paths Too many hills

Lack of on-street bike lanes Destinations are too far away

Inadequate shoulder widths/narrow lanes Lack of time

Bike facilities/roads are in poor condition Weather

Inadequate lighting Motorist behavior

Lack of bike parking at residence Bicyclist behavior

Lack of bike parking at destination(s) I have too many things to carry

Lack of showers and/or lockers at workplace I travel with small children

Too much traffic


11. Please select your preference for the following bicycle facilities, whether or not you bike.

Love It Like It Neutral Dislike It Hate It

Paved Bike Path (separated from streets and vehicle traffic)

Natural Surface Trail (separated from streets and vehicle traffic)

Bicycle Lane (separated by roadway striping)

Bicycle Route (shared roadway designated with signs only)

On-street Shared Lane (designated by “Shared Lane” markings)




12. Would the following improvements encourage you to bike more often, or begin biking if you do not bike now? (Please rate each improvement by the likelihood of influencing your decision to bike.)

Definitely Somewhat Neutral Not Likely Not at All

A more connected system (by connecting fragmented bicycle lanes and paths)

More bike lanes (separate lanes for bikes on streets)

More bike routes

More paved bike paths (off-street)

Wider outside/curbside lanes on major streets (easier to share lanes with cars)

Improved bicycle detection at intersections

More bicycle parking at major destinations and public facilities

Increased maintenance (sweeping/repairs to bike lanes, routes, and paths; landscape trimming; etc.)


13. Where are additional bicycle facilities (bike paths, bike lanes, bike routes, bike racks, etc.) needed? (Please provide specific location and description.)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

14. Please rate the potential effectiveness of each activity for improving bicycling conditions in the Centre Region.

Very Effective Effective Ineffective Very Ineffective

Education programs that improve motorists’ awareness of cyclists

Education programs that teach adults basic road bicycling skills

Education programs that teach children basic bicycling skills

Education programs that teach residents and businesses the benefits of bicycling

Programs that encourage children to bike to school

Programs that encourage residents to bike (Bike-to-Work Week, community bike events, incentive programs, etc.)




Very Effective Effective Ineffective Very Ineffective

Public awareness campaign focused on state laws that apply to bicyclists and motorists

Greater police enforcement of motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian laws

One-stop bicycle information website

Bicycle maps and guides

15. What do you think motorists need to be educated about?

16. What do you think bicyclists need to be educated about?

17. Other comments, suggestions, ideas:

18. What is your age?

Under 18 years

18-24 years

25-34 years

35-59 years

Over 60 years

Prefer not to answer




19. What is your gender?

Female

Male

Other

Prefer not to answer

20. In which municipality do you live?

College Township

Ferguson Township

Halfmoon Township

Harris Township

Patton Township

Borough of State College

Not sure


21. Nearest street intersection:

22. What is your Zip Code?

23. OPTIONAL: Please provide your e-mail address if you would like to stay up to date with the planning process for the Centre Region Bicycle Plan, including upcoming events and activities.

E-mail Address:

Thank you for participating! Results will be posted at www.crcog.net/bikes after all responses have been collected.


http://www.crcog.net/bikes

State College Borough Bicycle Facilities: Existing and Proposed 3-19-15

1

MUNICIPALITY TYPE NAME DESCRIPTION MILES

State College Bike Lane Whitehall Rd Bike Lanes Along Whitehall Rd from State College line to Ferguson Twp line 0.51

State College Bike Lane Whitehall Rd Bike Lanes Along Whitehall Rd from College Twp line to Ferguson Twp line 0.66

State College Bike Lane Garner St Bike Lanes Along Garner St from East Foster Ave to Easterly Pkwy 0.50

State College Bike Lane Waupelani Dr Bike Lanes Along Waupelani Dr from Atherton St to Whitehall Rd 0.99

State College Bike Lane West Foster Ave Bike Lanes Along West Foster Ave from Atherton St to South Fraser St 0.16

State College Bike Lane South Sparks St Bike Lane Traveling southbound along South Sparks St from West Foster

Ave to West Nittany Ave

0.08

State College Bike Lane South Sparks St Bike Lane Traveling northbound along South Sparks St from Westerly Pkwy

to West Prospect Ave

0.20

State College Bike Lane Allen St Bike Lanes Traveling southbound along Allen St from West Nittany to West

Hamilton Ave

0.21

State College Bike Lane Allen St Bike Lanes Traveling southbound along Allen St from West Irvin Ave to

Westerly Pkwy

0.21

State College Bike Lane Allen St Bike Lanes Traveling northbound from along Allen St from Westerly Pkwy to

East Foster Ave

0.48

State College Bike Route Westerly Pkwy Bike Route Along Westerly Pkwy from Allen St to Ferguson Twp line 1.18

State College Bike Route Garner St Bike Route Along Garner St from Bradley Ave to Easterly Pkwy 0.54

State College Bike Route McKee St Bike Route Along McKee St from Park Ave to Sunset Park 0.41



2


State College Bike Route East Foster Ave Bike Route Along East Foster Ave from Sidney Friedman Parklet to Garner St 0.39

State College Bike Route West Foster Ave Bike Route Along West Foster Ave from Sparks St to Atherton St 0.27

State College Bike Route Sparks St Bike Route Along Sparks St from Westerly Pkwy to Railroad Ave 0.72

State College Bike Route Gill St Bike Route Along Gill St from Orchard Park Bikeway to Railroad Ave 0.66

State College Bike Route West Prospect Bike Route Along West Prospect Ave from Sparks St to Gill St 0.09

State College Bike Route Allen St Bike Route Along Allen St from Atherton St to Easterly Pkwy 0.20

State College Bike Route Allen St Bike Route Along Allen St from West Irvin Ave to West Hamilton Ave 0.07

State College Bike Route Easterly Pkwy Bike Route Along Easterly Pkwy from Allen St to Garner St 0.61

State College Shared Use Path Curtin Rd Path Along Curtin Rd from Burrowes St to Atherton St 0.14

State College Shared Use Path McKee St to Curtin Rd Path Path from the McKee St/Park Ave intersection to Curtin Rd 0.19

State College Shared Use Path Sidney Friedman Parklet Path Path through the Sidney Friedman Parklet that connects South

Fraser St and D Alley

0.07

State College Shared Use Path Clinton Ave/McKee St

Bikeway

Connection from McKee St to the Ferguson Twp line 0.01

State College Shared Use Path South University Dr Path Along University Dr from South Atherton St to an off street

connection to Garner St

0.17

State College Shared Use Path Orchard Park Bikeway From Blue Course Dr through Orchard Park and along State

College Area School District property to Gill St

1.06



3


State College Shared Use Path University Dr Bikeway Along University Dr from East College Ave to College Twp line 0.30

State College Shared Use Path South Atherton St Bikeway Along South Atherton St from University Dr to College Twp line 0.18

State College Shared Use Path Blue and White Trail Section of the trail from Ferguson Twp line to West Campus Dr 0.03

State College Shared Use Path Tudek/Circleville Bikeway Section of the trail near Hillcrest Ave to the Ferguson Twp line 0.12

State College Shared Use Path Tudek/Circleville Bikeway Section of the bikeway located on Radio Park Elementary School

property

0.14

State College Shared Use Path Blue and White Trail Along North Atherton St from Curtin Rd to West Park Ave and

along West Park Ave from North Atherton St to the Ferguson

Twp line

0.70

State College Proposed Facility SC1 West End Bike

Improvements

Connection from Gill St to West Campus - PennDOT Multimodal

Project

0.08

State College Proposed Facility SC2 Blue Course Dr Path Along Blue Course Dr from Bayberry to Whitehall Rd - Potential

Capital Improvement Project

0.34


STATE COLLEGE BOROUGH

interoffice

MEMORANDUM PLANNING DEPARTMENT

to: State College Planning Commission

from: Planning Staff

subject: Considerations for the 2016-2020 Capital Improvements Program

date: March 26, 2015

The Planning Commission has been requested to review the 2015-2019 Capital Improvements Plan(CIP) and provide comments on project revisions could be included in the 2016-2020 plan. The 2015-2019 CIP is available at: http://www.statecollegepa.us/DocumentCenter/View/9395. Staff has highlighted several projects below that the Planning Commission may be interested in. Commissioners are asked to review the following projects and prepare comments for staff for the meeting on March 26, 2015. These comments will be taken under advisement as Borough staff works to prepare the draft 2016-2020 CIP. 2015-2019 CIP Projects:

1. OP053a West End Transportation Infrastructure: This project calls for a pedestrian and bike connection at either N Sparks or N Gill Street to connect to West Campus. This is proposed for construction in 2016, and the Borough as received a grant from PennDOT to complete this project. At this time, staff believes this project is on schedule. The project also calls for implementation of streetscape enhancements along the north side of College Avenue from Atherton to Buckhout in 2017. Staff is working with Ferguson Township staff to determine a time frame for W College Avenue improvements to see if there is an opportunity for collaboration on grants or construction cycles.

2. OP053d West End Redevelopment Projects: This project calls for a catalyst redevelopment project through a public private partnership to be designed in 2016 and implemented in 2017. Due to current discussions regarding the former Verizon Building, several options are available for updating this project. Anticipating a decision by Council to pursue a redevelopment strategy for the Allen Street corridor, staff is recommending the following changes to this item. Should the Borough decide to sell or lease the former Verizon building, the changes below are not applicable.

a. OP053d Redevelopment Projects: recommended change of name to incorporate all redevelopment activities

b. Include funding for design & engineering, and construction activities, for a phased redevelopment strategy for the 200 block of S. Allen St. in 2016 and 2017.

c. Move funding for design and construction of a West End catalyst project to 2019-2020.


http://www.statecollegepa.us/DocumentCenter/View/9395

3. OP142 Downtown Infrastructure Improvements: This project calls for catalyst projects from the 2013 Downtown Master Plan to be designed and implemented over the next five years. Over the next year, staff will be coordinating a phased approach for implementing these changes, taking into consideration both public and private construction activities, and routine maintenance. This comprehensive strategy will better phase the following list of projects, and work to vet the schedule with the Downtown businesses. In order to allow appropriate timing for completing this phasing plan and funding schedule, staff will likely update this project to include two years, 2017-2018, with major improvements scheduled as a placeholder until a more accurate plan is prepared. Projects to coordinate with this updated schedule include:

OP053a: West End Transportation Infrastructure

OP053d: Redevelopment Projects

PF152: Pugh Garage Replacement

PF137: Fraser Garage Maintenance/MLK Plaza Upgrades/Fraser St Plaza

ST002: Street Resurfacing

ST021: CBD Streetlights

ST022: Intersection Safety Improvements

4. ST021 Central Business District Streetlights: This includes the installation of handicap ramps and replacement street lights throughout downtown each year.

5. PF137 Fraser Garage Updates/MLK Plaza Upgrades/Fraser Plaza Construction: This project includes the completion of design and construction documents for the open space at the northeast corner of Beaver Avenue and Fraser Street in 2016. It also includes necessary upgrades to the current MLK Plaza, including the replacement of brick pavers and removal of a concrete canopy attached to the Fraser Street parking deck. Updates to the elevators and other structural elements of the Fraser Street parking deck are also scheduled.

6. PF152 Pugh Garage Replacement: This project includes the purchase of land, design and construction of a new parking garage in Downtown, with funding originally set for 2017. Due to unanticipated delays in the Borough’s parking study, and potential strategies for alternatives, this project may be modified in the 2016-2020 CIP.

7. OP254 Zoning Ordinance Rewrite: The purpose of this project is to prepare a new Zoning Ordinance for the Borough in order to bring up-to-date the regulations and remove inconsistencies. The plan calls for the funding of this project in 2016. The Borough hopes to receive a grant to offset the cost of the project. Staff has increased the General Fund request for this project due to research on the cost of similar projects in other communities.


Stormwater Management Issues in the Spring Creek Watershed

Thursday, May 21 20158:00 AM to 4:00 PM

at theCentre County/Penn State Visitor Center Auditorium

800 East Park Ave, State College, PA

Free public seminar sponsored by the Penn State Office of Physical Plant

Seminar Topics:

• Introduction to stormwater and how local stormwaterprograms work together – Scott Brown, NTM Engineering

• Flooding in State College, why it happens, and how do we fix it – Larry Fennessey, PSU

• The local MS4 programs – Amy Kerner, State College Borough

• The great things in State College that protect stormwater –Katie Ombalski, Clearwater Conservancy

• Green Infrastructure and its applications in State College – Katie Blansett, PHRC

• Understanding erosion control, what it can and can’t do –Don Franson, Harris Township

• Protecting Groundwater – David Yoxtheimer, Penn State Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research

• Understanding thermal and water quality impacts to cold water streams – Bob Carline, USGS retired

To reserve your spot go to:http://sustainability.psu.edu/stormwater

or call (814) 863-3345RSVP required by May 8th, 2015

6 PDHs available and lunch providedRegistration limited to 120


Planning Comission Agenda

Documents

Transcript of Planning Comission Agenda