5 West Mountain Development

[mzweig]

if they want more activity in downtown and the square, developers will need to build more hi rise residential ontop of commercial, and that will usually be higher than 6 or 12 stories, what we realy need for the downtown area to develop is a strong corporate pressence, id love to see a couple thirty story buildings in downtown, mixing in with the hillsides and trees, it would be a very unique and beautiful looking downtown. as for old main, you can see the damn thing from my house in tontitown, and from the mall in faytown easily, downtown is way on the other hill side, the only residence views it could block would be from the far south east side of the city, and all you see out there are hills and apartment complexes, i dont think a bunch of people are complaining, i just think some city planners are stuck back in the small town 50s. screw a whole bunch of that.

[Mith242]

This isn't Dallas. Downtown Fayetteville does not need a large skyline. The height restrictions are there for a reason. You have to think about scale. A thirty story building would be totally out of scale and would impose on any natural beauty surronding Fayetteville. Has anyone ever been to Europe? The larger collection of smaller buildings give the city intrigue and a reason to explore. Larger buildings, especially in a town like Fayetteville, would take away that intrigue and expose everything for miles around. Yes, a few taller buildings, such as the Divinity, will not ruin Fayetteville. But too many and you lose the character.

No city ever runs the risk of the land value becoming to expensive to build a 6 story building. That just means you don't have an intelligent developer! Somehow they have been able to maintain height restrictions all over the world and still make a profit. These developers are the same ones developing these empty lot subdivisions that sit around and take up space because they "over estimated" the market.

[masons_dad1]

I'm all for tall skyscrapers. But in the case of Fayetteville I would prefer 5 six-story buildings over 1 thirty-story building. Like CellarDoor said, "the larger collection of smaller buildings give the city intrigue and a reason to explore."

[Mith242]

I'm all for tall skyscrapers. But in the case of Fayetteville I would prefer 5 six-story buildings over 1 thirty-story building. Like CellarDoor said, "the larger collection of smaller buildings give the city intrigue and a reason to explore."

[strmchsr77]

That and multiple lower storied buildings is a bit more natural progression than suddenly a very tall building put in. NYC didn't start off putting up the Empire State Building first. It worked it's way to it. Perhaps not the best example but I think everyone gets the idea. But I still have to say I think 6 stories is too low.

[Mith242]

Just wanted to post another pic of the building and area we're talking about here. It's the small building in the center.

[strmchsr77]

Since we have been recently talking about the height restrictions and where they are located downtown, I thought I would post this map and these models on this topic. This is thanks to JiggyK that posted this on another topic.

Here is the link: Height Restrictions Map

[Thia]

Since we have been recently talking about the height restrictions and where they are located downtown, I thought I would post this map and these models on this topic. This is thanks to JiggyK that posted this on another topic.

Here is the link: Height Restrictions Map

[Thia]

This isn't Dallas. Downtown Fayetteville does not need a large skyline. The height restrictions are there for a reason. You have to think about scale. A thirty story building would be totally out of scale and would impose on any natural beauty surronding Fayetteville. Has anyone ever been to Europe? The larger collection of smaller buildings give the city intrigue and a reason to explore. Larger buildings, especially in a town like Fayetteville, would take away that intrigue and expose everything for miles around. Yes, a few taller buildings, such as the Divinity, will not ruin Fayetteville. But too many and you lose the character.

No city ever runs the risk of the land value becoming to expensive to build a 6 story building. That just means you don't have an intelligent developer! Somehow they have been able to maintain height restrictions all over the world and still make a profit. These developers are the same ones developing these empty lot subdivisions that sit around and take up space because they "over estimated" the market.

[Mith242]

Think about balance. For the next few decades in downtown Fayetteville, many 2- to 12-story buildings and existing 1-, 2-, and 3-story buildings with full occupancy make much more sense than a few 30-story buildings with moderate occupancy.

I think CellarDoor135

[zman9810]

Yeah I do know that Fayetteville wants to follow the European model than the Dallas model. But I'm still a bit worried that by placing such a low height that we in some ways are going to induce sprawl. European cities naturally went for infilling and such for safety. Many of these cities are old enough that they had city walls for protection. While I don't think we need 30 story buildings I'm concerned that if real estate goes up some pieces of land would be economically feasible to be developed with a lower height restriction. I have no problems with having a height restriction. I just think it's a bit too low in a number of areas. Granted that's not to say you couldn't talk the City Council into letting you have something higher. While that's possible I also think there might come a time when the City Council could become even more anti-development. While Paris and Barcelona do have height restrictions rather low they also do have a number of structures that are above those limits as well. I just hope that the City Council keeps that in mind for future developments. At the moment I don't think it's that big of a problem. But I think it can be in the near future if real estate prices go up.

[zman9810]

I think if a project is requested as a PZD (Planned Zoning District) that current zoning and planning restrictions don't apply. The project plans are negotiated between the developer and city staff and then introduced to planning committee for consideration. If this is true it gives an avenue for City Council to allow a higher building.

Anyone know if this is indeed the way it works?

[Mith242]

I think I found my answer. It seems there are two ways to bypass current zoning and planning restrictions. One is the PZD, which will go directly to the City Council after staff reviews it, and the other is as a variance. Bottom line, if you have a project that you can convince enough council members that it is worthy, it can be approved regardless of current law. Obviously, getting the support of council members is the hard part, no matter how worthy the project is.

[jdevers]

Everyone is wanting Fayetteville to avoid 'the Dallas route' yet Dallas is exactly where we are headed with height restrictions. The only people who think that Dallas has a very impressive skyline with a huge number of downtown buildings are people who have never been anywhere else. On the other hand, Dallas is a very impressive example of urban sprawl gone bad. Outside of downtown Dallas and Fort Worth and a couple of business parks here and there, the vast majority of Dallas is less than three stories...most is one story. By imposing incredibly strict height restrictions we are headed TOWARDS the Dallas look instead of away from it, or perhaps just killing Fayetteville growth off completely.

I agree that downtown Fayetteville would look better with a nice collection of 6-16 story buildings than a handful of 30 story buildings, but the height restriction isn't 16 stories...not even close. At some point the land values will be too high for 3-5 story buildings to be feasible with the sort of rents and leases people want to pay for space in Fayetteville, then we won't have ANY development in downtown.

[cowbreath]

I agree that downtown Fayetteville would look better with a nice collection of 6-16 story buildings than a handful of 30 story buildings, but the height restriction isn't 16 stories...not even close. At some point the land values will be too high for 3-5 story buildings to be feasible with the sort of rents and leases people want to pay for space in Fayetteville, then we won't have ANY development in downtown.

[strmchsr77]

I think we're going to hit a big problem with high land prices and the city council "unable" to make decisions or have discussions based on economic factors.

On the subject of property values, I know about everyone who owns a house doesn't have a problem with property values skyrocketing in their neighborhood. I don't understand everything about how property values get measured or become "official", but to me it just seems like greed becoming policy.

Back to the city council, I don't think they can judge what can and can't be built unless they have the ability to control property values.

[Mith242]

Another kind of strange and stupid deal is that the city council cannot look at economic impact when approving a project. It can't be an arguement for a proposed development, this is where they ran into problems with the Divinity. Although, how can you stop someone from looking at the economic impact. They can say the are approving it on another basis but they know that tax revenue is going to be one of the main concerns.

[cowbreath]

I agree, I don't see how you couldn't. I think there could be pressure to allow developments because of the tax revenue because many of the other NWA cities benefit greatly from this.

[Mith242]

I think you and stormchaser are right. No matter what they say, they are going to be pressured to allow stuff when it comes to economic impact. I wish I knew more about cities and their government structure. Anyone have a good reading recommendation?

[jdevers]

I may have misread the last few replies, but NO city council can look at economic impact when they are simply being sought to approve a development. Basically, all they can do is see if the development does or does not meet the legal specifications for that plat of land (assuming they don't seek a rezoning, in which case that is done first). There are lots of reasons for this, some good and some bad, but it is the law. Now, I've seen planning commission meetings that really border on illegal (I won't mention names...but they occurred in the city that is the most "anti-development" in NWA). As much as financial impact shouldn't be included personal preferences of the members of the commission or council should also not be included in these matters.

[cowbreath]

As much as financial impact shouldn't be included personal preferences of the members of the commission or council should also not be included in these matters.

[jdevers]

True dat! So in saying that they can only determine if a development is approved based on if it meets the legal requirements, does that include ordinances and all. I guess since they help determine the legal requirements and ordinances I assume that they do have a lot of personal preference they've swung into law. I'm not sure we can stop that. I guess they're just elected to represent our city's people, and of course like the President once they are elected they can do whatever they want or listen to whatever subjective opinions.

[itk]

Oh, absolutely that includes all the small ordinances and such (that is really what they do), so from that perspective their opinions DO matter. The thing is though that the city council has to pass an ordinance as a whole and without thinking about a specific project. Then they compare projects to those ordinances. They SHOULD NOT choose to deny a permit based on personal preference that is NOT already an established ordinance.

Well, the problem is that they DO represent a lot of the people, or at least the people who are most vocal.

I think an interesting experience for anyone in Fayetteville would be to go to a city council or planning commission meeting in one of the other cities. They start on time, the individual items are read and heard, debated, voted on all in a timely fashion. Basically, they are functional. Fayetteville's is NOT, individual items often take five times longer than they should to debate and the debate gets WAY out in left field almost instantly. Planning commission meetings in most of the other cities generally last an hour maybe two if a lot of items are on the agenda, in Fayetteville they almost ALWAYS last two hours and sometimes last three or four and may even extend to an additional meeting. This isn't because of the number of items on the agenda either. Fayetteville is rapidly approaching the point of being a dysfunctional city government.

[Mith242]

Oh, absolutely that includes all the small ordinances and such (that is really what they do), so from that perspective their opinions DO matter. The thing is though that the city council has to pass an ordinance as a whole and without thinking about a specific project. Then they compare projects to those ordinances. They SHOULD NOT choose to deny a permit based on personal preference that is NOT already an established ordinance.

Well, the problem is that they DO represent a lot of the people, or at least the people who are most vocal.

I think an interesting experience for anyone in Fayetteville would be to go to a city council or planning commission meeting in one of the other cities. They start on time, the individual items are read and heard, debated, voted on all in a timely fashion. Basically, they are functional. Fayetteville's is NOT, individual items often take five times longer than they should to debate and the debate gets WAY out in left field almost instantly. Planning commission meetings in most of the other cities generally last an hour maybe two if a lot of items are on the agenda, in Fayetteville they almost ALWAYS last two hours and sometimes last three or four and may even extend to an additional meeting. This isn't because of the number of items on the agenda either. Fayetteville is rapidly approaching the point of being a dysfunctional city government.

[mzweig]

It would almost be funny if it wasn't so disapointing...

BUT, I think their approaching dysfunctionality is, on the same token, the reason why Fayetteville is the way it is. Those are the kind of people that are attracted to Fayetteville, and who care a lot about Fayetteville, and have a lot of interest in Fayetteville's future. I've watched their councils. I've sat and watched other councils/committees that are the same way. They feel like they should talk things through... and talk some more... because they have a lot of opinions they want heard. And they believe in listening and hearing people's viewpoints (sometimes). And there's an environment where people feel encouraged to speak up.

As opposed to other committees, where some people may feel in the minority opinion, or feel like their opinion doesn't matter, and they don't speak up, and things move by much quicker.

OR, committees where one or more people actually are on top of things, and move discussions forward. Rather than having things linger, with little or no resolution. So I think it's good and bad. It can certainly be better, though.