On January 30th, 2014, UV120, a local land development partnership, hosted a community meeting and design charrette facilitated by the City of El Paso’s Planning Division for a new 120 acre development located in the Upper Valley at the southeast corner of Artcraft Road and Westside Drive.
UV120 and City planning staff have identified several areas needing further input from the community, including additional detail regarding desired residential and commercial densities and styles and appropriate thoroughfare design from rural to the more urban main street setting.
2. UV120
Purpose and Summary of the
January 30th Meeting
• The purpose of the January 30th public meeting and design
charrette was to gather feedback from El Paso community
stakeholders, including residents, land development
professionals, realtors and other interested parties, on a new 120
acre development in the Upper Valley located at the southeast
corner of Artcraft Road and Westside Drive.
• This meeting offered a unique opportunity for the community to
play an important role in shaping the future of the Upper Valley
and more generally, the quality of life in El Paso by providing input
on various design elements and land development ideas.
• To this end, meeting attendees were asked to participate in three
activities:
1. Visual Preference Survey;
2. Master Plan Element Preference and Comment;
3. General comments about what participants would like or not
like to see in this new development.
• Approximately 40 members of the public attended the meeting to
provide their input and insight through participation in the above
activities.
• The following report details meeting attendees’ opinions and
preferences; it is these opinions and preferences that will serve as
the foundation for future design and development of the land.
3. METHODOLOGY: VISUAL
PREFERENCE SURVEY
• This activity was intended to obtain feedback on physical design alternatives for seven
categories including:
• Using stickers, participants were asked to choose their three favorite images within each
category.
• Additionally, comment sheets and pens were left on the tables to provide participants the
opportunity to comment more specifically on what elements of the various pictures they liked
or didn’t like.
• This report provides the results of this survey.
1. Housing 5. Civic Buildings
2. Thoroughfares 6. Amenities
3. Commercial 7. Canalscapes
4. Parks & Open Space
4. METHODOLOGY: MASTER PLAN
ELEMENT PREFERENCE AND
COMMENT
• This activity was intended to obtain feedback on design elements, including
development patterns and various amenities using six Master Plans created for
other communities across the U.S.
• Participants were asked to walk around and consider each of the six Master
Plans.
• Each meeting attendee was given six small orange stickers on the element(s) of
each plan that they liked best.
• Additionally, comment sheets and pens were left on the tables that provided the
opportunity for participants to comment more specifically on what elements of
the various master plans they liked or didn’t like.
• This report provides the results of this activity.
8. HOUSING Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• A clear preference for Option 9 was established, with more than
one-third (or 35 percent) of the “Housing” stickers placed on this
image. When comparing differences between Option 9 and the
bottom choices, it appears that a preference for lower density
residential options and architectural design style may have played
a role in this image being the preferred choice.
• Options 4 and 10, similar in that they are alley loaded homes with
front doors opening to a shared green space, ranked second and
third; together these two images received nearly one-third (or 29
percent) of the votes (i.e. “Housing” stickers).
• Noticeable similarities among the top three choices is a neutral
color palette and ample green landscaping.
• Bottom choices tended to share in common a higher density
character and architectural design styles not typical of El Paso.
• Despite its similar layout to Options 4 and 10 (both top choices),
Option 6 received the fewest stickers. Factors influencing this
variation may include a non-preference for attached housing
and/or architectural style and character, such as color palette.
• Option 3, which depicts a higher density, primarily residential
neighborhood, came in a distant 4th place (receiving one in ten
votes). Although clearly not a choice preferred by most, its rank
relative to other options suggests that density of this level may be
appropriate in some places, such as a long a main street as
depicted in this picture. Interestingly, a like for main streets was
repeated in several other categories as the following pages of this
report will show.
11. THOROUGHFARES Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• A notable distinguishing factor between top and bottom selections
is the presence of trees in images receiving the highest votes.
This trend suggests that thoroughfares, whether rural or suburban
in nature should include tree-lined streets.
• Receiving nearly one-fourth (or 23 percent) of votes, the top
choice was Option 5, which depicts a rural two-lane road with soft
shoulders and mature trees creating an arched canopy. The
preference shown for this image suggests tree types that will take
this shape over time and create a sense of enclosure should be
planted along the new community’s thoroughfares.
• A preference for main streets is again evidenced by the selection
of Option 1 as the second choice (receiving 18 percent of votes);
this image depicts a more urban thoroughfare with on-street
parking that abuts a storefront-lined block.
• Option 3, a top choice, and Options 2, 4 and 11, all bottom
choices, depict similar single-family residential streetscapes.
Option 3 may have been singled out as a preference because of
its more narrow pavement width and the prominent presence of
sidewalks and trees.
• A strong preference for tree-lined streets is repeated by the
drastic difference in preference for Option 5 (receiving 23 percent
of votes) and Option 11 (receiving 4 percent of votes). This
difference serves to illustrate the importance of tree cover, as the
two thoroughfares are otherwise essentially the same rural
design.
14. COMMERCIAL Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• The preference for the inclusion of a main street is highlighted by
the selection of Options 3, 5 and 6 as top choices, earning nearly
half (or 46 percent) of all votes combined.
• When comparing main streets depicted in the top choices, each of
the three options presents a different kind of main street
experience with varying levels of density and formality. The top
choice, Option 6 (with 21 percent of votes) represents a mid-point
between the high density formal nature of Option 5 and the low
density small-town feel of Option 3.
• Option 1 was the 2nd most selected (with 19 percent of votes),
suggesting that a shopping area that can double as open space is
preferable. A liking for gathering spaces that include outdoor
seating is a theme repeated throughout other categories of this
survey.
• Option 5 was the 3rd most selected (with 15 percent of votes)
despite its higher density character, echoing results from the
housing category that higher density may be acceptable, but only
along main streets.
• The two least selected options, 4 and 7 with three and one
percent of votes respectively, are dominated by pavement,
suggesting that commercial space should focus on the experience
for the individual, not the street or parking lot.
• Again, concern regarding architectural style and character was
repeated in open ended comments, suggesting that options 10
and 8 may have ranked poorly because the style of buildings
depicted in these images is not consistent with the Upper Valley.
16. PARKS & OPEN SPACE
n=116
Top Choices
Bottom Choices
3%
3%
4%
4%
5%
6%
7%
11%
11%
12%
16%
17%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
10
8
4
9
7
12
2
1
3
11
6
5
PictureID
17. PARKS & OPEN SPACE Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• Of the seven categories, preferences within the Parks & Open
Space group were least clearly defined, suggesting a lack of
consensus regarding appropriate open spaces for a new
community.
• Option 5 emerged as the top preference, while the similar Option 8
fell within the bottom four. Both images show public plazas,
characteristic of many towns in the Southwest and Mexico.
However, whereas Option 8 is hardscaped, Option 5 features green
landscaping and mature trees, suggesting that not only is a central
meeting area that reflects the character of the region important,
but that it is equally important that this space be green.
• Options 6 and 9 depict farmland located in proximity to residential
uses. The preference shown for Option 6 may suggest that any
farm or agricultural use should be well integrated into a
neighborhood. Participants may have seen Option 9 as the
meshing of incompatible uses, or a poor execution of integration.
• A third dichotomy exists between Options 3 and 4, both of which
depict settings more typical of an urban park. Where they differ is
that Option 3 illustrates an outdoor space well-defined by public
art, a trail and landscaping, while Option 4 lacks a sense of
enclosure and definition.
• The idea of creating gathering areas appropriate for all, including
children and families, is given preference in the selection of Option
11, which depicts a playground.
• Option 10 was the least selected option. The low rank of this image
may be attributable to a feeling that desert landscaping and the
Upper Valley are not compatible. Additionally, Option 10, much like
Option 4, lacks a sense of enclosure and definition.
20. CIVIC BUILDINGS Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• Civic Buildings may include any number of buildings open for public
use. Typical examples of civic buildings include town halls, schools
and religious or government buildings.
• Over half (or 55 percent) of the total Civic Building selections
identified Options 2, 4 or 7. Each of these images depicts a civic
building that relates well to its surroundings and serves as a
community focal point.
• When comparing top and bottom choices, it is clear that
participants prefer civic buildings that are integrated into
neighborhoods, rather than those that serve as stand-alone
destinations.
• With regard to design, buildings showcasing modern architectural
details were selected less often than the more traditional
architectural types.
• Additionally, large expanses of paved area are not preferred, as
illustrated by the low scoring Options 1, 3 and 6. This finding
reinforces Commercial non-preferences where the two lowest
ranking commercial images were also dominated by pavement.
23. AMENITIES Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• With over one-fourth (or 26 percent) of selections, the outdoor
seating space for a café/restaurant depicted in Option 8 was
repeated as a high priority for participants. Notably, this selection
also indicates that unique features, such as the water shown in
this picture, ought to be used to augment the amenity.
• Option 6 scored closely behind top choice Option 8, receiving over
one-fifth (or 22 percent) of votes. The high rank of this option
suggests that a farmer’s market or some other activity that relates
to the heritage of the Upper Valley in a manner that is easily
accessible by a wide audience should be an important feature of
this new community.
• The preferred Options 1, 4 and 6 highlight spaces that provide
opportunities for a variety of activities accessible to the entire
community, whereas more open ended and specialized amenities,
such as those shown in Options 3 and 7 (stables and an orchard),
were less often identified as a preference. This trend is in line with
previous findings that amenities and gathering spaces should be
accessible to the entire community, rather than to typically smaller,
more specialized interest groups.
• Option 12, a recreational center, scored in the bottom two. Given
previous findings, this relatively poor rank may have partially been
influenced by the modern architectural design of the building
rather than due to the amenities it offers.
26. CANALSCAPES Top Choices
Bottom Choices
• Well over half (or 60 percent) of votes indicated a preference for
structured, urban canalscapes as illustrated by the top three
choices: Options 3, 10 and 11. This finding suggests that canals
should be a centerpiece of the development and serve as an
amenity available for community-wide use.
• The top choice, Option 10, received the largest share of votes,
representing nearly one-third (or 31 percent) of canalscape
stickers. The trees and sidewalk, in combination with outdoor
café/restaurant space and shallow building setbacks, create a
sense of enclosure reminiscent of an outdoor room. The strong
preference for this image augments previous findings suggesting
that engaging outdoor gathering spaces should be a priority as
design of the new community is considered.
• Bottom choices, Options 4 and 5 depict canalscapes improved for
use as trails. Although both images include people using the trails,
a reason for their low rank may be the sense of isolation they
communicate relative to the top three choices. For example, Option
5 separates the canal from the rest of the community with a wall,
while the presence of a surrounding community is missing from
Option 4.
• Interestingly, despite its structured urban nature Option 7 scored
very low, receiving about one percent of votes. One factor that may
have influenced the low score may have been an inability to relate
the canal to the surrounding environment.
• Finally, despite their similar unimproved feel, Option 2 with eight
percent of votes scored in the top four, while Option 8 with four
percent of votes scored in the bottom four. The small difference in
score may be related to a preference for more natural canalscapes
that retain vegetation and have not been channelized using hard
materials such as concrete.
27. COMMENTS ON VISUAL
PREFERENCE SURVEY IMAGES
• A total of 51 comments were received regarding the various images shown during the visual
preference survey.
• The largest share of positive comments received referred to a like for the trails and gathering spaces
depicted in various images suggesting that the inclusion of such amenities should be a priority when
designing the new community.
• The largest share of negative comments received referred to a dislike for the architectural style or
character of an image. Many of these comments communicated a concern that the building style was
not in keeping with the integrity of the region.
• Additionally, a review of negative comments received suggests that a community that finds a balance
between a rural and urban character is preferred.
• The Housing and Thoroughfares categories received the largest proportion of comments, while the
Amenities and Canalscapes categories followed closely behind. This finding suggests that these four
categories are considered important elements of a new community and as such, should be given
much attention in their design.
• The majority of comments received regarding Housing images were negative, suggesting that an
objective of future meetings should be to better understand residential preferences.
29. SUMMARY OF
FINDINGS
The “perfect” community has…
• …an architectural style that is consistent with the character and
history of the Upper Valley.
• …many and varied public gathering spaces – farmer’s markets,
parks and other active event spaces.
• …a main street where commercial and higher density uses are
focused.
• …canals that are available for use by the entire community –
whether as trails or outdoor cafés/gathering areas.
• …landscaped thoroughfares and open spaces, with an
emphasis on the importance of trees in creating a sense of
enclosure and well-defined space.
• …lower density residential neighborhoods that include some
kind of variety such as traditional single-family detached homes
and less traditional patio homes.
• …civic buildings that relate well to their surroundings and are
well integrated into the community rather than separated,
stand-alone buildings.
• …a range of development types – rural, single-family housing,
commercial areas and gathering spaces.
“Places to sit and gather.”
“I like that [this image] is not high
density.”
“Walkways close to the water.”
“Outdoor cafés are great…”
“Open Space for families and
neighborhoods to gather.”
“Looks most like El Paso…”
“Trees, trees and more trees!”
37. MASTER PLANS
• Stickers were used as a tool to identify specific elements of the
master plans liked by charrette participants. As illustrated by
the graph to the left, the elements identified as preferences
could be catalogued into one of seven categories.
• Of the total 174 stickers placed, nearly two-fifths (or 38
percent) referenced a Parks and Open Space element,
suggesting that participants feel these public spaces are
important features of any community.
The largest share of Parks and Open Space stickers were
placed on the multi-use Holiday Community Park pictured in
Plan A and the Multi-Use Trails linking the community to
Open Space pictured in Plan D.
• One in five (or 20 percent) of total stickers were placed on
Commercial elements of the master plans, suggesting that
participants are receptive to Commercial uses being included in
the new community.
The Market pictured in Plan D and the Retail Center
pictured in Plan E, both large anchor retail spaces, were
most often selected within the Commercial category. This
trend suggests that there is an area need for a larger
commercial amenity such as a grocery store.
• Sixteen percent of all stickers cited some element of Housing
within the master plans.
Preferences within this category were more evenly split
among many different types of primarily lower density
housing types, including: senior housing, multi-family
townhomes, cottage and single-family/classic homes.
• Plan C, a semi-rural cluster development, garnered a notable
share of votes, although the specific plan element referenced
by these votes was unclear; as a result, these votes have been
classified as a “General Like” (note that the entirety of this
category is comprised of votes for Plan C).
n=174
2%2%2%2%
4%4%4%4%
6%6%6%6%
14%14%14%14%
16%16%16%16%
20%20%20%20%
38%38%38%38%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Civic Building
Parking
Agricultural
General Like
Housing
Commercial
Parks &
Open Space
Total Stickers Placed (%)Total Stickers Placed (%)Total Stickers Placed (%)Total Stickers Placed (%)
CategoryCategoryCategoryCategory
Preference Summary by CategoryPreference Summary by CategoryPreference Summary by CategoryPreference Summary by Category
38. MASTER PLANS
• A total of 174 stickers were placed on the six Master Plans
provided. The graph to the left illustrates the sticker spread
among plans.
• Elements of Plans D and E were most often selected as
preferred, with the plans receiving 30 and 29 percent of votes,
respectively.
Plan D was cited most often for its Parks and Open Space,
Housing and Commercial elements. Specifically, its multi-
use trails and anchor retail market scored high, while
housing choices indicated a preference for a variety of
options appropriate for a wide range of age groups and
income levels.
Plan E, on the other hand, was recognized most often for
its Commercial and Parks and Open Space elements;
other than the retail center, no single element stood out as
preferred over others, suggesting that a variety of
commercial and parks and open space types ought to be
included in the new community.
• Plan A and Plan C received 22 and 17 percent of selections,
respectively.
Over two-thirds of selections for Plan A cited the Holiday
Community Park as a preference, while the overwhelming
majority of selections for Plan C cited a general like for the
plan rather than identifying specific elements of its layout.
• Plan B received only two percent of stickers, while Plan F
received none, suggesting that avant-garde and standard
conventional developments are not preferred design
alternatives.
n=174
0%0%0%0%
2%2%2%2%
17%17%17%17%
22%22%22%22%
29%29%29%29%
30%30%30%30%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%
Plan F
Plan B
Plan C
Plan A
Plan E
Plan D
Total Stickers Placed (%)Total Stickers Placed (%)Total Stickers Placed (%)Total Stickers Placed (%)
MasterPlanMasterPlanMasterPlanMasterPlan
Preference Summary by Master PlanPreference Summary by Master PlanPreference Summary by Master PlanPreference Summary by Master Plan
39. COMMENTS ON MASTER PLANS
• A total of 30 comments were received providing additional insight into specific likes and
dislikes regarding the six master plans.
• Two-thirds of the comments received were positive. Of these, some element of open space or
mixed-use was most often cited as a positive asset to the community. Specifically, community
trails and adequate landscaping were repeated likes, while neighborhood mixed-use was a
common theme.
• Plan C, a semi-rural cluster land development, received the largest share of comments relative
to the other plans, all of which were positive in nature. Comments regarding Plan C cited a
number of its elements, including its open spaces, mixed-use qualities and other features.
• With regard to negative comments, the density level depicted by several of the plans was of
concern. This, in combination with a communicated like for neighborhood mixed-use, indicates
that while there may be room for a range of uses including commercial, residential and office
space, those uses should respect the lower density nature of the surrounding Upper Valley
area.
40. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Repeated themes include…
• …parks and open space are important elements of any community.
• Specifically, multi-use spaces that serve as gathering spaces for the entire neighborhood are a high priority, as are multi-use trails
that serve as linkages throughout the community.
• …neighborhood mixed-use is an amenity.
• In addition to small restaurants and cafés, there is a communicated need for a larger anchor retail/market space; however, that
space should be integrated into the community, blending well with its surroundings.
• …a variety of housing options are needed.
• A need for housing types that fit all age groups and income levels was communicated, although such housing should respect the
lower density nature of the Upper Valley, including options like townhomes, cottage/patio homes, single-family detached homes and
the opportunity for senior housing.
• …the unique rural character of the Upper Valley should be maintained.
• Although traditional agricultural uses were not often cited as a preferences, comments and master plan selections consistently
communicated a fondness for semi-rural communities. Amenities accessible to a wider audience such as community gardens may
be explored as a way to preserve the character of the area.
42. OPEN-ENDED
COMMENTS
Repeated themes include…
• …the character of the community should stay
true to the rural heritage of the Upper Valley, as
well as the architectural design styles typical of
the region.
• …a mix of lower density housing options
appropriate for all age groups and life stages
should be provided.
• …neighborhood mixed use such as cafés and
restaurants are an amenity.
• …establish and augment the existing canal as a
community focal point.
• …ensure that amenities, both traditional and
non-traditional in nature be included in the
design and plan of the community.
n=14
“Maintain the unique farmland feel.”
“Senior Housing.”
“Restaurants and cafés.”
“Riverwalk – great idea.”
“Nice multi-family, townhomes,
duplexes.”
“Maintain rural atmosphere.”
“Make it unique, not a copy of another
city.”
44. CONCLUSIONS
Repeated themes include…
• …the character of the community should stay true to the
rural heritage of the Upper Valley, as well as the
architectural design styles typical of the region.
• …a mix of lower density housing options appropriate for
all age groups and life stages should be provided.
• …important community buildings such as schools or
anchor retail spaces should be well-integrated into their
surroundings and add to the character of the
neighborhood.
• …parks and gathering spaces, both traditional and non-
traditional in nature are important features of any
neighborhood and should be designed in such a way as
to encourage use by the entire community.
• …neighborhood mixed use such as cafés and
restaurants are a desired amenity.
• …establish and augment the existing canal as a
community focal point.
• …green landscaping should be used as a way to define
outdoor spaces and create a sense of place whether
along thoroughfares, canals or in parks and other
gathering spaces.
Explore Further…
How to best preserve the agricultural
heritage of the Upper Valley through
community design?
Residential densities, styles and color
palettes.
Commercial and “Main Street” densities
and styles.
A range of thoroughfare types from rural
to main street urban.
45. NEXT STEPS
•Report the findings of the January 30th UV120 Public Meeting and Design Charrette to the community.
•Hold a second public meeting and design charrette to clarify remaining issues such as residential and
commercial building styles and densities.
•Tentatively scheduled for Thursday, April 3rd, 2014.
•Compile results from both meetings and begin working with design professionals to develop a plan for the
new community that uses public feedback as its foundation and guide.
•Present the plan to the community and provide the opportunity for public comment, suggestions,
additions, deletions, etc.
•Refine the plan given community feedback, hold a fourth public meeting if necessary, and finally, begin the
development process.
