On Tuesday night, MW Steele returned to the Tower District to present a first draft of a redesigned Tower streetscape. The draft design is in part the result of a design charrette that Steele and the city put on last Saturday.
Tuesday night was a good chance for us to get more information about the process Steele used to take the input from the charrette and come up with a design. It turns out that after the charrette was over, Mark Steele and Diego Velasco stayed in Fresno to look at the results. For example, they showed us pictures of them laying out and looking over our designs in the corridor of their hotel.
Steele definitely showed that they are serious about community input for their design. They broke the charrette results down into a list showing how many tables asked for what features. They also came up with six guiding principles that any design should follow (e.g. historical continuity, pedestrian friendly, etc.).
One of the most intriguing items they presented was an interpretation of the unique layout of Tower streets. They called it “The Zipper,” referring to the way north south streets do not cross directly over Olive Avenue, but instead dog-leg, creating a zipper pattern when viewed from above. The only streets that go straight through are Van Ness and Wishon, the old streetcar routes.
Steele presented one design rather than a set of alternatives, apparently because the input seemed to lead in one clear direction. The major features are a north-south pedestrian corridor from Fulton just south of Olive to the businesses along Fern Street, liberal use of sidewalk pop-outs, and two traffic circles at Van Ness and Olive and Wishon and Olive.
The north-south pedestrian corridor was a big hit with the 80 or so attendees Tuesday night, but the traffic circles generated some concern. I for one am very skeptical about the utility and authenticity of traffic circles on Olive Avenue. (City Traffic Engineer Bryan Jones spoke approvingly of circles as traffic calming devices.) The biggest problem with the proposed traffic circles is that they do not fit the historical context of the Tower. You can see a recent piece by the Fresno Bee’s Mike Osegueda and the large number of comments for some of the issues involved.
Mark Steele reported that sidewalk pop-outs and traffic circles were among the most popular features that came out in the streetscape plans that participants developed Saturday’s charrette. However, the materials we had to work with virtually assured this outcome. In addition to maps of the Tower business core and paper cutouts and stickers of various street features, we were also provided several sheets of paper with a few specific features on which to elaborate. One was an intersection with pop-outs and the other was a traffic circle. Not surprisingly, these features cropped up in a large number of designs we produced at the charrette.
Check out Kiel Famellos-Schmidt’s posting on the draft designs for more.
TheAnthroGeek
anthroguy
Felicia Salcido
21 comments
Comments feed for this article
July 30, 2009 at 1:09 pm
1st draft of Tower District streetscape design
[...] The Anthro Guys Gustav’s Groupie Fresno Beehive [...]
September 7, 2009 at 8:13 pm
CelinaG
From someone who grew up in the Tower District I am excited about Steeles idea. Unlike other major cities, Fresno is lacking in districts where people can congregate for shopping, eating, socializing and exercising. Although the Tower District is the closest thing Fresno has to an urban marketplace it still lacks the major elements that other cities have including to keep tourists and locals visiting that district such as adequate parking structures, public transportation and clean landscaping along pedestrian walkways. The traffic circles will help keep a pedestrian friendly atmosphere and actually motivate locals to visit their own historical district.
November 4, 2009 at 9:47 am
Ashley Tom
I agree that Steeles has a great idea to improve the shopping, eating, and socializing here in Fresno. Downtown especially needs the revamping, but I think his idea is similar to the pervious attempts to build up downtown to make it nicer and a better market place. I personally think in order for his idea to successfully work, bringing more shopping and socializing to Downtown there needs to be a big clean up in the crime that occurs in that area. I avoid going Downtown because I feel it is unsafe as a young girl. I will not go down there by myself,nor do I even feel safe driving along the streets of Downtown. The corners are covered in graffiti and there is a bum asking for money on just about every block, which can make many people feel uneasy and unsafe. The drug use in that area of town is also very bad. So, in order for Steeles plans to work the way he intends them to I think there first needs to be a clean up of Downtown.
September 17, 2009 at 8:31 pm
Chirag Patel
I grew up in india, where shopping, eating and socializing exist. I am excited about Steeles idea in Tower District. Unlike other big cities, Fresno is lacking where people can get together for socializing, shopping, eat out etc. I think Steels idea on Tower district, might bring the life in District. I think City of Fresno should put more resource in Tower district to maket it better place such as parking, security, public trnasportation, pedestrian walk and more inactive for busiensses to open new businesses. All this migh attract people from around town and outsider to come visit. I think Tower District is cool place to hang around, they always have something going on and bring steeles idea will make it better.
December 17, 2009 at 9:24 pm
Maria A
This idea will increase the tourism around the Fresno area. I agree with Chirag in that steeles idea will make the town much better and will help to increase the activities around the Fresno area. There are things to do there but with this new thing, there will be much more activity.
September 23, 2009 at 8:49 am
Tower District Streetscape Community Meeting #3
[...] was Fresno’s Blogosphere that this discussion took place. Find those discussions here: The Anthro Guys, Gustav’s Groupie, Fresno Beehive, Business Street Online, The [...]
September 24, 2009 at 6:00 pm
adamshamoon
I was unaware these meetings about the Tower District redesign plans were being discussed. Very interesting. I know quite a lot of people who live in the Tower District, and I occasionally eat down there myself. I agreed with Anthroguy’s analysis of the Tower District Streetscape Design meeting. I would presume that Mark Steele already had his plans drawn up even though the meeting was supposed to be about participation and input from the residents of the Tower District. I like the fact that Anthropology emphasizes getting involved with people and their problems, I think this design activity is a good example of field anthropology at work. I agree that it would have been nice to have more of a representation (diversity) of people at the meeting, but my guess would be that many are apathetic, don’t think anyone would listen, and just didn’t hear about the meeting. I know that we have some awesome designers that actually live in the Tower District. I think I would tap into some of their ideas and then perhaps present a number of different options to perhaps be voted on by those who actually live and/or work in the Tower District. In the process, perhaps those people who don’t want to come to a meeting could submit their ideas either verbally or in writing at some locality.
September 28, 2009 at 10:48 am
Tower District Streetscape meeting #3 recap | archop
[...] critique, discussions (1, [...]
October 25, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Patrick M
I grew up in Visalia where our Main Street is very much like the Tower District of Fresno. However, I enjoy all the features of easy parking shops and activities offered in Visalia compared to that of the Tower District of Fresno. I think that Steeles idea to improve features would greatly benefit the whole area of the Tower District. Although it would be more beneficial in my opinion to get a more opinions about what to do that everyone would agree with to bring a more welcoming atmosphere. The Tower District is very popular already with the variety of businesses and shops for the night life but new renovations are needed to improve the overall experience of this particular part of Fresno.
October 25, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Nadine S
I like the fact that there are several plans to revamp areas in Fresno. I myself love to visit the Tower District because it has more of a laid back feel compared to some of the other Fresno “hot-spots”. I’m not sure if its my overanalyzing side, but when I hear about revamping particular areas like downtown I initially write it off because I fear that some of the history will be lost. In this particular case, I would not want Tower to become anything less than what it is, a great area to meet up for music and socializing at restaurants or vintage shopping. I like Steeles ideas just from reading, but I would definitely need to take a look at the altogether plans for Tower. I did not know of the prospective plans and although 80 people is a good size crowd, I am sure there are many others out there who would love to have a say in future community plans. I think it would be nice for some of the plans to be assesed and commented on by other members of the community, possibly through local discussion boards or meetings such as the one already held. Hopefully, the plans if put into action will help give Tower that little extra boost while keeping its artsy appeal.
November 2, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Brad V.
Revitalizing the tower district in Fresno is a fantastic idea. The only place I can think of in Fresno similar to this would be Fresno River Park. However, I feel the river park area has been taken over by the adolescences. You do not see as many adults hanging out and socializing. I would definitely say that the tower is more of an adult hot spot. The redesign of the tower streetscape will be a great idea to attract more folks and increase revenue for the local businesses. The restaurants, bars and hangouts make it definitely worth giving the tower a facelift. The tower is a quaint place that gives you that small hometown feel that is quite enjoyable.
The traffic circles, even though they do not fit the local feel, do control the speed of the traffic and would make it a little safer to walk around down in that area. Fresno River Park and multiple residential areas have utilized the traffic circle and they definitely do the job. I am sure that the incredibly artistic designers can come up with a way to make the traffic circle fit the culture of the Tower. One thing that does concern me is the people involved in giving their input on the design of the Tower. I hope that once they get a good rough draft together that they display it to the culturally diverse population surrounding that area. All these ideas for improvement are fantastic but if you do not get support from the surrounding groups you will be met with negative feelings.
November 8, 2009 at 8:22 pm
Michael Brown
I was completely in the dark about this – I didn’t even know a project was underway until I read this article. It seems that a problem with Fresno and a lot of others cities is how we tend to expand outward rather than trying to revitalize the inner city and downtown areas. The Tower District has a lot of potential mostly because there are a lot of people that hang around their already, this idea seems to make it be a little more pedestrian friendly. In places like Sacramento’s downtown or Santa Cruz’s downtown you can easily and successfully walk up and down the streets and find interesting shops or a place to sit down and eat at, even though Tower has some shops and places to eat – it is still lacking in some aspects. I’ve always wanted Fresno’s downtown to sort of replicate the type of layout and idea they have with the downtown’s of other bigger cities. This seems like it’s a step towards that which is exciting. I agree with Brad V..input from the people who live in Tower and surrounding areas is crucial..without their input there will definitely be a lot of negativity.
November 10, 2009 at 12:40 pm
michelleva
I too enjoy Tower’s atmosphere and charm. I agree that it is lacking some people friendly walking areas and parking areas. I hope that Steele’s ideas work in promoting Tower as a new place to congregate. I have noticed that River Park has become a place for high school age kids to hang, making it unappealing for those who have careers or in college. River Park lacks the historical buildings and uniqueness, making Tower a more important interesting hang out. As for the traffic circles I am unsure if they will work well downtown. If there is heavy traffic, circles could cause accidents for cars and pedestrians. I’m glad to hear that Steele is really trying to gather input from the community first. This way everyone will be happy with the results.
November 18, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Andrew S
I am all for the notion of reworking the tower district into a better place. I grew up in Stockton, where we really don’t have anything like the tower district, and our downtown area is pretty pathetic looking only until recently. I must say the overhauling that section of town would be a great idea. It already is one of the most popular places in town to go visit and have a good time. I think that with the correct remodeling, that it can be an even more popular place for people to congregate. I must say, the few times I have been over there, it is a pain to get to certain places because of the traffic situation. Maybe these circles will help the flow of traffic and give us easier access to specific locations. Either way, the fact that community input is important to him is a big deal. I also like the idea of fixing the pedestrian situation. I don’t always feel very safe while I’m there. Whether it is due to bums, or unsafe sidewalks, it could definitely use some work.
November 27, 2009 at 10:32 pm
ANA D.
I did not know that there were plans on redesigning the Tower District. I is great that Steele is trying to redesign it. It is also good to hear that Steel likes to have input from the community. It would be also very important to have more security in this area. Many people I know do not visit the Tower District because they do not feel secure. If we could reduce crime and reduce graffiti, I think that the Tower District would have more visitors visiting the great businesses there. This would also increase the economy in central Fresno. Families would have another great place to shop and socialize. It can become a place like River Park. Personally I really enjoy going to River Park and if the Tower would offer the same feeling of security I would, with no doubt, visit it as much as I visit River Park. I do agree the River Park has become a place where many high school teens hang out. This can be a little unpleasant for older people. If the Tower is redesign, I believe that older people would go and have a nice time. It we all put in a little part the Tower District can become a great place to visit, shop, eat and meet new people in our community and from other places.
December 2, 2009 at 12:01 am
Tyler Riddick
I think that Steele’s ideas will be great for the tower district. I’ve lived in Fresno for two years now and I have noticed that Fresno lacks a downtown area where people can hang out, shop, and eat. I think these additions to the Tower District is exactly what Fresno needs to help bring more recreation to the city. The traffic circles, the sidewalk pop-outs, and extra parking all seem like a good idea. I agree with some of the other students on the topic of crime in the Tower District. I feel that in order for this part of town to become a successful marketplace law enforcement will have to clean up the streets. I know a lot of people who refuse to go to the Tower District because they feel that it is an unsafe part of town.
December 3, 2009 at 5:18 pm
Joe C.
I have lived in the tower district for three years now and I enjoy it quite a bit. There are many different restaurants and night club/bars, but the shopping is a little more limited, but then again if you want to shop there is always the overpriced fig garden or the completely artificial overpriced riverpark. A few more shops would be kinda nice. I don’t feel that there is a traffic problem and thus no reason to justify traffic circles and “zippered” streets. There are always plenty of law enforcement to discourage excessive speeding, but oddly enough does nothing for the beggar/bum problem. If there is a problem with the street crossings and traffic the blame could be placed with the pedestrians. I cant even begin to count how many times I have had people walk out in front of my truck as I travel down the strip. They are always oblivious of passing cars. The money would be better used in fixing sidewalks and promoting local businesses. There should also be some sort of beautification project underway. In my home town of Lodi our downtown was revamped to include many more trees and more appealing store fronts which made it far more appealing. The store fronts in the tower district have far too many inconsistencies which help add a kind of uniqueness, but as one travels west down the tower strip the quality of establishments quickly deteriorates into a less hospitable area. I agree parking is an issue with and something should be done. Perhaps a parking garage because a large parking lot would not be practical, there is just not enough free space for a large parking lot and there are a few locations that would nicely accommodate one, such as the north east corner of palm and Olive or the South West corner of Van Ness and Olive. These are empty lots and would not displace any businesses. The tower district has many different events planned throughout the year, which help to promote the area, maybe we should promote them a little more. Also I must agree with others who have commented here in that I had no idea that this meeting was underway and as such I believe that there should be some kind if posting in the tower to notify those that frequent the area.
December 5, 2009 at 9:22 pm
Ricardo N.
I agree with many of the previous comments regarding the modifications that are needed at the Tower District in Fresno. However the civilians who live in this area should be the main ones to have a vote in what happens to the area in which they live in. The Tower District is a nice place to go for a day out or a night out, there is a variety of small shops and restaurants to choose from as well as numerous night clubs and bars to enjoy from. Although the Tower District offers many things to choose from it wouldn’t hurt to beautify the area some more or make it a little safer for pedestrians. Maybe all the changes they are proposing aren’t too necessary but one thing I would have to agree with would be on making a parking garage. I think this would help the area out greatly rather than visitors having to struggle for parking and what not.
December 6, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Cary Reents
Tower district provides a unique service to its inhabitants. Riverpark is an area in which I think that most shopping centers should be modeled after. It provides all different types of services, shopping, and eating in various types of markets. Although tower district does provide a more lively night time atmosphere. The downside is, that when more and more districts like these are developed, the less amount of business that can be found in each. I believe that Fresno has room for improvement in the amount of districts it has, but they should be located more closely to the age group they are trying to attract.
December 15, 2009 at 12:20 am
Brendyn Koerper
One of the first things that should be considered when doing a brain storming activity or information gathering seminar is the people who will be affected by the decisions and actions taken. In the situation of the Tower District design charette it does not seem as though this was the main concern. To say that peoples input will be taken seriously and considered is one thing but to actually do it requires people to retain an open mind throughout a long and demanding process. Which can become harder and harder to do by the day, especially when it is your project, your name will be on it, and you have your own plans and ideas. It is very easy to get in a mind set and do a project without fully considering what is best for the people who will be affected. It seems that this might be what was happening. The company had ideas in mind and wanted them to pass on to the next stage. It is understandable especially with short deadlines but many people with different needs and wants will go unheard in the process. One of the best parts of the Tower District is its abundance of diversity. Many of the people that go to Tower and youths who go to hangout. The youth would have different wants and needs then the middle aged people going out to dinner. Meeting the needs of everyone who goes to tower would be impossible, but is somewhat obtainable only with the full consideration of unbiased input of the people who would be affected. A job like that would take an immense amount of time and resources which might not have been offered when the project was decided.
December 18, 2009 at 12:00 am
Gary Grubb
Roundabouts are time and trouble savers if two things are certain to take place; drivers know the proper roundabout etiquette and there is not major traffic in or around the roundabout itself.
Recently, CSU, Fresno has implemented roundabouts on Chestnut Ave which borders the east side of the Fresno State campus. They help alleviate the aggravation of sitting at a stop sign, and the tendency to do the “California Roll” right through one. Though you may think a large CSU campus would attract much traffic, that area is hardly if ever congested.
Incorporating stop signs in the Tower District of Fresno will similarly help lighten driver hassle. I have visited the Tower District on one account and could say from experience that the streets are very compact and the buildings small and tight (despite its deceptive name, “TOWER” District). It isn’t a really crowded area, in fact it is rather small and somewhat peculiar. It may seem more crammed than it truly is because it is so petite.
What I would like to know more information about is how much this plan would cost and where the money would derive from. It seems that in the present economic situation, a historic landmark that has been the same way for decades and still attracts a diverse crowd would need so much rebuilding. If it is for safety and convenience I do see the need…but why here? Why now?