CellarDoor135

Ruskin Heights

Recommended Posts

Seems like the developers have so much trouble with people and the city. Now the city is having a problem with the developers wanting to 'age' the concrete in the sidewalks. They're wanting to go for more of an established neighborhood rather than a brand new one. So one of the things they're wanting to do is age the sidewalks which involves pressure washing the top 1/8" off. I guess maybe I can see the city having some questions about it. But it's funny how the city encourages 'unique development styles'. But then nothing can get through all the city code. I can understand needing city codes and ordinances to prevent bad developments and such. But here's a case where it's being more harmful than useful. Fayetteville code only allows a 'broom finish' to sidewalks and curbs. Everybody complains about 'cookie cutter' developments. But then when someone comes in with a nice development the city seems to be discouraging it rather than encouraging it. Come on city officials, put your money where your mouth is. How about some city officials actually do something 'helpful' for a change. Before we run off more developers to other areas.

I was not allowed to put in exposed aggregate sidewalks in front of my houses. White concrete....even tho exposed costs more and looks better...is all they want. We talked them into a tiny bit of color in front of 413 N. Willow....they did me a favor.

Mark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I can understand having a clause that "requests" durable long lasting materials and to be a "proper fit" within the community. I cannot understand why so many cities require specific things when those things have little to do with practicality. Require only one type of sidewalk? Why? Just because someone was too lazy to provide proper details in the city code and instead just said, hell we will just require only this so we will have to do less work.

From News Article here

"They are doing a lot of things outside the box, and I do like to encourage creativity," Planning Commissioner Porter Winston said.

Commissioner Jill Anthes agreed the city is encouraging unique development styles.

Encouraging unique ideas like the mixed use development that was suppose to have both residential and storage facilities on one site that was denied by council? Or how about <insert nice long list of anti-unique encouraging examples from Fayetteville here>.

Sure, there is a purpose for city codes. What the codes are for is a base line requirement that is not set in stone but is a suggestion for the most basic of requirements that should be allowed easy waivers. The developer is putting so much time and resources into these things and the council doesn't realize the risks involved.

Stupid, large, overbearing government!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These developers should apply for the variance BEFORE they put in curbs and gutter. They put planning on the spot when they can not prove the durability or safety of their finish on the concrete.

Thinking outside the box is great. Crapping in the box is not. Grow up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These developers should apply for the variance BEFORE they put in curbs and gutter. They put planning on the spot when they can not prove the durability or safety of their finish on the concrete.

Thinking outside the box is great. Crapping in the box is not. Grow up.

Even if you have a valid point coming on here and posting for the first time and telling people to 'grow up' isn't going to get anyone to listen to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If our new poster is on the same PC that approved Lindsey's The Links and has given Ruskin Heights hassle after hassle, I don't want to hear a word he/she says anyway.

Pathetic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Grow up comment was in response to Ruskin "fight the power".

Going to the city with a project and a chip on your shoulder from the beginning, telling (instead of asking) the PC to give them variances, acting insulted when PC members and the public question these variances and just being rude with their overbearing attitude, (marching into meetings and acting like everyone but them is stupid or ignorant to NU) creates a lot of their own problems.

Working with the system and then changing the system to adopt NU ideas is the way to archive the goals of better development.

Pushing the issue with an attitude just hurts the cause, alienates potential allies and makes the government and public wary of the motives for NU projects and development.

So if you are insulted by the comment to grow up, just keep it in perspective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mith 242, I have been reading post on this blog for a few years bu have just recently decided to comment on occasion. I see and talk to a lot of the people on the local forum.

I did not mean to PO anyone, just felt the need to chime in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked back in. Boy, I sure thought that the "Fight the Power" comment would be understood as tongue-in-cheek, which was exactly how it was meant. After all, how much are you really fighting the power by trying to get a curb finish approved??

Also, I will defend sustainable a bit. The original point about putting the staff in an awkward position is legitimate, altough I disagree about the durability and safety points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked back in. Boy, I sure thought that the "Fight the Power" comment would be understood as tongue-in-cheek, which was exactly how it was meant. After all, how much are you really fighting the power by trying to get a curb finish approved??

It brought a grin to my face. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've found frustrating about the whole thing is that to me it just never seemed like the city of Fayetteville really was supportive to this development. I went to all the Fayetteville 2025 City Plan meetings and it seemed pretty unanimous that people at those meetings felt a New Urbanism style of planning should be followed by Fayetteville. Yeah the city did eventually give Ruskin Heights a pass but for a development that follows the ideas of New Urbanism so well I just feel the city should have been more supportive. I can't really recall anyone on the City Council who seemed to be very supportive of this development. The city talks a lot about wanting 'planned growth' and such. But doesn't seem to put it's money where it's mouth is. I've seen Lindsey developments that don't have any of the New Urbanism aspects at all go through the City Council more easily. Honestly I still have a hard time understanding why this development in particular seems to get some people riled up so much. It was pretty obvious none of the neighbors liked this development. Too bad none of them took the time to attend one single 2025 City Plan meeting. I just don't see why this development doesn't get more support from members of the city government when it follows all the ideas of the 2025 City Plan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've found frustrating about the whole thing is that to me it just never seemed like the city of Fayetteville really was supportive to this development. I went to all the Fayetteville 2025 City Plan meetings and it seemed pretty unanimous that people at those meetings felt a New Urbanism style of planning should be followed by Fayetteville. Yeah the city did eventually give Ruskin Heights a pass but for a development that follows the ideas of New Urbanism so well I just feel the city should have been more supportive. I can't really recall anyone on the City Council who seemed to be very supportive of this development. The city talks a lot about wanting 'planned growth' and such. But doesn't seem to put it's money where it's mouth is. I've seen Lindsey developments that don't have any of the New Urbanism aspects at all go through the City Council more easily. Honestly I still have a hard time understanding why this development in particular seems to get some people riled up so much. It was pretty obvious none of the neighbors liked this development. Too bad none of them took the time to attend one single 2025 City Plan meeting. I just don't see why this development doesn't get more support from members of the city government when it follows all the ideas of the 2025 City Plan.

As an outside observer, this seems more like a case of clashing personalities than clashing ideological views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've found frustrating about the whole thing is that to me it just never seemed like the city of Fayetteville really was supportive to this development. I went to all the Fayetteville 2025 City Plan meetings and it seemed pretty unanimous that people at those meetings felt a New Urbanism style of planning should be followed by Fayetteville. Yeah the city did eventually give Ruskin Heights a pass but for a development that follows the ideas of New Urbanism so well I just feel the city should have been more supportive. I can't really recall anyone on the City Council who seemed to be very supportive of this development. The city talks a lot about wanting 'planned growth' and such. But doesn't seem to put it's money where it's mouth is. I've seen Lindsey developments that don't have any of the New Urbanism aspects at all go through the City Council more easily. Honestly I still have a hard time understanding why this development in particular seems to get some people riled up so much. It was pretty obvious none of the neighbors liked this development. Too bad none of them took the time to attend one single 2025 City Plan meeting. I just don't see why this development doesn't get more support from members of the city government when it follows all the ideas of the 2025 City Plan.

I think there is a lot of ignorance out there about New Urbanism. My own limited interactions with a few of those who objected to this specific project were based on their prejudices about higher density attracting a different class of people (i.e., those from a socioeconomic strata lower than those objecting), when we all know that it will probably be just the opposite (higher income, higher education) who will eventually inhabit this development. A lot of folks just think big houses on big lots are what everyone who can afford it wants, when that is just not the case. Many people want a sense of community and don't want the alienation that comes from living in a typical drive-to-everything subdivision.

M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've found frustrating about the whole thing is that to me it just never seemed like the city of Fayetteville really was supportive to this development. I went to all the Fayetteville 2025 City Plan meetings and it seemed pretty unanimous that people at those meetings felt a New Urbanism style of planning should be followed by Fayetteville. Yeah the city did eventually give Ruskin Heights a pass but for a development that follows the ideas of New Urbanism so well I just feel the city should have been more supportive. I can't really recall anyone on the City Council who seemed to be very supportive of this development. The city talks a lot about wanting 'planned growth' and such. But doesn't seem to put it's money where it's mouth is. I've seen Lindsey developments that don't have any of the New Urbanism aspects at all go through the City Council more easily. Honestly I still have a hard time understanding why this development in particular seems to get some people riled up so much. It was pretty obvious none of the neighbors liked this development. Too bad none of them took the time to attend one single 2025 City Plan meeting. I just don't see why this development doesn't get more support from members of the city government when it follows all the ideas of the 2025 City Plan.

People love ideas like new urbanism or smart growth in an abstract form. Its when a project is built next to them or they see what those ideas require with regard to actual regulations that people voice opposition.

It is unfortunate when a city spends so much time AND money going through the planning process to get public input, makes a plan, adopts/readopts development regs and the planning commission/council cowers because of a crowd of angry people. That happens elsewhere more than in Fayetteville, but man that sucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any updates?

I agree, I'd like to hear what progress there's been. One of the links that had been posted on this topic doesn't seem to work anymore. This link here seems to be the most up to date one I can find.

http://www.ruskin-heights.com/

There's a spot for pictures and progress but there doesn't seem to be much on that section of the website right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like there could be trouble.

http://www.nwaonline.net/articles/2009/08/...09busruskin.txt

It's going to be really disappointing if this development never happens. I've worried a bit because I haven't seen much progress happening in quite a while. Granted the economy certainly isn't helping. I just hope things can work out. This was a nice development and infill I was really looking forward to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what's holding things up. But it sounds like most of the infrastructure for phase one is already in. Also sounds like developers have already paid the city. I was thinking some of the developers involved were out of state. Maybe they were involved with other housing markets that got hit a lot worse. In fact I was thinking there was a Florida developer involved. I know Florida got hit really hard by the housing market. Still such a shame to get this close. Still hoping that something can happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the developers hadn't had to fight through the city planning process for so long they could have been further along. By now they and the bank might have been getting a return on their investment and been able to continue. The neighbors may have won the battle after all, sadly enough. It's still zoned and approved for this development, though. It's possible something can be worked out and the present plan or something similar can be built there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the developers hadn't had to fight through the city planning process for so long they could have been further along. By now they and the bank might have been getting a return on their investment and been able to continue. The neighbors may have won the battle after all, sadly enough. It's still zoned and approved for this development, though. It's possible something can be worked out and the present plan or something similar can be built there.

I'm worried though, that if someone else builds something there they could just end up building typical cookie cutter suburban style homes. Although ironically the neighbors might actually go for that. To make things worse I checked out an online article on this. There was a few comments from some of the 'neighbors' still complaining about this development and blaming it on the developers and city.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm worried though, that if someone else builds something there they could just end up building typical cookie cutter suburban style homes. Although ironically the neighbors might actually go for that. To make things worse I checked out an online article on this. There was a few comments from some of the 'neighbors' still complaining about this development and blaming it on the developers and city.

It is a PUD--Planned Unit Development. That means that only this very specific site plan has been approved because the zoning was not changed. No one can do anything different with it at all unless they throw the whole plan out the window and start from scratch. To put in typical subdivision stuff here now would be a huge waste of money. The bank would not go for that. They will want to implement this plan at some point my guess is to recover their investment and not slow down the process. We'll see.

M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a PUD--Planned Unit Development. That means that only this very specific site plan has been approved because the zoning was not changed. No one can do anything different with it at all unless they throw the whole plan out the window and start from scratch. To put in typical subdivision stuff here now would be a huge waste of money. The bank would not go for that. They will want to implement this plan at some point my guess is to recover their investment and not slow down the process. We'll see.

M

Good point- means there is hope yet for this good project of the type the city says it wants. According to the paper almost all the infrastructure is in place and it is for that plan so it would indeed be a big waste of money to start over. I think this is the type of development that would sell even in a economic downturn- I know I'd like one of those townhomes or lofts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point- means there is hope yet for this good project of the type the city says it wants. According to the paper almost all the infrastructure is in place and it is for that plan so it would indeed be a big waste of money to start over. I think this is the type of development that would sell even in a economic downturn- I know I'd like one of those townhomes or lofts.

The paper doesn't know what it is talking about (as usual). The infrastructure basics are in for phase 1, which is less than a third of the project area. I can't get too excited about this mess that bleeds dirt onto Mission.

I guess it's walkable if your are a mountain goat. Maybe the banks will plant grass and turn it into a park.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The paper doesn't know what it is talking about (as usual). The infrastructure basics are in for phase 1, which is less than a third of the project area. I can't get too excited about this mess that bleeds dirt onto Mission.

I guess it's walkable if your are a mountain goat. Maybe the banks will plant grass and turn it into a park.

While I read it in the paper the paper was directly quoting city staff. here's the quote-"Most, if not all, of these public infrastructure items have been installed to my knowledge," said Jeremy Pate, director of the Fayetteville Planning Division.' He was talking about 'Much of the infrastructure, such as streets, curbs, sidewalks and water lines for the 295-residence and 58,000-square-feet of commercial space has been installed, say city officials.' It's not likley that a bank would be willing to lose it's investment by not developing the project as it is planned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read in the newspaper about the infrastructure I was assuming they were just talking about phase one. I can't imagine that developers would put in all the infrastructure for a development that was going to take years all at once. I'm not so sure though that a bank wouldn't make changes. Especially on the latter stages, where some of the more innovative development would have happened. Even if someone else comes in and follows the general plan I also worry that they'll try to go through and do it cheaply just to save money. Forget about the new urbanism aspects and such. Why bother with a multi-use structure here when we can just throw up an easy strip mall instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.