Ruskin Heights

[mzweig]

yeah, i think there are some legitmate runoff concerns with this development voiced by those in the neighborhood, not to mention traffic. plus, it does suck that it is going to be located, if i'm not mistaken, on one of the last, if not the last, wooded areas of mt. sequoyah. but i still think it's worth it.

The area is pretty well open land--not wooded at all. The perimeter has some trees and they are planning on leaving most of them.

[Mith242]

yeah, i think there are some legitmate runoff concerns with this development voiced by those in the neighborhood, not to mention traffic. plus, it does suck that it is going to be located, if i'm not mistaken, on one of the last, if not the last, wooded areas of mt. sequoyah. but i still think it's worth it.

I don't know I still think there's a number of wooded areas around Mt Sequoyah. The city just bought all that land from the Methodist retreat not long ago that's all forested up there. I guess I shouldn't make it sound there aren't any concerns. And I obviously don't have the same opinion as everyone.

[Ruskin]

yeah, i think there are some legitmate runoff concerns with this development voiced by those in the neighborhood, not to mention traffic. plus, it does suck that it is going to be located, if i'm not mistaken, on one of the last, if not the last, wooded areas of mt. sequoyah. but i still think it's worth it.

Just a quick response to these legitimate points:

Runoff - Matt Casey, the City Engineer, accurately pointed out at the Subdivision meeting that post-development, the neighbors will have a lot less runoff since the property is currently undeveloped and, therefore, has no storm water management. After the property is developed, storm water will be managed and direct to our detention areas. At the same meeting Commissioner Candy Clark pointed out that new State and Federal guidelines require the developer, not just the contractor, to be responsible for runoff during construction. The obvious result is a prudent construction storm water management plan that uses berms, silt fences and detention.

Trees - There are actually hundreds of wooded acres on East Mt. Sequoyah. Most of the site is open now and the most wooded, and steepest, area (unfortunately most of the larger trees are only around 40 years old) of the site is on the southwestern boundary and has been set aside for protection. Furthermore, the homes surrounding the protected area will have prescribed footprints that are relatively small and laid out to protect as many signficant trees as possible.

Traffic - Traffic on Mission is always a concern and we have recently gotten some significant State approvals for improvements to Mission. In fact, we have postponed our Planning Commission meeting from Monday the 8th to Monday the 22nd to solidify (hopefully) more traffic approvals. Of course, the best way to improve traffic on Mission is to discourage sprawl out East, but that gets lost in the discussion a lot of the time.

I am glad that you think the neighborhood will be nice, but I also wanted to let you know that we are thinking about, and trying to improve, areas in which you may have concerns.

Ward

[Ruskin]

UPDATE - JANUARY 22nd Planning Commission

We have pulled ourselves from the January 8th Planning Commission agenda to solidify several things, most notably traffic improvements. Our new date for the Planning Commission is January 22nd. We need everyone to be there to support us!!

Ward

[cocothief]

Just curious, do the traffic improvements to Mission include a boulevard strip as shown in the photo?

[Mith242]

Just a quick response to these legitimate points:

Runoff - Matt Casey, the City Engineer, accurately pointed out at the Subdivision meeting that post-development, the neighbors will have a lot less runoff since the property is currently undeveloped and, therefore, has no storm water management. After the property is developed, storm water will be managed and direct to our detention areas. At the same meeting Commissioner Candy Clark pointed out that new State and Federal guidelines require the developer, not just the contractor, to be responsible for runoff during construction. The obvious result is a prudent construction storm water management plan that uses berms, silt fences and detention.

Trees - There are actually hundreds of wooded acres on East Mt. Sequoyah. Most of the site is open now and the most wooded, and steepest, area (unfortunately most of the larger trees are only around 40 years old) of the site is on the southwestern boundary and has been set aside for protection. Furthermore, the homes surrounding the protected area will have prescribed footprints that are relatively small and laid out to protect as many signficant trees as possible.

Traffic - Traffic on Mission is always a concern and we have recently gotten some significant State approvals for improvements to Mission. In fact, we have postponed our Planning Commission meeting from Monday the 8th to Monday the 22nd to solidify (hopefully) more traffic approvals. Of course, the best way to improve traffic on Mission is to discourage sprawl out East, but that gets lost in the discussion a lot of the time.

I am glad that you think the neighborhood will be nice, but I also wanted to let you know that we are thinking about, and trying to improve, areas in which you may have concerns.

Ward

Thanks for the info. It really seems like you guys have really thought all of this through and it's not some spur of the moment development that will have problems later on. Nice to see and I hope people notice this.

[Ruskin]

Just curious, do the traffic improvements to Mission include a boulevard strip as shown in the photo?

Not yet. Unfortunately, we have to take baby steps with the State. Our first goal is to get the traffic flows improved and then push for the aesthetics. That being said, tree medians are great for traffic calming as well as just being beautiful, so we continue to encourage their use.

[cowbreath]

Hi all, I went to the dpz website just to checkout the current projects and what they looked like. I was getting second thoughts in throwing my support in the direction of the project if the designs were not that great. One thing I hadn't thought through is if the mixed retail and the isolation of necessity to leave the area turned it into a "gated" kinded of community. Also that factor plus the expensiveness of doing diversity in design for the houses and for the community makes me wonder if the quality of the housing is sacrificed or whatever. What we have are mainly sketches, and they look nice but the eye can see better with the end result.

So looking at the other projects constructed by DPZ had me wondering if they were really all that quality. What does anyone else think about this? Should we go for supporting these things blindly because they are "urban infill" by category and are diverse in purpose? I think they can easily win support by people like us, and they are going to be a growingly popular development style as people get tired of urban sprawl. Anyways, just testing the depth of our conviction on this property, and challenging it beyond the glamour of actually having the developer communicate with us directly.

I'm sure we have good reasons, but just checking. Also it turns out when my parents disapproved of a new development behind their house many years ago, they got about 30 houses knocked off of the plan for the PUD off of Old Wire and Mission. So resistance is good some times, but then again I guess I wonder what the site would look like with 30 more houses.

[mzweig]

Hi all, I went to the dpz website just to checkout the current projects and what they looked like. I was getting second thoughts in throwing my support in the direction of the project if the designs were not that great. One thing I hadn't thought through is if the mixed retail and the isolation of necessity to leave the area turned it into a "gated" kinded of community. Also that factor plus the expensiveness of doing diversity in design for the houses and for the community makes me wonder if the quality of the housing is sacrificed or whatever. What we have are mainly sketches, and they look nice but the eye can see better with the end result.

So looking at the other projects constructed by DPZ had me wondering if they were really all that quality. What does anyone else think about this? Should we go for supporting these things blindly because they are "urban infill" by category and are diverse in purpose? I think they can easily win support by people like us, and they are going to be a growingly popular development style as people get tired of urban sprawl. Anyways, just testing the depth of our conviction on this property, and challenging it beyond the glamour of actually having the developer communicate with us directly.

I'm sure we have good reasons, but just checking. Also it turns out when my parents disapproved of a new development behind their house many years ago, they got about 30 houses knocked off of the plan for the PUD off of Old Wire and Mission. So resistance is good some times, but then again I guess I wonder what the site would look like with 30 more houses.

DPZ is one of the top neourban planning and design firms in the country, if not the world. Believe me, Ruskin Heights will be the best looking and best planned residential/mixed use development in the state if it is allowed to be built and not screwed up by everyone else.

[Mith242]

Everything I've seen makes it looks like these guys have really done their homework. I don't think this is some hastily planned development that was thrown out there. They seem to have everything thought through rather well. From what I have seen it didn't give me the impression of being a gated community.

[NWAnewby]

It is always worthwhile to be skeptical, but you don't have to take the developer's word for the quality. Do a quick Google search for DPZ and Andres Duany and see what you pull up. I did just that and it doesn't seem like they are associated with low quality stuff. Ridiculously high end projects maybe, but certainly not the bottom of the barrel or even mediocre.

All in all, it seems to me that with DPZ's track record we can safely assume that this will be a world class addition to Fayetteville.

[jiggyK]

may i say, "amen."

[cowbreath]

Well, I guess that sounds good enough for me.

Still surprised the Legacy building had stucco.

[Thia]

Everything I've seen makes it looks like these guys have really done their homework. I don't think this is some hastily planned development that was thrown out there. They seem to have everything thought through rather well. From what I have seen it didn't give me the impression of being a gated community.

I think the Ruskin Heights developers did LOTS of homework even before they brought DPZ to Fayetteville in July for the public charettes. The Ruskin Heights guys understood they would have to overcome resistance and though through issues like storm water maintenance, traffic, public space, tree preservation, and green space, and made DPZ aware of these issues as hot spots to consider in their planning. It was obvious in the developers

[jiggyK]

i'll write my commissioner as well. but how does one do such a thing? i know fayetteville has different wards. does one then write the aldermen for his/her respective ward?

[Thia]

Planning Commissioners - [email protected] For the Planning Commission send to this address "Care of City Clerk"

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

Mayor - [email protected]

jiggyK-

Our planning commissioners all support the entire city. They do not represent specific wards. Send a message to all planning commissioners.

The planning commissioners have to pass this before it goes to our aldermen at City Council. If the planning commission does not pass this I think there is an appeal process to get this before the City Council.

Our aldermen support us by wards but they all vote on every issue so there is much value to sending your opinion to all of them. And include the mayor- he votes on issues in the case of ties.

Here is the ward map: http://gis.accessfayetteville.org/website/Wards/viewer.htm

Here is the list of aldermen: http://www.accessfayetteville.org/city_gov...t/city_council/ (not updated for Ward 1's new alderman)

Here is the list of planning commissioners: http://www.accessfayetteville.org/city_gov...commission.html

[jiggyK]

thanks for all the helpful info, thia. i'll send some pro-heights emails now.

[orangeplanet]

jiggyK-

Our planning commissioners all support the entire city. They do not represent specific wards. Send a message to all planning commissioners.

The planning commissioners have to pass this before it goes to our aldermen at City Council. If the planning commission does not pass this I think there is an appeal process to get this before the City Council.

Our aldermen support us by wards but they all vote on every issue so there is much value to sending your opinion to all of them. And include the mayor- he votes on issues in the case of ties.

Here is the ward map: http://gis.accessfayetteville.org/website/Wards/viewer.htm

Here is the list of aldermen: http://www.accessfayetteville.org/city_gov...t/city_council/ (not updated for Ward 1's new alderman)

Here is the list of planning commissioners: http://www.accessfayetteville.org/city_gov...commission.html

Believe me, Thia does her homework! If she's in favor of the development, I'm in favor of the development! Plus, I've been to the site, attended the charrettes, lived off Mission several years, talked to the developers, researched DPZ, etc., etc. I've exchanged ideas with the planning commissioners I know and am ready to show my support at the planning commission meeting on the 22nd.

[Mith242]

I noticed someone had a nice letter that was sent in to the editorial of the Northwest Arkansas Times supporting this development. It was nice to see. I believe it was the owner of Eureka Pizza. He mentioned how they were trying to do things that were discussed at the City Plan 2025 meetings. He also pointed out Fayetteville's need for developments to help Fayetteville's schools because the university doesn't pay any property taxes and most of the mall area ended up in Springdale's property tax area. He also mentioned how property development is a risky occupation and hopefully future developers won't be scared away from Fayetteville in the future.

[cowbreath]

I noticed someone had a nice letter that was sent in to the editorial of the Northwest Arkansas Times supporting this development. It was nice to see. I believe it was the owner of Eureka Pizza. He mentioned how they were trying to do things that were discussed at the City Plan 2025 meetings. He also pointed out Fayetteville's need for developments to help Fayetteville's schools because the university doesn't pay any property taxes and most of the mall area ended up in Springdale's property tax area. He also mentioned how property development is a risky occupation and hopefully future developers won't be scared away from Fayetteville in the future.

Was it Rauf (Roff..I don't know the spelling)?

[cowbreath]

Was it Rauf (Roff..I don't know the spelling)?

Oh I just found the editorial and it is spelled Rolf! Very powerful editatorial and to the point, and he brought in some valuable information that I had not known. I always thought our 11% sales tax was extremely high for restaurants anywhere, and the most that I had seen. It ticks me off that it only used to be 6%! What is going on here?

Rolf's Takes His Turn

[Mith242]

Oh I just found the editorial and it is spelled Rolf! Very powerful editatorial and to the point, and he brought in some valuable information that I had not known. I always thought our 11% sales tax was extremely high for restaurants anywhere, and the most that I had seen. It ticks me off that it only used to be 6%! What is going on here?

Rolf's Takes His Turn

Yeah it's Rolf. Like I said earlier, I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure he's the owner of Eureka Pizza. But yeah it's nice to hear him support this.

[NWAnewby]

Yeah it's Rolf. Like I said earlier, I'm not positive but I'm pretty sure he's the owner of Eureka Pizza. But yeah it's nice to hear him support this.

I am so happy to read such a positive response in the paper. His letter is an asset to these guys considering he is a neighbor who WANTS this development in his backyard. I hope the city council members and planning commissioners take his letter to heart when they vote.

[mzweig]

Well, I guess that sounds good enough for me.

Still surprised the Legacy building had stucco.

These developers had nothing to do with the Legacy just like Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Neither did the planners. You can thank Brandon Barber and no-name architects for stuff like that.

[cowbreath]

These developers had nothing to do with the Legacy just like Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11. Neither did the planners. You can thank Brandon Barber and no-name architects for stuff like that.

Yeah, I knew that. I was just alluding to another project that I had a little higher expectations for on the quality of it. I'm still happy with it though and what the Barber dude is trying to do.

Anyways, didn't mean to be like the US and make an excuse to attack Ruskin because of the Legacy.