200 replies to this topic

[thewizard16]

Mith242, on May 2 2006, 05:24 PM, said:

Yeah I think there are people in Fayetteville that seem to have the idea that they can keep things the way they are and simply implement zero growth and push it to the other NWA cities.  That just doesn't seem realistic to me.  I think there should be some way to compromise, allow growth but manage it and not try to make Fayetteville the next Dallas or something.

I never understood this mentality, but it's in a lot of places. In Mountain Home (if you're not familiar with it, it's about 3 hours east of here, an hour past Harrison) people have been very upset because there are a lot (I would say almost equal to NWA, if reduced to the scale of Mtn. Home, which is 12,000 people) of new housing developments and commercial centers being built. There were even editorials where some retirees that live in the area (they used to be the predominant population there, but not quite as much anymore) were complaining about people moving to the area. That's the most selfish thing I can think of, that they feel they should be able to live there and others shouldn't just because it means a little more traffic, or more commerce, or developments extending farther out into the "country (there, it just means it's too hilly to develop, not that it's really country)" than before. Mountain Home is small enough that everything right now is growing in the form of sprawling, and I imagine it will for some time. I agree with the idea of compromise. It's not fair to tell people they can't move here because some existing residents decided we've grown enough, the best we can do is try to manage the growth so that it doesn't ruin the atmosphere or beauty of the area, and try to keep it organized at the same time.. nobody wants to end up like Houston. Worst city layout I've ever had the unpleasantry of experiencing.

EDIT: No problem at all, I'm in Fayetteville, downtown-ish.

Edited by thewizard16, 02 May 2006 - 04:33 PM.

[Mith242]

thewizard16, on May 2 2006, 05:32 PM, said:

I never understood this mentality, but it's in a lot of places. In Mountain Home (if you're not familiar with it, it's about 3 hours east of here, an hour past Harrison) people have been very upset because there are a lot (I would say almost equal to NWA, if reduced to the scale of Mtn. Home, which is 12,000 people) of new housing developments and commercial centers being built. There were even editorials where some retirees that live in the area (they used to be the predominant population there, but not quite as much anymore) were complaining about people moving to the area. That's the most selfish thing I can think of, that they feel they should be able to live there and others shouldn't just because it means a little more traffic, or more commerce, or developments extending farther out into the "country (there, it just means it's too hilly to develop, not that it's really country)" than before. Mountain Home is small enough that everything right now is growing in the form of sprawling, and I imagine it will for some time. I agree with the idea of compromise. It's not fair to tell people they can't move here because some existing residents decided we've grown enough, the best we can do is try to manage the growth so that it doesn't ruin the atmosphere or beauty of the area, and try to keep it organized at the same time.. nobody wants to end up like Houston. Worst city layout I've ever had the unpleasantry of experiencing.

EDIT: No problem at all, I'm in Fayetteville, downtown-ish.

Yeah it is somewhat funny someone moves to some 'unspoiled' area and then think that no one else can move in after they're there.  I hadn't realized this was also a problem over in Mountain Home.  But I do know that area has been really growing with retirees.  
I figured you were from Fayetteville, but I thought I'd ask and make sure.  

Edited by Mith242, 02 May 2006 - 06:58 PM.

[thewizard16]

Mith242, on May 2 2006, 05:45 PM, said:

Yeah it is somewhat funny someone moves to some 'unpoiled' area and then think that no one else can move in after they're there.  I hadn't realized this was also a problem over in Mountain Home.  But I do know that area has been really growing with retirees.  
I figured you were from Fayetteville, but I thought I'd ask and make sure.  

I'm not sure what the breakdown is exactly, but more of Mtn. Home's new growth appears to be younger people (families) than before. I know there's still quite a retirement draw to the area, but their schools have been having record class sizes and the average age has dropped, so I guess it's not all retirees anymore.

[strmchsr77]

thewizard16, on May 2 2006, 02:29 PM, said:

I think perhaps people have finally gotten realistic. Northwest Arkansas is growing at an extremely brisk pace, and any area that is developing into a higher-density population metro area is going to have some bigger buildings. There's no point in trying to complain or oppose everything that goes over 6 or 7 stories because it's bigger than things next to it, because eventually (or around here, in not too long) there are going to be an increasing number of large buildings. It's going to change the way things look, but that's inevitable. I think the Bellafont development is great because it's a very nice looking complex, but also will be the first large-scale office space area in Fayetteville.

I can somewhat understand people complaining about the Divinity Project just because of how large of a building they're trying to pack onto that little space, but also because of how it will stick out. That, and the renderings looked somewhat ugly.

On a related commercial note, does anyone know what that big black office building that's for lease on I-540 around Rogers is planned for or who it was built by? It looks like it's kindof off on it's own on there interstate there, but it appears to be brand new, and it doesn't look like there are any occupants yet.

By the way, I'm new to the forums, so hello everyone.

Yes, welcome to Urban Planet, TheWizard16, and thanks for your input.  I as well as many others on here can completely agree with you on this topic.  I have been complaining about the city's height ordinance since the beginning.  They don't like sprawl because of the strain it puts on infrastructure, but then they put height limits on downtown buildings.  It makes no since to anyone.  I have no problem with 20+ story buildings, it is what any city in the world has.  Architecture is an artform, whether it is a house or skyscraper.  
At least Bellafont has some how slipped through the cracks and will be built.  I guess because it is not downtown in a historic district.  I do see some form of the Divinity building going through eventually.  I don't know if it will be the full 185 feet, but I hope it is close.  Hopefully within the next planning commission.

Edited by strmchsr77, 02 May 2006 - 07:41 PM.

[thewizard16]

strmchsr77, on May 2 2006, 08:39 PM, said:

Yes, welcome to Urban Planet, TheWizard16, and thanks for your input.  I as well as many others on here can completely agree with you on this topic.  I have been complaining about the city's height ordinance since the beginning.  They don't like sprawl because of the strain it puts on infrastructure, but then they put height limits on downtown buildings.  It makes no since to anyone.  I have no problem with 20+ story buildings, it is what any city in the world has.  Architecture is an artform, whether it is a house or skyscraper.  
At least Bellafont has some how slipped through the cracks and will be built.  I guess because it is not downtown in a historic district.  I do see some form of the Divinity building going through eventually.  I don't know if it will be the full 185 feet, but I hope it is close.  Hopefully within the next planning commission.

Thank you (and mith as well, since I never said it) for the welcome. I'm sure that the Divinity project will be built in some form or fashion, but I fear they'll not allow it at the current height, just as I was sure it wouldn't be approved at it's initial height. Realistically, I don't think the Divinity Project has an ideal location for such a building, but as there is a lack of easily developable space in the central downtown area to build something like that, I can understand them wanting to do it along Dickson. I think it it were down the hill a bit farther there wouldn't have been as many complaints about it sticking out, but on the hill, away from the other tall downtown buildings (Radisson, the soon-to-be Renaissance Tower, federal building, that run-down looking residential building) and not close to the other buildings of somewhat comparable heights (the soon-to-be Lofts at Underwood, the Legacy building, etc.), it really will look odd. That, and the styling of the building doesn't blend whatsoever with the Dickson street atmosphere. I like the idea of the Divinity Project, I liked it at it's original height, but I think unless there's even a possibility of buildings of similar heights being built near there (which I don't forsee in the near future) there won't be much support for the Divinity Project.

[strmchsr77]

thewizard16, on May 2 2006, 09:55 PM, said:

Thank you (and mith as well, since I never said it) for the welcome. I'm sure that the Divinity project will be built in some form or fashion, but I fear they'll not allow it at the current height, just as I was sure it wouldn't be approved at it's initial height. Realistically, I don't think the Divinity Project has an ideal location for such a building, but as there is a lack of easily developable space in the central downtown area to build something like that, I can understand them wanting to do it along Dickson. I think it it were down the hill a bit farther there wouldn't have been as many complaints about it sticking out, but on the hill, away from the other tall downtown buildings (Radisson, the soon-to-be Renaissance Tower, federal building, that run-down looking residential building) and not close to the other buildings of somewhat comparable heights (the soon-to-be Lofts at Underwood, the Legacy building, etc.), it really will look odd. That, and the styling of the building doesn't blend whatsoever with the Dickson street atmosphere. I like the idea of the Divinity Project, I liked it at it's original height, but I think unless there's even a possibility of buildings of similar heights being built near there (which I don't forsee in the near future) there won't be much support for the Divinity Project.

I think that this is exactly the kind of project we need there, I agree maybe some redesign would be perfectly fine.  But you have to look into the future.  This could and will be the cornerstone of the connection of Dickson street to the square.  Once this building is finished, more and more development will occur southward toward the square along block street.  This will provide a ped. safe connection between the two points.  With more bars, restaurants, and residences comes more connectivity and safety for walkers and club goers.

[thewizard16]

strmchsr77, on May 2 2006, 10:13 PM, said:

I think that this is exactly the kind of project we need there, I agree maybe some redesign would be perfectly fine.  But you have to look into the future.  This could and will be the cornerstone of the connection of Dickson street to the square.  Once this building is finished, more and more development will occur southward toward the square along block street.  This will provide a ped. safe connection between the two points.  With more bars, restaurants, and residences comes more connectivity and safety for walkers and club goers.

I think it's a good idea, but I don't see there being a lot of new development along block street in the near future. I also think that historical building issues might arise with some of the houses etc. in that area, were any larger developments to be attempted. I agree about looking to the future, and while I still like the idea of the Divinity Project (though I think the styling could be more Dickson-friendly), I don't think it's going to get much more support while the styling remains like it is and the height remains so far above the norm.

[thewizard16]

Sorry for the double post, but I just remembered something. Getting back to Joyce, has anyone heard of planned road improvements in that area? The current Joyce College intersection is incredibly frustrating, especially if you're coming from the south and want to get to I-540... not only is it dangerous, it can take forever. At any rate, with the increased traffic (and increased difficulty to turn across to head to 540) that the Bellafont project and following projects are sure to cause, has anyone heard any plans of redoing that side of the intersection, or making improvements to Joyce in general?

[strmchsr77]

thewizard16, on May 2 2006, 10:37 PM, said:

Sorry for the double post, but I just remembered something. Getting back to Joyce, has anyone heard of planned road improvements in that area? The current Joyce College intersection is incredibly frustrating, especially if you're coming from the south and want to get to I-540... not only is it dangerous, it can take forever. At any rate, with the increased traffic (and increased difficulty to turn across to head to 540) that the Bellafont project and following projects are sure to cause, has anyone heard any plans of redoing that side of the intersection, or making improvements to Joyce in general?

The Barber Group is going to make some improvements to Joyce for sure.  I think they will add a turn lane (which is REALLY needed) as well as a light at joyce/Vantage.  They will also be improving some of the surrounding streets.  Joyce and College will probably just get worse.  I come through that intersection 4 or 5 times per day and know how bad it gets.  It is still worth it though, I guess we will see what happens.

[thewizard16]

strmchsr77, on May 2 2006, 10:58 PM, said:

The Barber Group is going to make some improvements to Joyce for sure.  I think they will add a turn lane (which is REALLY needed) as well as a light at joyce/Vantage.  They will also be improving some of the surrounding streets.  Joyce and College will probably just get worse.  I come through that intersection 4 or 5 times per day and know how bad it gets.  It is still worth it though, I guess we will see what happens.

If all their investments work out, the Barber group is pretty much going to be thought of as the firm that redefinied Fayetteville. AMA is doing their part too, but Barber has a lot going at once.

[Mith242]

thewizard16, on May 2 2006, 11:08 PM, said:

If all their investments work out, the Barber group is pretty much going to be thought of as the firm that redefinied Fayetteville. AMA is doing their part too, but Barber has a lot going at once.

Yeah overall I've been pretty happy with the Barber Group's developments.  Like you said AMA and others haven't bene bad either.  But the Barber Group really seem to be moving at a much faster rate.

[itk]

thewizard16, on May 2 2006, 10:37 PM, said:

Sorry for the double post, but I just remembered something. Getting back to Joyce, has anyone heard of planned road improvements in that area? The current Joyce College intersection is incredibly frustrating, especially if you're coming from the south and want to get to I-540... not only is it dangerous, it can take forever. At any rate, with the increased traffic (and increased difficulty to turn across to head to 540) that the Bellafont project and following projects are sure to cause, has anyone heard any plans of redoing that side of the intersection, or making improvements to Joyce in general?

No specific projects are planned for the Joyce/College intersection... yet.  

There is, however, federal ear-marked funds (dubbed "pork-barrel money" by some) for something called the "North Fayetteville Economic Development Corridor" or some such.  My understanding is that Fayetteville is in the process of hiring a consultant to do a traffic study in the area to figure out how to spend that.  Their current transportation bond program (phase 1) includes this "project".

So bottom line, as far as Joyce/College goes, I bet Fayetteville will end up spending money to somehow relieve that bottleneck in the near future.  What that improvement will be, no one knows just yet.

[Mith242]

itk, on May 3 2006, 04:55 PM, said:

No specific projects are planned for the Joyce/College intersection... yet.  

There is, however, federal ear-marked funds (dubbed "pork-barrel money" by some) for something called the "North Fayetteville Economic Development Corridor" or some such.  My understanding is that Fayetteville is in the process of hiring a consultant to do a traffic study in the area to figure out how to spend that.  Their current transportation bond program (phase 1) includes this "project".

So bottom line, as far as Joyce/College goes, I bet Fayetteville will end up spending money to somehow relieve that bottleneck in the near future.  What that improvement will be, no one knows just yet.

Do you think this could possibly have anything to do with some people's views on trying to integrate a street grid back onto the northern part of the Fulbright Expressway?

[itk]

Mith242, on May 3 2006, 05:12 PM, said:

Do you think this could possibly have anything to do with some people's views on trying to integrate a street grid back onto the northern part of the Fulbright Expressway?

Ohhhh, I'm sure some of the stuff those consultants Fayetteville hired (I forget the consultants names) were exactly what certain people in Fayetteville wanted to hear.

There are dreamers... then there are realists.  The City of Fayetteville, I think, has its fair share of the former.  

They can't tackle the problem by themselves.  Granted, the problem is pretty complex, so it obviously deserves a thorough study.  It's easy to say "make it a grid" and think voila, problem will be solved.  But I'm 99.9% confident this will require professionals with expertise in this field to do a thorough analysis.

Fayetteville always had ideas for improving Joyce/College-- they've been talking about a "fly-over" (to eliminate that U-turn) for as long as I can remember growing up there.  After those consultants, the City I think wants to seriously look at other options.  If it takes a progressive and innovative solution, I'm all for it... if it's realistic.  

I guess to address your question directly, you would need to elaborate on what you mean by a "street grid".  I think I've read some of those consultants take on their "grid" idea... I wasn't impressed.  Talking about fuzzy planning recommendations and talking about specific solutions to specific engineering problems are somewhat different animals.  They can integrate, and mingle, and work together, but they must be realistic.

[masons_dad1]

itk, on May 4 2006, 09:23 PM, said:

Ohhhh, I'm sure some of the stuff those consultants Fayetteville hired (I forget the consultants names) were exactly what certain people in Fayetteville wanted to hear.

There are dreamers... then there are realists.  The City of Fayetteville, I think, has its fair share of the former.  

They can't tackle the problem by themselves.  Granted, the problem is pretty complex, so it obviously deserves a thorough study.  It's easy to say "make it a grid" and think voila, problem will be solved.  But I'm 99.9% confident this will require professionals with expertise in this field to do a thorough analysis.

Fayetteville always had ideas for improving Joyce/College-- they've been talking about a "fly-over" (to eliminate that U-turn) for as long as I can remember growing up there.  After those consultants, the City I think wants to seriously look at other options.  If it takes a progressive and innovative solution, I'm all for it... if it's realistic.  

I guess to address your question directly, you would need to elaborate on what you mean by a "street grid".  I think I've read some of those consultants take on their "grid" idea... I wasn't impressed.  Talking about fuzzy planning recommendations and talking about specific solutions to specific engineering problems are somewhat different animals.  They can integrate, and mingle, and work together, but they must be realistic.

I heard that not too long ago Fayetteville brought in some planners from St. Petersburg, FL to consult them about a "street grid". St. Petersburg has one of the nicest street grids of any city I've lived in. In fact they have so many streets that the city is now facing a shortage of developable land so the city wants to eliminate some less travelled streets. Essentially, St. Petersburg, FL shares the same urban land area as NWA, but there are over a million people living in St. Petersburg. Their street grid is very effective, but totally unrealistic for NWA. Fayetteville is very hilly and will just have to settle for some other means of transportation because a great street grid is unattainable.

[itk]

^ Yep, that's part of it.  For example, wouldn't it be nice if Fayetteville could extend their grid over the eastern half of the city... except that Mt. Sequyoah is in the way, and they've fought any road connection over that mountain for I don't know how long.

Also, I remember Fayetteville's good idea to extend Township to connect to Hwy 45 to the east.  Very logical, sound idea, and does reflect in a way a "grid pattern".  Except, to my understanding, citizens in that area fought it, so now the road basically dead-ends in a subdivision.  "Grid pattern" concept struck down again.

I'm sure there are other examples I can't think of right now...

[Mith242]

I know the odd roads throw people off but I like the fact that Fayetteville isn't all laid out as a grid system.  I think it helps add to part of Fayetteville's uniqueness.  Although I know it certainly helps confuse the new people that move in.

[thewizard16]

Mith242, on May 8 2006, 05:40 AM, said:

I know the odd roads throw people off but I like the fact that Fayetteville isn't all laid out as a grid system.  I think it helps add to part of Fayetteville's uniqueness.  Although I know it certainly helps confuse the new people that move in.

Depending on where they're going, it can make giving directions interesting too. I don't mind the roads not being gridded, I just wish that the whole 71/71B/I-540 intersection wasn't like it was. It can be very difficult to tell someone who isn't from here how to get through there to go to anywhere specific when you're talking to them on their cell phone as they come into town...

[Mith242]

thewizard16, on May 8 2006, 03:27 PM, said:

Depending on where they're going, it can make giving directions interesting too. I don't mind the roads not being gridded, I just wish that the whole 71/71B/I-540 intersection wasn't like it was. It can be very difficult to tell someone who isn't from here how to get through there to go to anywhere specific when you're talking to them on their cell phone as they come into town...

Yeah it's certainly hard on new people.  But I certainly agree with you on how the 71/I-540 situation here in Fayetteville.  I think if they ever get something done with the Fulbright Expressway that it will make traffic a lot better in that area of the city.

[strmchsr77]

Another office building planned on East Joyce.  This is going to be just a 2 story building on the back of the Proctor & Gamble property.  I guess they will eventually be putting more buildings on the lot in the future along with a new building for P&G.  This is located between Regions Bank and First Security Bank and directly across from Bellafont.  

Here is the article from the Times:
East Joyce Office