380 replies to this topic

[mzweig]

Ruskin, on Nov 29 2006, 04:59 PM, said:

Mitchell is an equal partner with the three of us on the deal and Morgan Hooker and I used to be minority owners of Growth Group.  We kind of have the best of both worlds by being able to focus on this project while having access to a larger organization for support.

I certainly appreciate the support and would encourage folks to voice that support at the Planning Commission and City Council (or tomorrow at the Subdivision Meeting).  I know that people usually only motivate to show up when they have negative comments, but we could sure use the help.  An e-mail to Tim Conklin, Jeremy Pate, and Andrew Garner at the City as well as to the Councilmembers and Commissioners wouldn't hurt as well!!  I will keep checking in with key dates during the approval process.

Hey, Ward.  Mark Z. here--I am your next door neighbor over there on Lafayette.  Love the project--and I think it could very successful due to it being differentiated from all else around here.  Best of luck to you!

[Mith242]

cocothief, on Nov 29 2006, 04:28 PM, said:

Based on the renderings, I believe this project preseves what is unique and great about Fayetteville, while providing density that the city needs to prevent sprawl.

I agree with you there.

[thewizard16]

I love the idea of Ruskin, and I like the location. The idea of using a hill to your advantage for street layout and style purposes is refreshing compared to what most developments have done. Good luck with approval, Ruskin.

[Ruskin]

Disappointing Update.

We were forwarded with a recommendation to deny by the Subdivision Committee of the Planning Commission (2 for denial, 1 for passage).  Their whole problem revolves around density.  We are proposing 10 units per acre which follows a transect from condos on Mission to single family lots up the hill and on the edges.  This density is, as many of you know, relatively sparse relative to most TND's.  The two that voted for denial claim to be very supportive of New Urbanist concepts and City Plan 2025, but admitted that they are swayed by "not-in-my-back-yard" in this case.

We feel very strongly about a mix of uses (and, therefore, density) are critical to a healthy community and have decided to move forward with the current plan, but will need public support.  The Planning Commission meeting is at 5:30 on Monday, December 11th.

[Sneaky Snake]

What is the Ruskin Heights website?

[itk]

Ruskin, on Nov 30 2006, 03:28 PM, said:

Disappointing Update.

We were forwarded with a recommendation to deny by the Subdivision Committee of the Planning Commission (2 for denial, 1 for passage).  Their whole problem revolves around density.  We are proposing 10 units per acre which follows a transect from condos on Mission to single family lots up the hill and on the edges.  This density is, as many of you know, relatively sparse relative to most TND's.  The two that voted for denial claim to be very supportive of New Urbanist concepts and City Plan 2025, but admitted that they are swayed by "not-in-my-back-yard" in this case.

We feel very strongly about a mix of uses (and, therefore, density) are critical to a healthy community and have decided to move forward with the current plan, but will need public support.  The Planning Commission meeting is at 5:30 on Monday, December 11th.

This sort of apparent and seeming lip service to new urbanism and the principles outlined by Dover & Kohl dissapoint me thoroughly.  Yet I am not surprised.  This sort of thing happens all the time.  A City administration can give one impression, yet without spine or resolve can decide on issues to the contrary.  When push comes to shove, they cave.  Not always, but this seems like a definite example.  

One may even go so far as to claim hypocrisy.  Very dissapointing.

From a transportation professional, this irks me even more for other reasons.  Like I have constantly said before, when it comes to transportation problems, it's not entirely the fault of those who plan or build them.  The onus is also on those who don't follow smart growth principles, planning, etc., and cave without leadership to those in the public with the loudest voices.  The result?  In many cases, low density sprawl, seperation of neighborhoods (i.e. lack of connectivity), etc.

[mzweig]

itk, on Nov 30 2006, 06:45 PM, said:

This sort of apparent and seeming lip service to new urbanism and the principles outlined by Dover & Kohl dissapoint me thoroughly.  Yet I am not surprised.  This sort of thing happens all the time.  A City administration can give one impression, yet without spine or resolve can decide on issues to the contrary.  When push comes to shove, they cave.  Not always, but this seems like a definite example.  

One may even go so far as to claim hypocrisy.  Very dissapointing.

From a transportation professional, this irks me even more for other reasons.  Like I have constantly said before, when it comes to transportation problems, it's not entirely the fault of those who plan or build them.  The onus is also on those who don't follow smart growth principles, planning, etc., and cave without leadership to those in the public with the loudest voices.  The result?  In many cases, low density sprawl, seperation of neighborhoods (i.e. lack of connectivity), etc.

I completely agree, ITK.  Dover-Kohl plan is being ignored all over this town.  It's a shame!

[cocothief]

mzweig, on Nov 30 2006, 07:17 PM, said:

I completely agree, ITK.  Dover-Kohl plan is being ignored all over this town.  It's a shame!

Why spend the money on a study if you aren't going to implement its recommendations?

[Ruskin]

SS - We are working on the web site, but we love to walk people through the plan.  Stop by or call at any time (Ward at 422-2955, 2013 Mission Blvd).

ITK - You hit the nail on the head.  We are proposing the type of neighborhood that improves traffic problems (mixed use - reduces trips between 25 and 40%, infill - reduces miles per trip, and density to support public transportation), and yet we get blamed for adding traffic.  How about all the sprawl toward Goshen?

We will be in front of the whole Planning Commission on the 11th at 5:30 and could really use support.  I know I have a vested interest, but it would be a shame to have DPZ design a project for Fayetteville and not be allowed to develop it.

[cowbreath]

I hope they aren't too swayed by the "not-in-my-backyard" argument.  I remember years ago when my parents were fighting against a development in their backyard here in Fayetteville.  It was proposed to be much more dense than the surrounding neighborhoods.  We couldn't imagine fitting so many houses in one small tract of land.  It turns out it is one of our favorite places/neighborhoods in Fayetteville now.  I can't remember the name of it, but it is between Old Wire and Mission and you have to drive through the neighborhoods to get there.  My parents call it a PUD, but I don't know if that was an official name.  It is by far the coolest neighborhood idea that they could've come up with.

[Thia]

cowbreath, on Dec 1 2006, 01:19 AM, said:

I hope they aren't too swayed by the "not-in-my-backyard" argument.  I remember years ago when my parents were fighting against a development in their backyard here in Fayetteville.  It was proposed to be much more dense than the surrounding neighborhoods.  We couldn't imagine fitting so many houses in one small tract of land.  It turns out it is one of our favorite places/neighborhoods in Fayetteville now.  I can't remember the name of it, but it is between Old Wire and Mission and you have to drive through the neighborhoods to get there.  My parents call it a PUD, but I don't know if that was an official name.  It is by far the coolest neighborhood idea that they could've come up with.

Charleston Place, by Greg House on Amber Drive, north of Fairview Memorial Cemetery?

[mzweig]

Thia, on Dec 1 2006, 01:55 AM, said:

Charleston Place, by Greg House on Amber Drive, north of Fairview Memorial Cemetery?

That has to be what he's talking about.  Very successful, too.

As many of you folks undoubtedly know, a PUD is a planned unit development.  It's an approved, non-conforming plan for a specific piece of property.  Zoning is not changed but that specific plan, as designed, gets approved to be built.

[cowbreath]

Thia, on Dec 1 2006, 12:55 AM, said:

Charleston Place, by Greg House on Amber Drive, north of Fairview Memorial Cemetery?

Yeah, that's the one. I was hoping someone would be able to remember it.

mzweig, on Dec 1 2006, 05:31 AM, said:

Charleston Place, by Greg House on Amber Drive, north of Fairview Memorial Cemetery?

Thanks for clarifying what a PUD is.  I knew what it stood for but didn't know why it was called that.

[strmchsr77]

Ruskin, on Nov 30 2006, 08:55 PM, said:

ITK - You hit the nail on the head.  We are proposing the type of neighborhood that improves traffic problems (mixed use - reduces trips between 25 and 40%, infill - reduces miles per trip, and density to support public transportation), and yet we get blamed for adding traffic.  How about all the sprawl toward Goshen?

Sprawl seems to be an issue in west Fayetteville as well.  Most developments out there are also trying to use the New Urbanism concepts but I would not call them infill.  Most seem to be "greenfield" developments.

Hey Ward, do you know anything about the Southpass Development in SW Fayetteville?  I know you are just focusing on Ruskin but I thought that I would ask anyway.

[Ruskin]

strmchsr77, on Dec 1 2006, 10:39 AM, said:

Sprawl seems to be an issue in west Fayetteville as well.  Most developments out there are also trying to use the New Urbanism concepts but I would not call them infill.  Most seem to be "greenfield" developments.

Hey Ward, do you know anything about the Southpass Development in SW Fayetteville?  I know you are just focusing on Ruskin but I thought that I would ask anyway.

I totally agree that the TND projects in West Fayetteville are greenfield, not infill.  We have really stuck our neck out in terms of both cost and a fight with NIMBY's to put New Urbanist principles to work in an infill location.

Yes,  I am very familiar with Southpass.  Urban Design Associates (UDA) is the land planner and they are great (http://www.urbandesignassociates.com/).  I also respect how John Nock and Richard Alexander develop real estate.  They aren't, however, as dumb as I am and realize that regardless of the lip service paid to City Plan Goal #1 (infill highest priority), you have a much easier time getting a New Urbanist project approved in a greenfield location.  

cowbreath, on Dec 1 2006, 12:19 AM, said:

I hope they aren't too swayed by the "not-in-my-backyard" argument.  I remember years ago when my parents were fighting against a development in their backyard here in Fayetteville.  It was proposed to be much more dense than the surrounding neighborhoods.  We couldn't imagine fitting so many houses in one small tract of land.  It turns out it is one of our favorite places/neighborhoods in Fayetteville now.  I can't remember the name of it, but it is between Old Wire and Mission and you have to drive through the neighborhoods to get there.  My parents call it a PUD, but I don't know if that was an official name.  It is by far the coolest neighborhood idea that they could've come up with.

Cowbreath,

What do I have to bribe you with to have you or your parents tell this story to the Planning Commission on the 11th?  This is exactly what we try to tell folks, but it just sounds self-serving coming from us.

[cowbreath]

Ruskin, on Dec 1 2006, 02:55 PM, said:

Cowbreath,

What do I have to bribe you with to have you or your parents tell this story to the Planning Commission on the 11th?  This is exactly what we try to tell folks, but it just sounds self-serving coming from us.

Well, if we are going for bribes here -- and I have no ethics against that in this situation   -- I guess I could have a few options:

1) (most important) Give me a nice stylish 1500sf house in this new development for $125,000.  

2) Build this development in style with quality materials for the living abodes and ensure that in the end it won't be ugly or tight with cars parked on the street too much or giving too much accessibility issues.  I guess you can get away with this style and make the houses smaller and prices higher, but I hope each house is fully practical and not making two rooms out of one room if you get my drift.

3) Just build this development at all if it is approved and do it fast because we are waiting to see it.  

Yeah, it might be a good story to sell to the council, but I"m extremely inexperienced with community involvement and my parents are extremely inexperienced in listening to my ideas and going forth with it.  I'll give it some thought and discussion with them though.

Edited by cowbreath, 01 December 2006 - 05:46 PM.

[Mith242]

Sorry for the late response here.  This is disappointing news and I have to agree with the others, some city officials do seem a bit hypocritical about new urbanism and the Dover Kohl study.  This does seem to be one of these situations where everyone thinks this is a good idea until you try to do something close to where someone lives.  I might have to work some long hours at work next Monday but if possible I'll try to swing by Planning Commission for the meeting.

[Mith242]

Does anyone have the email addresses for the members of the Planning Commission?  I imagine if I look hard enough I could find it one the city's website somewhere.  But I was hoping someone might have easy access to them.  I'd like to respond to them about this issue.

[Ruskin]

Mith242, on Dec 1 2006, 06:36 PM, said:

Does anyone have the email addresses for the members of the Planning Commission?  I imagine if I look hard enough I could find it one the city's website somewhere.  But I was hoping someone might have easy access to them.  I'd like to respond to them about this issue.

Planning Commissioners - city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us   For the Planning Commission send to this address "Care of City Clerk"

Aldermen - http://www.accessfay...t/city_council/    Use this web site to get each of the Aldermen

Mayor - mayor@ci.fayetteville.ar.us

[NWAnewby]

Wow!  I am new to Fayetteville and am truly impressed that DPZ has made it here.  I've visited Seaside in FL and used to live in the DC area near Kentlands.  They are cool developments!!  I think it would be a fresh idea here and would add even more charm to this college town.  TND fits perfectly here, as noted by the success of Charleston Place, and the Noch/Alexander developments in town.  Too bad they aren't infill, but I guess it's one baby step at a time for the council.   I'll keep checking on the updates.  Good luck!