CANCELED: Divinity Development

[strmchsr77]

I do agree with you there. I admit I guess I don't remember hearing that much about the Three Sister's Project, but I didn't keep up with developments back then either. But it is interesting to hear the comparisons. Maybe I could understand some concerns about the Divinity development, but as the Barber Group keep making changes to make people happy I'm having a harder time seeing people's arguments against it. I believe I read that one of the city officials tried to call it a 'vertical gated community' since gated communities aren't allowed in Fayetteville. What a joke, a vertical gated community? I understand wanting to control the growth to make Fayetteville better. But I just can't understand this zero, or close to it, growth that so many people are advocating. But I guess some of the problems lie in the location. There wasn't any fuss over the Bellafont development on Joyce. Personally though I'd like to see something like this go into that spot and also help spur some development on Block St and better 'connect' Dickson and the Square. Obviously though not everyone agrees with the views we have here on this forum.

It seems like the only people who don't agree with this are the city council/planning commission and a few anti-growth residents. Usually on a project getting negitive response, you only hear about just that, negative, but on this project the local news has put both sides on air. That tells me that we are getting about a 50/50 response, instead of just one-sided. This leads me to my original thought that the city government is ANTI-GROWTH. Most of the people I talked to today were EXTREMELY disappointed with the city, and these people were major contributors to the city.

[Mith242]

It seems like the only people who don't agree with this are the city council/planning commission and a few anti-growth residents. Usually on a project getting negitive response, you only hear about just that, negative, but on this project the local news has put both sides on air. That tells me that we are getting about a 50/50 response, instead of just one-sided. This leads me to my original thought that the city government is ANTI-GROWTH. Most of the people I talked to today were EXTREMELY disappointed with the city, and these people were major contributors to the city.

We certainly have a City Council right now that has members that appear to be anti-growth. I don't think I'd put all the city officials in that grouping though. But there are enough officials that lean that way to cause a lot of problems. But as someone pointed out things change. Back when Kohl's was in the news the city seemed more pro growth.

[Mith242]

Hey Matt, now that you're a moderator again can we change this name of this topic, since we obviously now know what the name of the development is. Just something like Divinity Development or something along those lines would be great.

[mcheiss]

Hey Matt, now that you're a moderator again can we change this name of this topic, since we obviously now know what the name of the development is. Just something like Divinity Development or something along those lines would be great.

I was just getting to ask you Mith, man it's like you read my mind.

You want something like Divinity Development, 10 Floor Mixed Use Project by the Barber Group?

[Mith242]

I was just getting to ask you Mith, man it's like you read my mind.

You want something like Divinity Development, 10 Floor Mixed Use Project by the Barber Group?

Sure that sounds great.

[mcheiss]

Is it 10 Floors or 11?

[Mith242]

Is it 10 Floors or 11?

10, although I suppose that could possibly change as they keep altering plans to try to make it more 'acceptable'. Maybe mentioning the number of floors isn't the best idea unless you want to keep changing it.

[mcheiss]

10, although I suppose that could possibly change as they keep altering plans to try to make it more 'acceptable'. Maybe mentioning the number of floors isn't the best idea unless you want to keep changing it.

I'll mention the floors and if they change I will change the board. It looks more professional and is a more eye catcher when you see 10 Floor Building, instead of Dixon Street High rise.

[Mith242]

Cool, thanks for the change. That's been bothering me for a little while.

[mcheiss]

Me as well.

[OnDickson]

Art Hobson wrote an opinion column in the NWA Times that mentioned some interesting facts about building heights and what other successful cities are doing. The following is a list of some comparable and highly successful cities and their respective building height restrictions:

BOULDER, CO (96,000) 55ft, or 4 stories

SANTA FE, NM (62,000) 3 stories

CHARLESTON, SC (330,000) 4 stories, requiring new structures to 'fit in' with surroundings

SAVANNAH, GA (140,000) 5 stories limit enacted in 1733--has a few exceptions that city leaders still consider to be mistakes

BERKLEY, CA (100,000)65ft, or 5 stories outside of a small, core, downtown area that allows for structures as high as 10 stories

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN (1.5M) 6 stories, with few exceptions

From his article, it sounds as if Berkley might be the most comparable of the cities to Fayetteville, and it also sounds to me like they may have found an acceptable comprimise for thier restrictions.

Of course there are plenty of successful cities that have no building restrictions, but I did find this information quite interesting. I have also thought it is interesting that the folks that support height restrictions in Fayetteville are often labeled as 'anti-growth', and 'anti-business'. Perhaps, they are trying to fiercely defend the qualities that have helped make Fayetteville such a unique and special place to live and work. Perhaps they feel that height restrictions and building codes will pay greater dividends in the long term rather than focusing on the immediate return on a development like Divinity. Perhaps they are on to something here.....that list of cities is some pretty impressive company.

Anyway, I'm still not taking sides on Divinity--just thought Art brought some real insight to 'the other' side of the argument (for building height restrictions).

[masons_dad1]

^^

I'm guilty of labelling the poeple who support building height restrictions as "anti-growth" or "anti-business", but I've changed my opinion. I've lived in New York City and my favorite neighborhoods are made up of 6-8 story buildings, although they were some ugly buildings it was still nicer walking through those neighborhoods than downtown where you couldn't see the tops of the buildings and you always walked in their shadows. Here's some examples of a downtown type of area with 6-8 story buildings:

BTW... those are pictures of Branson Landing which I've fallen in love with.

[CellarDoor135]

Is it 10 Floors or 11?

Did anyone else hear that the divinity was going to be 10 floors but equal to 15 regular floors( Radisson), and at first the original 15 floors would be about the height of a 22 story building. Did I hear that right?

[masons_dad1]

^^ You were close.

Tabled Again! They will try again on the 22nd of this month. They were still concerned with the height and materials, but I think that it might go ahead and pass next time. The Barber group is going to make more changes and that will hopefully get it moving. Since they are doing whatever the planning commission tells them, I don't see why it won't pass.

The height issue was the big thing again. The original 15 stories was around 225 feet (more like a 22 story building) and the current 10 story height of 185 feet (about the height of most 18 story buildings). I can see that at that height it will dwarf surrounding buildings, but as time goes by taller buildings should fill in around the area making the height less of a problem. Also, if they can tone down the modern materials I believe they can get it passed.

[Mith242]

Art Hobson wrote an opinion column in the NWA Times that mentioned some interesting facts about building heights and what other successful cities are doing. The following is a list of some comparable and highly successful cities and their respective building height restrictions:

BOULDER, CO (96,000) 55ft, or 4 stories

SANTA FE, NM (62,000) 3 stories

CHARLESTON, SC (330,000) 4 stories, requiring new structures to 'fit in' with surroundings

SAVANNAH, GA (140,000) 5 stories limit enacted in 1733--has a few exceptions that city leaders still consider to be mistakes

BERKLEY, CA (100,000)65ft, or 5 stories outside of a small, core, downtown area that allows for structures as high as 10 stories

STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN (1.5M) 6 stories, with few exceptions

From his article, it sounds as if Berkley might be the most comparable of the cities to Fayetteville, and it also sounds to me like they may have found an acceptable comprimise for thier restrictions.

Of course there are plenty of successful cities that have no building restrictions, but I did find this information quite interesting. I have also thought it is interesting that the folks that support height restrictions in Fayetteville are often labeled as 'anti-growth', and 'anti-business'. Perhaps, they are trying to fiercely defend the qualities that have helped make Fayetteville such a unique and special place to live and work. Perhaps they feel that height restrictions and building codes will pay greater dividends in the long term rather than focusing on the immediate return on a development like Divinity. Perhaps they are on to something here.....that list of cities is some pretty impressive company.

Anyway, I'm still not taking sides on Divinity--just thought Art brought some real insight to 'the other' side of the argument (for building height restrictions).

Interesting, Santa Fe must have recently changed their restrictions because I believe it had been set at around 5. There are a few buildings that aren't too old that are around 5 stories. But still if you thought Fayetteville didn't have much of a skyline you should see Santa Fe.

[OnDickson]

BTW... those are pictures of Branson Landing which I've fallen in love with.

I had read about Branson Landing, but hadn't seen pictures yet. WOW! Now I'm even more eager to visit once it is complete. Developments like Branson Landing certainly make a strong argument in favor of strong building codes and height restrictions.

[OnDickson]

This tidbit would probably have been better suited for this thread when it was titled 'another possible mixed use development'. But, for lack of a better place to mention it here's one to keep your eye on.

Rumor has it that a group of residents/home owners along the West side of Locust Street are 'testing the waters' (so to speak), considering marketing their properties (individual houses) as a group (resulting in more than an acre of prime development land about as close to Dickson as you can get without actually being on it). The only things seperating this property from Dickson Street are a small city parking lot and the Yellow House at the corner of Dickson and Locust. This property is bordered by city parking lots on the North and West sides--which I would think makes it prime for mixed use, although strictly residential would certainly be more compatible with the existing structures (mostly small houses) on the East side of Locust.

It will be interesting to see if property slightly off of Dickson can fetch the same rates that have been paid for land on the street. Heck at $80+ per square foot of real-estate, you can't hardly blame these folks for at least mulling it over. Although nothing definite yet, again it's just one to keep your eye on.

[Mith242]

This tidbit would probably have been better suited for this thread when it was titled 'another possible mixed use development'. But, for lack of a better place to mention it here's one to keep your eye on.

Rumor has it that a group of residents/home owners along the West side of Locust Street are 'testing the waters' (so to speak), considering marketing their properties (individual houses) as a group (resulting in more than an acre of prime development land about as close to Dickson as you can get without actually being on it). The only things seperating this property from Dickson Street are a small city parking lot and the Yellow House at the corner of Dickson and Locust. This property is bordered by city parking lots on the North and West sides--which I would think makes it prime for mixed use, although strictly residential would certainly be more compatible with the existing structures (mostly small houses) on the East side of Locust.

It will be interesting to see if property slightly off of Dickson can fetch the same rates that have been paid for land on the street. Heck at $80+ per square foot of real-estate, you can't hardly blame these folks for at least mulling it over. Although nothing definite yet, again it's just one to keep your eye on.

Interesting, I need to go look up Locust St now. The name is familiar but I can't quite remember where exactly it is. Sounds like a good idea though. I just wonder what that area is zoned for. If the zoning was right selling a lot of properties together would make it useful to someone wanting to put in a development.

[itk]

This tidbit would probably have been better suited for this thread when it was titled 'another possible mixed use development'. But, for lack of a better place to mention it here's one to keep your eye on.

Rumor has it that a group of residents/home owners along the West side of Locust Street are 'testing the waters' (so to speak), considering marketing their properties (individual houses) as a group (resulting in more than an acre of prime development land about as close to Dickson as you can get without actually being on it). The only things seperating this property from Dickson Street are a small city parking lot and the Yellow House at the corner of Dickson and Locust. This property is bordered by city parking lots on the North and West sides--which I would think makes it prime for mixed use, although strictly residential would certainly be more compatible with the existing structures (mostly small houses) on the East side of Locust.

It will be interesting to see if property slightly off of Dickson can fetch the same rates that have been paid for land on the street. Heck at $80+ per square foot of real-estate, you can't hardly blame these folks for at least mulling it over. Although nothing definite yet, again it's just one to keep your eye on.

This is sort of across from the 3 Sisters Building? (I'm trying to think what's on the south side of Dickson there... somewhere between the Dickson St Book Shop and that liquor store?) That seems to me to be a great location.

[OnDickson]

This is sort of across from the 3 Sisters Building? (I'm trying to think what's on the south side of Dickson there... somewhere between the Dickson St Book Shop and that liquor store?) That seems to me to be a great location.

Yeah, DSL (the liquor store) sits on SE corner of Locust and Dickson and the Yellow 2 story house sits on the SW corner. Locust is immediately across from Romance Diamond (in the 3 Sisters Building) and The 36 Club. Traveling south on Locust, the houses are on your right immediately after the small parking lot. The first is an empty lot where a house that burned more than a year ago was recently razed. This parcel of land (where the house was) is apparently what got the neighbors to begin thinking about testing the waters together. Again, there are no definite plans as of yet--but they are serious about negotiating with interested parties and I'm certain there will be some.

[Mith242]

Ah, that is a good location for a development. I wish they'd also do something with that liquor store. I don't have anything against liquor stores but it's not the greatest use for that location. You could put in a nice development there and put a liquor store in part of the new development.

[strmchsr77]

The Divinity building has been put off until the June 12 planning commission meeting. The Barber group said that they needed more time to finish the drawings. It was supposed to come back through May 22. Hopefully they can get the support they deserve from the PC next month.

[Mith242]

The Divinity building has been put off until the June 12 planning commission meeting. The Barber group said that they needed more time to finish the drawings. It was supposed to come back through May 22. Hopefully they can get the support they deserve from the PC next month.

I hope so too but I'm getting the impression that there are still some council members that are going to vote against it no matter what. Well I suppose if it were only 6 stories maybe but then it wouldn't be big enough to be economically feasible.

[Mith242]

I hate to be negative here but I just get the feeling that this development isn't likely to get by the City Council. Even if the Barber Group is able to cut it down to be the same height of the Lofts at Underwood Plaza. I just get the feeling there are members of the council who are planning on making a stand here and just won't approve it. Unfortunately I missed the final 2025 meeting held last night. The Dover Kohl group didn't mention the Divinity development by name but it sounds like they did point out that cities can develop well even with such height restrictions. Paris has a limit of 6 stories and Barcelona with 8 stories. I think hearing that is just going to make it harder for the Barber Group to get this development approved. I thought I heard somewhere that the city has suggested the development use more brick. Perhaps if they totally redesigned the look it might sway a few council members but I'm not sure if it would be enough. But as I said before I just feel certain council members are totally against this project. It sounds like it's just bad timing for the Barber group. They seem to be catching some of the flack for the Lofts at Underwood Plaza being approved with it's height. I guess the location appears to be playing a big role in it as well. Perhaps if it was at a different location this wouldn't have become such a big deal. It would seem to be to cut it down low enough to make enough people happy wouldn't make it economically feasible right now. Perhaps if they could buy out some of the houses behind it. If people want to insist on a 6 story limit I think people also need to realize that you're going to have to take up more room horizontally.

[OnDickson]

Another interesting development rumor that I'm sticking in this thread simply because I couldn't find a better place for it. It does qualify as another possible mixed use development, but it also signifies the end of an era on Dickson Street: Rogers Rec has reportedly finally sold. The new owners..........lets just say it starts with a 'B' and it seems like they own about half of the street now. Heck I guess if they buy the whole street they can develop it however they want to!