Fayetteville, Arkansas

[itk]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the upcoming election over the proposed road impact fees in Fayetteville. Mith must be on vacation!

I'm curious if anyone has an opinion on the matter. I think it's interesting that Fayetteville, being the unique town that it is, is finally recognizing the need for more and wider roads.

There's a lot of people in Fayetteville, and on this board, that don't like that I'm sure. But in the real world, Fayetteville can't just keep doing that and expect to be competitive. People drive cars, people will continue to drive cars, and more people and jobs are moving into Fayetteville. It's not like we're talking about widening an 8-lane freeway. We're talking about widening two-lane roads.

On one hand, Fayetteville, which didn't invest in road widenings for as long as I can remember as a child until very recently, needs to catch up. The fees that I have seen in the papers don't seem as outrageous as critics make them out to be-- residential prices will surely be passed along to the buyers, but the costs to new business don't seem that much. For a 50,000 sq ft commercial/office, for instance, would be about $50,000. Is that going to deter a developer from building an office or retail in Fayetteville??

On the other hand, there is no tiering system for residential units, nor for areas of town (further out, closer in, etc).

The fact is, Fayetteville, in the real world, to continue to attract businesses and thus tax dollars, must build or help fund *wider* roads and highways (4-lane roads). That's reality. The money has to come from somewhere. More money isn't going to come from the feds, or the state, for the foreseeable future. An RMA may or may not help out. Fayetteville has to help themselves.

[strmchsr77]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the upcoming election over the proposed road impact fees in Fayetteville. Mith must be on vacation!

I'm curious if anyone has an opinion on the matter. I think it's interesting that Fayetteville, being the unique town that it is, is finally recognizing the need for more and wider roads.

There's a lot of people in Fayetteville, and on this board, that don't like that I'm sure. But in the real world, Fayetteville can't just keep doing that and expect to be competitive. People drive cars, people will continue to drive cars, and more people and jobs are moving into Fayetteville. It's not like we're talking about widening an 8-lane freeway. We're talking about widening two-lane roads.

On one hand, Fayetteville, which didn't invest in road widenings for as long as I can remember as a child until very recently, needs to catch up. The fees that I have seen in the papers don't seem as outrageous as critics make them out to be-- residential prices will surely be passed along to the buyers, but the costs to new business don't seem that much. For a 50,000 sq ft commercial/office, for instance, would be about $50,000. Is that going to deter a developer from building an office or retail in Fayetteville??

On the other hand, there is no tiering system for residential units, nor for areas of town (further out, closer in, etc).

The fact is, Fayetteville, in the real world, to continue to attract businesses and thus tax dollars, must build or help fund *wider* roads and highways (4-lane roads). That's reality. The money has to come from somewhere. More money isn't going to come from the feds, or the state, for the foreseeable future. An RMA may or may not help out. Fayetteville has to help themselves.

I know that we need wider roads and I am for that but I have to say I am completely against this impact fee idea. This is very anti-developer. Don't we already have some impact fees? I am afraid that this will just drive more development to other cities in the area further lowering our tax base. We have been losing hundreds of thousands of dollars to Benton county over the past 4 or 5 months, and I don't think that pushing more development away is the answer. There has got to be another way of raising money for roads.

[jiggyK]

in principle i agree with impact fees. but i'm not sure how they will be applied. is it that, when a developer builds a subdivision or a commercial strip, the fees they pay go toward road improvements directly associated with that particular development? or, does the money go toward the most pressing road projects in the city-- i.e., widening of gregg, joyce/college intersection, 540, etc.? i think the latter is how it works from what little i've read. and that would seem most reasonable.

but i'm also curious about, with the excepiton of mission, what other roads besides those that i mentioned above really need widening? i mostly operate in southen and downtown fayetteville. so in rush hour i don't really know what other areas of town are like during rush hour. there could be obvious ones that i've missed, but sidewalks and bike lanes are what i think a lot of streets need more than adding extra lanes.

thoughts?

[strmchsr77]

A judge has sided w/ SWEPCO's request to upgrade powerlines on Dickson street. So, it looks like they will be going through with this. The city would have to pay 1.3 million to have the lines put under ground through that area and they are not willing to do this.

Here is the article from the Times: SWEPCO

[Mith242]

I can't believe no one has mentioned the upcoming election over the proposed road impact fees in Fayetteville. Mith must be on vacation!

I'm curious if anyone has an opinion on the matter. I think it's interesting that Fayetteville, being the unique town that it is, is finally recognizing the need for more and wider roads.

There's a lot of people in Fayetteville, and on this board, that don't like that I'm sure. But in the real world, Fayetteville can't just keep doing that and expect to be competitive. People drive cars, people will continue to drive cars, and more people and jobs are moving into Fayetteville. It's not like we're talking about widening an 8-lane freeway. We're talking about widening two-lane roads.

On one hand, Fayetteville, which didn't invest in road widenings for as long as I can remember as a child until very recently, needs to catch up. The fees that I have seen in the papers don't seem as outrageous as critics make them out to be-- residential prices will surely be passed along to the buyers, but the costs to new business don't seem that much. For a 50,000 sq ft commercial/office, for instance, would be about $50,000. Is that going to deter a developer from building an office or retail in Fayetteville??

On the other hand, there is no tiering system for residential units, nor for areas of town (further out, closer in, etc).

The fact is, Fayetteville, in the real world, to continue to attract businesses and thus tax dollars, must build or help fund *wider* roads and highways (4-lane roads). That's reality. The money has to come from somewhere. More money isn't going to come from the feds, or the state, for the foreseeable future. An RMA may or may not help out. Fayetteville has to help themselves.

I have been away a little this week. But actually I mentioned it last week and only got one response from anybody about it.

[Mith242]

On the road issue I can see both sides. In some ways it does make sense to me, there seems to be some sort of way to make people on the outskirts of the city to pay their fair share because they are increasing the amount of infrastructure needed. But I do worry about Fayetteville becoming too 'anti-development' or at least seen that way. I'm not ready to say this will make Fayetteville into a bedroom community like some of those against the impact fees. But I do think it would give more people the impression Fayetteville is anti-business and anti-development. But I wonder if there would be a better way of handling this. I'd like to see the city make more people interested in developing in areas like College Ave or more the core of the city. Make it more encouraging for people to invest in already developed areas of the city instead of having everyone go out to the outskirts.

[zman9810]

I have been away a little this week. But actually I mentioned it last week and only got one response from anybody about it.

Welcome back- you seem to be the "glue" that holds the NWA forum together, at least you do a good job of facilitating discussions.

I've been back and forth on the road impact fees. If they were designed to encourage infill and redevelopment by rewarding those type projects with lower fees I would be supportive. Otherwise I think it will discourage all development and that may be the aim of some who do support the fees. My 2 cents.

[Mith242]

A judge has sided w/ SWEPCO's request to upgrade powerlines on Dickson street. So, it looks like they will be going through with this. The city would have to pay 1.3 million to have the lines put under ground through that area and they are not willing to do this.

Here is the article from the Times: SWEPCO

Yeah I saw that. It's too bad all of this worked out the way it did. I also don't think it helped much by making everyone have to travel to Little Rock to present our side. But the 1.3 Mil is cheaper than what I had heard before. But still something the city doesn't really have money to shell out. I won't go as far to say that it will ruin Dickson St. But it is frustrating for the city to put that much money into improving Dickson St just to have something like this happen.

[cowbreath]

As all things in the US seem to be hard-coded (such as price), I think negotiations would be good here with the impact fees. Flat-rate impact fees should definitely be discouraged. Roads do have to be improved and we are far behind on infrastructure. That isn't our fault (at least not mine). I think developments along I-540 and west of I-540 will continue and that will bring some traffic to some better "opportunity" and larger traffic arteries. When tax is earned from businesses on those properties other parts of the city could be improved. Citizens in general could probably help out themselves or the community more if they sell their land or property at lower than market values to encourage the developments they would want. Higher property values in the past 15 years means that people had their land when it was probably half as much so it is definitely feasible.

Anyways I do agree better road infrastructure may encourage business, and some impact fees may be needed sometimes, but that's just how it is and we should have no reason to support a plan until it is a good one. I'm glad we have Coody not supporting this. Apparently it has an affect even if the council votes differently. Coody is a very public person and wouldn't be able to face the public I think if he didn't have a clear conscience towards how he thinks about things.

[Mith242]

Fayetteville was mentioned in another Forbes list recently. Although Fayetteville was the one mentioned it's referring to the metro as a whole. But Forbes has us at #8 in the top ten places for business and careers.

http://www.forbes.com/home/business/lists/...?thisSpeed=6000

http://www.forbes.com/home/business/lists/...reers_land.html

Edited April 6, 2007 by Mith242

[masons_dad1]

Everyone is making "impact fees" sound like a disease that will drive away developers, but that is not the case. The first developer to build will have to pay impact fees for infrastructure improvements needed, BUT, any future developments that utilizes those improvements will have to pay it's share to the initial developer. So, in the long term developers will get back most of the impact fees they paid as long as growth continues. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[masons_dad1]

Fayetteville was mentioned in another Forbes list recently. Although Fayetteville was the one mentioned it's referring to the metro as a whole. But Forbes has us at #8 in the top ten places for business and careers.

http://www.forbes.com/home/business/lists/...?thisSpeed=6000

http://www.forbes.com/home/business/lists/...reers_land.html

While that sounds fine and dandy, the only reason Fayetteville even makes the list is for low "Cost of Doing Business" and low "Cost of Living"... Fayetteville isn't even in the same league as far as "Colleges, Culture & Leisure, or Educational Attainment." is concerned. Everything else is on par with the rest of the top metros, but in those 3 categories Fayetteville is so far behind it's not even funny.

[Mith242]

While that sounds fine and dandy, the only reason Fayetteville even makes the list is for low "Cost of Doing Business" and low "Cost of Living"... Fayetteville isn't even in the same league as far as "Colleges, Culture & Leisure, or Educational Attainment." is concerned. Everything else is on par with the rest of the top metros, but in those 3 categories Fayetteville is so far behind it's not even funny.

Yes most of those metros do relatively well in a few of those categories and leave a bit to be desired in others, just as ours. But it does show areas we need to work on. One of the big reasons why many of us would like to see more of an IT field develop here. I think that would help in a number of ways.

[OnDickson]

While that sounds fine and dandy, the only reason Fayetteville even makes the list is for low "Cost of Doing Business" and low "Cost of Living"... Fayetteville isn't even in the same league as far as "Colleges, Culture & Leisure, or Educational Attainment." is concerned. Everything else is on par with the rest of the top metros, but in those 3 categories Fayetteville is so far behind it's not even funny.

Never miss a chance to take a shot at Fayetteville, do you? Seriously it gets old. The funny thing is that if that list had said 'Fayetteville-Rogers, AR' instead of just Fayetteville you would be crowing about it.

[cowbreath]

Never miss a chance to take a shot at Fayetteville, do you? Seriously it gets old. The funny thing is that if that list had said 'Fayetteville-Rogers, AR' instead of just Fayetteville you would be crowing about it.

Hehe...well I'm sure he is a little more biased towards Rogers. That aside, I agree it's hard to put Fayetteville on the same level as the metros listed. There's a serious lack of diversity in this area for jobs. Dickson Street is awesome, though! I would put it up highly with the metros. It's even better since it's a small area with big culture. Education exists, and is strong in some fields at the UA, but overall just an average public university. I'm sure elementary educ. is decent for the big 4 here (since they pay so much). However, having Nashville at one position lower is kind of hard to justify. Music city with NFL and Vanderbilt is one behind? Ok, I'm confused there.

Anyways, as for Rogers I guess they'll just have to be known under the name "Fayetteville metro".

[mzweig]

Hehe...well I'm sure he is a little more biased towards Rogers. That aside, I agree it's hard to put Fayetteville on the same level as the metros listed. There's a serious lack of diversity in this area for jobs. Dickson Street is awesome, though! I would put it up highly with the metros. It's even better since it's a small area with big culture. Education exists, and is strong in some fields at the UA, but overall just an average public university. I'm sure elementary educ. is decent for the big 4 here (since they pay so much). However, having Nashville at one position lower is kind of hard to justify. Music city with NFL and Vanderbilt is one behind? Ok, I'm confused there.

Anyways, as for Rogers I guess they'll just have to be known under the name "Fayetteville metro".

Truthfully, I hate to enter these kinds of debates and generally just avoid them, especially in this forum! But "average public university?" I hate to hear that. At the Sam M. Walton College of Business, we take great pride in being ranked 24th overall for public colleges of business in the U.S. That's pretty good. The U of A has other strengths, as well, including our creative writing program.

In any case, Fayetteville overall does offer a good quality of life. Everything is very convenient, we have fairly low crime, good environmental quality, pay rates aren't bad compared to cost of living, there are some smart people here, and we have beautiful terrain. Our city, in spite of some problems, is getting better every day. I have travelled extensively throughout the U.S. and could live anywhere and I chose here, believe it or not. I lived in the Boston area for 17 years, and still have offices in San Fran, DC, NYC, Atlanta, and Chicago. I could have also gone to Columbia, MO or Lawrence, KS. Or, we could have gone anywhere else, for that matter. It is the balance in all things---not the best in anything--that Fayetteville offers that I really appreciate.

[Mith242]

Hehe...well I'm sure he is a little more biased towards Rogers. That aside, I agree it's hard to put Fayetteville on the same level as the metros listed. There's a serious lack of diversity in this area for jobs. Dickson Street is awesome, though! I would put it up highly with the metros. It's even better since it's a small area with big culture. Education exists, and is strong in some fields at the UA, but overall just an average public university. I'm sure elementary educ. is decent for the big 4 here (since they pay so much). However, having Nashville at one position lower is kind of hard to justify. Music city with NFL and Vanderbilt is one behind? Ok, I'm confused there.

Anyways, as for Rogers I guess they'll just have to be known under the name "Fayetteville metro".

Yeah I guess it is easier for most to just list it as Fayetteville instead of Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers. I've wondered though can that change if population shifts to one of the other NWA cities and it becomes larger than Fayetteville?

Truthfully, I hate to enter these kinds of debates and generally just avoid them, especially in this forum! But "average public university?" I hate to hear that. At the Sam M. Walton College of Business, we take great pride in being ranked 24th overall for public colleges of business in the U.S. That's pretty good. The U of A has other strengths, as well, including our creative writing program.

In any case, Fayetteville overall does offer a good quality of life. Everything is very convenient, we have fairly low crime, good environmental quality, pay rates aren't bad compared to cost of living, there are some smart people here, and we have beautiful terrain. Our city, in spite of some problems, is getting better every day. I have travelled extensively throughout the U.S. and could live anywhere and I chose here, believe it or not. I lived in the Boston area for 17 years, and still have offices in San Fran, DC, NYC, Atlanta, and Chicago. I could have also gone to Columbia, MO or Lawrence, KS. Or, we could have gone anywhere else, for that matter. It is the balance in all things---not the best in anything--that Fayetteville offers that I really appreciate.

Wow, nice to see that you really prefer to live here.

[johnnydr87]

Truthfully, I hate to enter these kinds of debates and generally just avoid them, especially in this forum! But "average public university?" I hate to hear that. At the Sam M. Walton College of Business, we take great pride in being ranked 24th overall for public colleges of business in the U.S. That's pretty good. The U of A has other strengths, as well, including our creative writing program.

In any case, Fayetteville overall does offer a good quality of life. Everything is very convenient, we have fairly low crime, good environmental quality, pay rates aren't bad compared to cost of living, there are some smart people here, and we have beautiful terrain. Our city, in spite of some problems, is getting better every day. I have travelled extensively throughout the U.S. and could live anywhere and I chose here, believe it or not. I lived in the Boston area for 17 years, and still have offices in San Fran, DC, NYC, Atlanta, and Chicago. I could have also gone to Columbia, MO or Lawrence, KS. Or, we could have gone anywhere else, for that matter. It is the balance in all things---not the best in anything--that Fayetteville offers that I really appreciate.

No offense, but UA is a pretty average school. It has strong programs (like business and creative writing), but it also has other average and weak programs. UA is ranked 24th among public undergrad business program. That automatically eliminates the privates, which tend to perform better. In addition, business undergrad programs are not that common as compared arts and sciences (i.e. not everyone has them, as with engineering schools). For interest, here are business week's most recent rankings (UA doesn't make a blip): http://tinyurl.com/2yyfej

Edited April 7, 2007 by johnnydr87

[cowbreath]

Truthfully, I hate to enter these kinds of debates and generally just avoid them, especially in this forum! But "average public university?" I hate to hear that. At the Sam M. Walton College of Business, we take great pride in being ranked 24th overall for public colleges of business in the U.S. That's pretty good. The U of A has other strengths, as well, including our creative writing program.

You're right. We do have strengths, in many areas too, but just we're still average though overall. I wouldn't come here for a serious engineering degree, but I would come here for many other things, though: agriculture, business, law, soil science, architecture, chemistry, etc. Those are at least some I know about.

[masons_dad1]

Never miss a chance to take a shot at Fayetteville, do you? Seriously it gets old. The funny thing is that if that list had said 'Fayetteville-Rogers, AR' instead of just Fayetteville you would be crowing about it.

That's where you're wrong. Forbes mention of Fayetteville IS the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers metro. The Forbes listing just uses the more prominent city's name for the metro. If I was taking shots it was at the entire metro for being put on a list simply for being a cheap place to live and do business. The fact is MOST of the top 50 metros surpass the Fayetteville METRO in a number of categories, including Colleges, Culture & Leisure, and Educational Attainment. If Forbes disregarded all the other categories other than Cost of Living and Cost of Doing Business then those categories should not even be mentioned.

Bottom line: The Fayetteville METRO is like a Chevy Metro that's cheap, gets great gas mileage, but doesn't have any options like power steering, power windows and only has a cassette player. Whereas those other top ten cities are your Lexus, BMW, Mercedes and Cadillac Escalades. Sure they cost a lot more, but have so many more options and are more fun to drive.

[Mith242]

That's where you're wrong. Forbes mention of Fayetteville IS the Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers metro. The Forbes listing just uses the more prominent city's name for the metro. If I was taking shots it was at the entire metro for being put on a list simply for being a cheap place to live and do business. The fact is MOST of the top 50 metros surpass the Fayetteville METRO in a number of categories, including Colleges, Culture & Leisure, and Educational Attainment. If Forbes disregarded all the other categories other than Cost of Living and Cost of Doing Business then those categories should not even be mentioned.

Bottom line: The Fayetteville METRO is like a Chevy Metro that's cheap, gets great gas mileage, but doesn't have any options like power steering, power windows and only has a cassette player. Whereas those other top ten cities are your Lexus, BMW, Mercedes and Cadillac Escalades. Sure they cost a lot more, but have so many more options and are more fun to drive.

If you took out a couple of other categories you could knock other metros out as well. I'm not saying there certainly isn't room to improve our metro. But if our metro was so 'one-sided' I don't think it would get mentioned so often in many rankings and polls.

[mzweig]

No offense, but UA is a pretty average school. It has strong programs (like business and creative writing), but it also has other average and weak programs. UA is ranked 24th among public undergrad business program. That automatically eliminates the privates, which tend to perform better. In addition, business undergrad programs are not that common as compared arts and sciences (i.e. not everyone has them, as with engineering schools). For interest, here are business week's most recent rankings (UA doesn't make a blip): http://tinyurl.com/2yyfej

We did not have enough students respond to the survey to make Business Week's list. That's the only reason we aren't listed. You needed at least 200 students to respond.

You're right. We do have strengths, in many areas too, but just we're still average though overall. I wouldn't come here for a serious engineering degree, but I would come here for many other things, though: agriculture, business, law, soil science, architecture, chemistry, etc. Those are at least some I know about.

I'm glad you mentioned architecture. We do have a good design school here.

[masons_dad1]

If you took out a couple of other categories you could knock other metros out as well. I'm not saying there certainly isn't room to improve our metro. But if our metro was so 'one-sided' I don't think it would get mentioned so often in many rankings and polls.

Which was my point in my bottom line. Fayetteville gets mentioned so much because it's a cheap place to live and do business, but that's really about all there is. That's all the Forbes list is for and if metros were rated for overall categories Fayetteville would fall down quite a few notches. You get what you pay for and you can't go much cheaper than the Fayetteville metro.

[mzweig]

Which was my point in my bottom line. Fayetteville gets mentioned so much because it's a cheap place to live and do business, but that's really about all there is. That's all the Forbes list is for and if metros were rated for overall categories Fayetteville would fall down quite a few notches. You get what you pay for and you can't go much cheaper than the Fayetteville metro.

There are a lot of other places that are cheaper to live than here. Fayetteville is reasonable but far from the cheapest place to live. Any city in North or South Dakota is cheaper. Kansas City is larger and cheaper. Omaha is cheaper. Heck, Tulsa is probably cheaper than here. Not to mention Springfield, MO--it's cheaper. We are far from the cheapest place to live. I hate to disagree with you but the quality of life is pretty high here.

[zman9810]

In any case, Fayetteville overall does offer a good quality of life. Everything is very convenient, we have fairly low crime, good environmental quality, pay rates aren't bad compared to cost of living, there are some smart people here, and we have beautiful terrain. Our city, in spite of some problems, is getting better every day. I have travelled extensively throughout the U.S. and could live anywhere and I chose here, believe it or not. I lived in the Boston area for 17 years, and still have offices in San Fran, DC, NYC, Atlanta, and Chicago. I could have also gone to Columbia, MO or Lawrence, KS. Or, we could have gone anywhere else, for that matter. It is the balance in all things---not the best in anything--that Fayetteville offers that I really appreciate.

Thanks for sharing this- it is great to hear positive comments about the area from someone with your background. I have always felt this was a great area to live in although I have only lived in Arkansas.