Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Centers Implementation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planners answer common questions on implementing centers: universities, small towns, parking and highways
Summary
During the webinar Q&A, WFRC planners and consultants addressed how to integrate centers near universities, create small‑town centers without large populations, manage parking and distribute centers along corridors, and strategies to create centers divided by busy roadways.
Attendees used the webinar Q&A to press planners on practical implementation questions. The panel—Ted Nolting (WFRC), Christy Ostema (People in Place) and Tim Watkins (WFRC)—offered examples and tactical suggestions for common local challenges.
On integrating centers with universities, Matthew Gibbons asked how cities can better connect campuses with walkable mixed‑use areas. Ted Nolting recommended finding ‘‘win‑win’’ locations—areas with some commercial character that won’t be perceived as encroaching on quiet neighborhoods—and building community consensus on acceptable locations. Christy Ostema pointed to Ogden’s work with Weber State and Logan’s efforts to connect downtown to Utah State by transit as practical local examples.
When John Jansen asked whether there is a population threshold to establish a small‑town center, presenters said there is no single numeric trigger. Tim Watkins urged flexibility: if ground‑floor retail is not initially viable, design for conversion from residential to commercial later; seek civic anchors (library, city hall, plazas) or periodic programming (markets, food trucks) that can create activity without large retail demand.
Britney Knutson expressed concern that development of a new center around a FrontRunner station in Springville could siphon activity from the historic downtown. Nolting recommended local analysis to define distinct roles for each center so they complement rather than compete; Ostema and Watkins suggested careful placement, transit connections and tailored economic development strategies.
On sites divided by busy roadways, Christy described Heber City’s approach: pursuing ownership or rerouting to slow traffic, re‑imagining Main Street with wider sidewalks, medians and street trees, and creating a pedestrianized alley and improved civic spaces (park and amphitheater) on the quieter side to form a usable community 'living room.' Nolting and Watkins added options such as traffic calming, pedestrian refuges and activated signals to improve crossings.
Panelists emphasized programming—regular events and activities—as a low‑cost strategy to create a perception that a center is active, which can help attract retail and investment over time. Presenters also noted technical assistance options: WFRC, Mountainland Association of Governments (MAG), UDOT’s Technical Planning Assistance program and local consultants can help municipalities assess impacts and next steps. Tim Watkins offered to collect follow‑up comments and provided contact information in the chat.
