Granada residents push back on proposed code changes

Karin Murphy and Andrew Georgiadis, the duo running the city’s Urban Design Studio, foresee a grim fate for Siesta Drive near Osprey Avenue if changes don’t happen.

Considering the high-speed, heavily trafficked nature of the street today, the planning experts believe it will be difficult to produce attractive residential developments in the area. Further complicating the matter is the minimum lot size for new homes in the area, which lends itself to the construction of McMansions.

The area is already uninviting for pedestrians and cyclists, they say. Given the factors in place, that’s only going to get worse — homes along Siesta Drive will likely become walled compounds, making it even worse for walkers and inviting vehicles to travel at an even greater speed.

“As walls go up on both sides, you’ve surrendered the street,” said Murphy, director of the Urban Design Studio. “The cars go faster through.”

It doesn’t have to be this way, they say. Murphy and Georgiadis are tasked with writing a new form-based zoning code for the city, giving them the opportunity to propose changes to avoid that deterioration of the street. Their experience has taught them that certain types of housing are better for creating a walkable road, even when that road sees a significant volume of vehicular activity.

Their initial solution? Change the zoning regulations to allow for the construction of attached single-family housing facing Siesta Drive. In conjunction with some changes to the streetscape itself, they say that particular building type will present a more inviting face to pedestrians. Multiple living units can help break up the street in a way larger houses couldn’t, they explain.

“We have seen places that wanted to keep single-family detached on a highly trafficked road,” said Georgiadis, the studio’s principal urban designer. “They paid dearly — houses get rebuilt, and the per-square-foot value of the houses declines.”

Residents Respond

Residents of the Granada neighborhood — where the proposed single-family attached land is located — foresee a grim fate for their community if the changes the Urban Design Studio suggested are made.

The proposed changes sparked an outcry within the neighborhood, located just south of Siesta Drive. Kevin Ellerbrock, president of the Granada Neighborhood Association, described the proposal as a radical change for a neighborhood that was by and large satisfied with the status quo. 

“It’s almost an attack on the culture and character of our neighborhood,” Ellerbrock said. 

Currently, Granada has approximately 120 homes. The proposed changes would impact 32 of the 128 lots in the neighborhood, increasing the maximum density in 25% of the area. That is the greatest proportion of any neighborhood in the “West of Trail” district the studio examined in April, which means residents are worried that the changes disproportionately affect the area.

“Notwithstanding questions we might have about traffic issues, about property value and some of those other issues, I think the heart of our concern is that it goes against protecting the historical charm of our neighborhood and why people chose to live here,” Ellerbrock said.

Butting Heads

When the Urban Design Studio and residents of Granada finally came together to discuss the proposed changes at a workshop April 23, they struggled to find a comfortable middle ground.

Georgiadis tried to assure the residents that there wouldn’t be any low-income housing — a response to a rumor that the studio was proposing Section 8  housing — and the per-square-foot value of the attached housing would be similar to the existing housing stock. One Granada resident retorted by saying they view houses priced at $750,000 as “low-income housing.”

Although some Granada residents were worried by images depicting Siesta Drive as built out with walled-in larger houses, Ellerbrock didn’t take issue with that. 

“Whether they put up a wall — we have some residents right now who have done that,” Ellerbrock said. “As a neighborhood, we’re fine with property owners’ rights to do that.”

Despite the stark contrast between the two sides, both are committed to continuing to work to find a solution. Murphy emphasized that the recommendations presented April 23 were both conceptual in nature and a first pass and that the feedback residents provided would be incorporated into the Urban Design Studio’s plans.

“The process, in this case, is really what we rely on,” Murphy said. “That is a very open and inclusive process, and one where we present options at the end of the day.”

Murphy stressed that the studio wasn’t picking on Granada when they proposed the changes — they took a holistic look at the city, and the land they judged as fitting for a certain zoning designation happened to fall in Granada.

Based on comment cards submitted at the workshop, she said the reception from Granada residents wasn’t as negative as the discussion might have suggested.

Ellerbrock said the neighborhood was appreciative of the studio’s effort. Residents are just hopeful that the new code accounts for factors they believe are unique to Granada.

“It’s hard to not be attracted by some of the architectural drawings they’ve done,” Ellerbrock said. “But every neighborhood is different in terms of where they’re headed, what they want to do, what they want to transform.”

Neighborhood Check-In: McClellan Park

In McClellan Park, located east of Osprey Avenue between Cunliff Lane and Hyde Park Street, most of the April 23 workshop discussion focused on a triangular property in the center of the neighborhood.

Bound by Seminole Drive, Oval Drive and Sioux Drive, the land currently houses an abandoned school. According to Karin Murphy and Andrew Georgiadis, the code is not allowing the land to be redeveloped — something residents said they’d like to see the Urban Design Studio address.

Georgiadis presented a potential adjustment that would facilitate redevelopment, rezoning the land to allow for a mixed-use project. In a conceptual rendering, he showed the property encircled by residential buildings with a courtyard in the center and a commercial property, such as a small café, on the ground floor.

Andy Dorr, a resident in the area, voiced his support for the vision the Urban Design Studio outlined. As far as those in the neighborhood are concerned, changes need to be made to facilitate a new development at that site.

“It’s a school, and it’s trashed, and it looks horrible,” Dorr said. “This is a good solution they’ve taken into account. It’s not a final solution — but just living there, I like it.”

Resident Check-In: Shoreland Woods

A resident of one of the other West of Trail neighborhoods the Urban Design Studio examined this month shares her takeaways from the April 23 workshop:

“I live in a pretty small neighborhood that’s just three streets. There are concerns — I think they’ve addressed our concerns. Our main concern is the tree canopy and preserving the greenery in our area, because we have a little spring-fed lake in the middle of our neighborhood. I don’t think anyone is concerned with the zoning in our neighborhood, but I understand the people in Granada are concerned about their property. I feel positive about this — this is the start of a conversation, and people have to look at it that way. Things are going to change no matter what. You can’t stop change, so you might as well look at it as a good thing. I think this a good start.”  

— M.H. Syin

Update: An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the district the Urban Design Studio studied in April, and has been updated to correct that error.