Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-02 - MinutesMONDAY, MARCH 2, 1998 REGULAR PRAB MEETING
Art
sit
.................. .
NAME (Please Print)
GROUP REPRE 9 NTING
A64el &vv [s 646)44iw
Ott ib�
A
v S� 6
5,
1,
1 iviiie,
./
C6�'9rn^do
rpropos
d _107/on S/
A
f U
,)
I A
.,
'2. /
• / ,% , • S(cJ& -i /9
life-
d '.%.r.
_,\
(PA14 62.E C,t_`.
ziAttdL��nr,
Al 74 Sim
in ms
FoR Sq
0., 54 Irk
(.kr
is
"/
/
1
(A112 G
..vn a
0v ✓' �"�
noted
f(.
a0?CS,Ne_-
W
or }-LAS
SVt SoN
k Peary_
4.I 1
/
77/
hi. 6A - AP-
(�
�l&,_
G�if,e.Is
kR 19 .
ru tt, PQ.-�- Rrn,v5� I
;
W
G --(
vs -7•7 �w
AMA- Jnr
Art
sit
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
•
DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION
February 20, 1998
PRAB MEETING ON MONDAY, March 2, 1998, AT 5:30 PM IN
ROOM 219 OF THE CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING
I. Approval of PRAB Minutes - February 2, 1998 Meeting
II.
Babe Ruth Baseball request for
- Mark Taylor
concession stand
Holcomb School matching funds request - John Colbert
IV. GREEN SPACE
Development:
Engineer:
Owner:
Location:
Park District:
Priority:
Total Acres:
Units:
Land Dedication
Requirement:
Money in Lieu:
1990 Needs:
2010 Needs:
Existing:
Outstanding
Dinerstein Apt. Development (unnamed)
East of Razorback Road, South of Cato
Springs Road
SW
None
20
156-180 multi family units
3.12 - 3.6 acres
$46,800 - $54,000
10 - 20 acres
12 -24 acres
5 acres ( Greathouse Park
Features:
•
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Page 2
March 5, 1998
V. Sutton Street property public input - Dugwyler
VI. Annual Report - Rogers
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
Bill Ackerman, before the meeting, spoke with Jerry
Rose, City Attorney, and decided himself to go ahead
and nominate and elect Chairman and Vice Chairman
without us having the 8th board member elected yet
INFORMATION:
PLEASE NOTE IN YOUR CALENDAR THAT WE WILL BE VISITING TWO
GREENSPACE PROPERTIES - SERENITY PLACE AND DINERSTEIN APARTMENT
• DEVELOPMENT (UN -NAMED) ON MARCH 4TH AT 5:OOPM. WE WILL MEET AT
THE PARKS DIVISION OFFICE BEFORE VISITING THE SITES.
•
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
Page ,a
March 5, 1998
*PLEASE READ THROUGH THESE ATTACHMENTS BEFORE THE BOARD MEETING ON
MARCH 2ND!
ATTACHMENTS:
• Monthly Green Space Report by Kim Rogers
• •February 2, 1998 P.R.A.B. Minutes
• Aaron Bleidt's newspaper article - Neighborhood oriented parks
becoming popular topic in the NWA Times
• Special Meeting minutes dated 2/11/98 - Easton green space,
Square Gardens, Serenity Place green space, Fall Baseball
League's request for batting cages at Walker Park, school
lease update, Sutton Street property update, and proposal
brought to the board members again on updating the softball
fees
• Letter from Donna Porter on the Botanical Garden Society of
the Ozarks dated January 26, 1998
• Holcomb school request from John Colbert for two outdoor
basketball poles, backboards, and rims
• Green Space information packet on Dinerstein
•
PRAB
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 2, 1998
The meeting was called to order by acting chairman Ackerman at 5:30
p.m. in Room 219 of the City Administration Building.
Members Present:
Staff Present:
Guests Present:
Ackerman, Bleidt, Charboneau, Judy,
Luttrell, Staggs, Thiel
Dugwyler, Nelson, Rogers
Harold Heady - Dinerstein Co.; Mark
Taylor - Babe Ruth League; Sarah Leflar -
Friends For Fayetteville; Nancy Burris,
Jennifer Alexander, Fran Alexander, Nancy
Seward, Richard Briggs, Kathy Thompson,
Orland Maxfield, Nan Simmons, Chris
Huggard, Quin Thompson, Roxanne Worthy,
Chris Krueger, Dick Keating, Stella
Keating, Jeanie Wright, Cynthia Peven,
Angela Stevens, Richard Alexander,
Harriet Jansma, Wyit Wright, Kitty Gay,
Constance Clack; Peggy Smith -
Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce; Tonya
Johnson
Media Present: Rusty Garrett, Northwest Arkansas Times
Jill Rohrback, Morning News
BUSINESS:
I. MOTION: BLEIDT/THIEL
The Minutes from the February 2, 1998, PRAB regular meeting
were approved as presented, 7-0.
II. Babe Ruth Baseball request for concession - Mark Taylor
Babe Ruth Baseball President, Mark Taylor, redistributed
facilities capital improvements outline [PRAB originally
March 2, 1998 • Page 1
received this outline during its regular November 3, 1997
meeting]. Mr. Taylor reiterated that the Babe Ruth Park would
be hosting a state tournament this year. He has researched and
aquired costs associated with the construction of a new
concessions facility (est. $45,000). Currently, the number
enrolled in the program is a 14% increase from last year. Mr.
Taylor reported that two games on two fields were played each
night with thirteen players on each team and fifty-two
mothers; there is only one toilet for the mothers to share.
The Babe Ruth organization has outlined their capital
improvements over a period of three years and request
assistance over that period of time. Mr. Taylor said two L
screens had been purchased, and he has covered the sprinkler
system. He requested help with the construction of a 900 sq.
ft. concession stand. Mr. Ackerman said the PRAB would take
this request under advisement; the committees would meet and
examine the projects for the ongoing year.
III. Holcomb School matching funds request - John Colbert
Holcomb Elementary School Principal, John Colbert, said they
were trying to enhance the outside playground/park area
because the usage has increased over the past three years. He
requested assistance in providing an outdoor basketball area.
The school district has supplied the asphalt area and requests
assistance in the purchase of two basketball poles,
backboards, and rims. The outdoor basketball area would be
used by the local school as well as the community youth and
adults. Mr. Colbert encouraged the PRAB to continue to stress
the ongoing partnership between the city and the schools.
Staff reported that the requested amount is $1650; green space
funds are currently available in the NW quadrant. [The two
goals provided by this proposal would replace inadequate goals
installed earlier by the school district.]
MOTION: JUDY/BLEIDT
Ms. Judy moved to support the Holcomb Elementary School
request for green space funds of $1650 for the purchase of two
basketball poles, two backboards, and two rims.
The motion carried 7-0-0.
Page 2 • March 2, 1998
•
IV. GREEN SPACE
Development:
Engineer:
Owner:
Location:
Park District:
Priority:
Total Acres:
Units:
Land Dedication
Requirement:
Money in Lieu:
1990 Needs:
2010 Needs:
Existing:
Dinerstein Apt. Development (unnamed)
East of Razorback Road, South of Cato
Springs Road
SW
None
20
156-180 multi family units
3.12 - 3.6 acres
$46,800 - $54,000
10 - 20 acres
12 - 24 acres
5 acres ( Greathouse Park )
Outstanding Features:
Harold Heady, a representative for Dinerstein Co. based in
Houston, Texas, reported that Dinerstein had entered into a
contract with the City of Fayetteville for the purchase of 20
acres on Cato Springs Road where a Public Works facility is
currently located.
Heady: My request of you tonight is for consideration in lieu
of land dedicated by way of park fee for a major development
such as required by ordinance, that you would accept $300 per
unit constructed as a fee in lieu of land. We have been in
touch with the city, and we understand that there is a youth
hospice located out there on the track of land as well. One of
the things we also propose is that we leave the youth hospice
in place, and the deed for the land would go back to the city.
Ackerman: You have entered into a contract for the purchase of
the ground from the city. There are green space requirements
which you would like to fulfill in this manner. This would be
to perhaps offset a portion of those green space fees with
deeding back the land on which Children's House is located
along with paying any additional fee which might be required
to satisfy the green space requirement. Is that correct?
Heady: Yes. In my initial proposal, I mentioned that we are
going to be building somewhere between 150-180 units. Since
that proposal was submitted, we have confirmed 180 units. The
March 2, 1998 • Page 3
green space fee would be $54,000. Right now the way the land
is utilized by Public Works, there's really not anything out
there that appears to be what I would expect you to perceive
as a park area. I don't think the parcel itself lends itself
very easily to a park without major infrastructure. You would
have to spend more money than you would get to make it
useable.
Thiel: How much land does Children's House sit on?
Heady: I'm not sure. We're in the process of having it
surveyed. I would guess one to two acres.
Bleidt: Were this to be a normal situation to where we took
land as required by ordinance due to the number of units, is
that the 3.12 to 3.6 acres that would be required?
Dugwyler: Yes, based on the number of units.
Bleidt: With apartments it is based on the number of units as
well?
Dugwyler: Yes.
Ackerman: Knowing a little bit about the Children's House
program, I understand that there might be some expansion in
the not -too -distant future of that facility. Would you
entertain maybe adding a little extra land to what is already
there in order for us to expand that facility in the future?
Heady: Yes, we might entertain that. I would like to put a
codicil on that—if it ever ceased to function as a youth
hospice that it would revert back to our ownership.
Ackerman: I don't know that we could do it specifically like
that. You may have the opportunity to buy it back if the city
so chose, but if we make a trade the city will own the land.
Regardless of what the future use might be, it might be
difficult at this point of time to commit to it voluntarily
coming back to your possession. I think that what you are
asking is not unreasonable. I think it would be in the best
interest of the city, from what little I know about your
project, to consider a swap and negotiate the arrangement for
whatever amount of land would be reasonable for you and still
reasonable for the future growth of the facility that is there
and try to work out the arrangements subject to the approval
of the City Council.
Dugwyler: Of course the reason for the green space ordinance
is to provide parks for our residents. Can you tell us a
little bit about what kind of amenities you will be providing
in your development that would suffice in place of us doing a
Page 4 • March 2, 1998
•
park?
Heady: We typically encompass basketball or tennis courts if
we have the opportunity to have the space. In this
development, if we did not have to give up the almost four
acres, it would allow us to develop more infrastructure on
site. In a lot of our properties we do golf practice areas.
Judy: Is this going to be a family-oriented or student -
oriented development?
Heady: Student -oriented. The requirement we understand is for
facilities. We need to provide them for the students. We're
not looking to the city to provide them. We want to keep the
space, so we can provide them ourselves.
Ackerman: I think this board would probably be willing to
consider your proposal. I think you would need to come forth
with details, exact measurements of the property, and let's be
specific of what we are speaking. Then if it's agreeable with
you and you can afford to give up a reasonable amount of land,
I think there would certainly be some favorable comment in
that regard.
City staff has been visiting with Children's House in regards
to their needs. Peggy Smith stated that the director of
Children's House had appeared at an earlier City Council
meeting where the impression was given that the organization
would move from the current site. Mr. Ackerman said recent
conversations with Children's House indicated they would be
ameniable to this arrangement. The objective is to accommodate
Children's House and enlarge their facility with the least
disturbance to their program. Mr. Ackerman said he thought
there was a way to do that and accomplish what the developer
wanted as well.
V. Sutton Street property public input - Dugwyler
Neighborhood residents appeared at last month's meeting
proposing the purchase of this property for a park. They were
asked to survey the community in which they live where this
park would accommodate and serve. The PRAB asked people who
are interested in seeing a park as well as those opposed to
the idea to speak tonight.
March 2, 1998 • Page 5
PROPONENTS:
Kathy Thompson: My name is Kathy Thompson, and I live at 507
North Walnut. I have lived in the historic district for
nineteen years. I came before the Parks Board a month ago
along with Cindy Long to propose that the PRAB buy the Sutton
Street walk -by historic park. We were sent away with an
assignment to find out how the neighborhood felt about this.
So the first thing Cindy Long and myself did was poll the
households surrounding the park. Out of those households we
found one person we could not contact, seven people for it,
two people "no", and two people who where undecided. That was
three weeks ago. We have those people's signatures on our poll
sheet with their decision. After that encouraging information,
we got together a group of ten people and divided our
neighborhood into sections. Our boundaries are Fletcher/Olive
on the east, Dickson/Spring on the south, Washington/Willow on
the west, and Rebecca/Johnson on the north. What we took
around were what we are calling Sutton Street Walk -By Historic
Park Petition, but actually, in reality, it is not so much a
petition as it is a survey. Because all we asked people to do
was sign their name, their address, and indicate yes or no. We
gave them the choice of how they felt about the park. By then
someone had brought around a sheet of paper all over the
neighborhood without signing it against the park. People were
aware of it, and we tried to explain to them about our
proposal. Out of all of those people we have 182 people on our
petition sheets. Out of all of those households the ones that
are not on it are just people who simply were not at home. If
they were not at home, we left a sheet explaining there was a
meeting tonight so they would be aware. We left our name and
address on each sheet, so if they were interested they could
call. Out of those 182 people, 165 were for the park, 13 were
against the park, and 4 were undecided. All of the people who
went around and surveyed individually told me that the people
who were for the park were overwhelmingly for the park. The
people who did that are very much aware of the fears and the
problems people have who are against it. It seems like to me
that we have come up with four basic problems. One, they are
Page 6 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
worried about the traffic. Part of that is because they
already have so much problems with St. Joseph's traffic. Two,
some are concerned with lighting. I tried to explain that we
are going to propose that there be lighting up in the trees,
so it would not only be safe but beautiful as well. Three, the
future of the park. We would make sure that the park was not
changed. It would be kept natural and only improved
historically. It would be a park that would have no
recreational equipment brought it. It would be kept and
maintained as it is. Four, the criminal element. We believe
that these problems can be overcome, both as a neighborhood
and as a neighborhood working with the city. Basically it
seems like what has really come out of this for most people in
trying to understand how everyone feels, is that a basic fear
is really the problem I think that is a problem we have in
our society today; people are afraid of what they do not know.
It's easy to make things up. It's easy to fear things that you
really don't know will happen. We have decided that we are
really hopeful that people would much prefer to try to work on
the problems that arise rather than to get rid of something
that is really important to our neighborhood. There are many
more things that I could say, positive things that have come
up and positive things that people have told me: what it was
like to go around and actually meet your neighbors that you
had never seen before but had always wondered who lived in
their houses; stories that they told us about playing in the
park; but I know there are other people who want to talk. The
last thing I would like to say is that I feel like we really
hope that it does not disappear. Because once it disappears it
never comes back. It is the only historic district that we
have in our city. There has already been a lot of it taken
away.
Ms. Thompson also read a letter written by Joan Smith, an art
historian and neighborhood resident. [See attachment "A"
following this page.] Ms. Thompson also submitted signed poll
sheets as supporting information.
Sarah Lefler: My name is Sarah Leflar, and my address is 1495
Finger Road. I am here on behalf of the 300 members of Friends
March 2, 1998 • Page 7
Attachment "A" submitted by Kathy Thompson
TO: The Parks Board
FROM: Dick and Joan Smith corner of Sutton and Washington
Due to a family illness, we couldn't be here tonight, so we are writing this letter in support
of converting the private park on Sutton St. into a public historic landmark. We live on the
corner of Sutton and Washington, a one -minute walk to Mrs. January's property.
Many of us to this neighborhood with permission from the owner, have used Mrs.
January's property for a number of years Both of our children have enjoyed nature and sledded
with their friends there. And, for a long time we have wanted the historic district to have a
neighborhood park for our families to use. Although Mrs. January always has been very generous
about letting people use the area, we are concerned that if it is sold for development it will be
unavailable for use any more. In addition, we feel there is enough historic and aesthetic value to
the location that it definitely merits being saved and preserved in its current state. It would be a
perfect addition to the historic district.
We contacted Mrs. January a couple of weeks ago to find out what she knew about the
history of her property, and she told us that Roberta Fullbright had named the area "The
Woodlands." Mrs. Fullbright even wrote a poem about it that was published in the newspaper at
the time. Unfortunately, we haven't had time yet to find a copy of the poem, but apparently there
also were several newspaper articles published about "The Woodlands." Mrs. Lighton, also a
resident in the historic district, said that when she was young the park was called "Big Spring"
and that many neighborhood children spent time playing there.
Mrs. January told us that the people who cleared the area and had all the rock work done
were Van and Mary Howell. Mrs. Howell was around 90 when she died about 10 years ago.
Mrs. January believes that the Woodlands was constructed beginning around 1910 or 15. She
was told by Mrs. Howell that one man built all of the rock work for the Howells. When the
January family bought the property in the mid-1970s, they embarked upon a restoration effort that
brought the Woodlands back to its original state. Working from old photographs and apparently
with some help from the original owner, Mrs. January and a New Zealand mason, Ian Dickey,
embarked on the restoration. They excavated areas that had been walls, the well, and so on, and
used the original rock that was still on the site to repair and rebuild the Woodlands into what it
still is today.
The Woodlands was used in both a private and public way for its entire existence. Mrs.
January said that picnics and church and community gatherings frequently have been held on the
grounds for the last 80 or so years The spring -fed well was used to chill watermelons for
community picnics. Special openings were built into the rock walls to hold torches to light the
grounds for evening events. We hope to locate the newspaper articles, photographs, Mrs.
Fullbright's poem, and other memorabilia related to the Woodlands to put into the archives at the
Washington County Historical society.
Page 8 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
Attachment "A" submitted by Kathy•Thompson
We have heard concern over potential noise and safety for surrounding residents if this is
made a public property. We contacted the Fayetteville police department to find out if there was
any reason for concern, since we live in such close proximity to the park. They told us that at
Headquarters House on Dickson St., a historic site comparable to the Woodlands, they only had
been contacted 3 times and one of those was a fire alarm. We are satisfied that it will not become
a nuisance to neighborhood property owners, and are very much in support of the city acquiring
this property. In order to discourage any potential problems, we would like the Woodlands to be
kept and maintained as it is, without additional parking or recreational facilities. The question of
lighting, we think, should be left to the people in the homes that back up directly to the park. It is
our opinion that signs with the park's name should be very small and unobtrusive or left off
altogether. Thank you.
March 2, 1998 • Page 9
For Fayetteville. We support the city purchase and
preservation of the historic Sutton Street park. We feel that
the preservation of this lovely public space would promote the
values that we represent, in particular, environmental
quality, beauty, sense of community, the preservation of our
unique heritage here in Fayetteville, and those are key values
to us. We think it is clear that the preservation of the park
would support that. It is a lovely, unserviceable green space.
We hope that the city takes this opportunity to purchase and
maintain it for generations to come.
Ackerman: Do you have a referendum of some kind from your
board in a written document for you to make this presentation
in support of this proposal?
Lefler: The Board has approved the statement I just read. I
can get a copy to your committee tommorrow.
Orland Maxfield: I'm Orland Maxfield, I live at 533 North
Willow. I am going to speak really twice while I am up here
because of the difficulty of going back and forth. First, I am
here as Chair of the Fayetteville Historic District
Commission. I am speaking now on behalf of that commission. I
would point out first that I don't really think that anyone
has a question of this property, but in the article that came
out just three or four days ago in the paper it commented that
the property is near the Washington/Willow historic district.
I want to correct that: it is in the district.
I have a map here if anyone has any question about that. I am
going to read this statement, and then I will give copies to
you and I will say a few other words. "The Fayetteville
Historic District Commission passed the following resolution
relative to the property in question at its regular meeting on
February 18, 1998. `Be it resolved that the Fayetteville
Historic District Commission supports the purchase of The
Woodland, the January property located east of Walnut Avenue
and north of Sutton Street, by the City of Fayetteville for
use as a neighborhood park.'" I am authorized by the
Page 10 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
commission to give this. You have already heard that actually
this has served, though a private property, in a somewhat
quasi -public way. People in the neighborhood have been using
it, apparently with the Howell's and January's blessing, so
that use by those other than those that own it would be
nothing new. It has been going on for a long time. I would say
more to the point even perhaps, that having neighborhood parks
is really a part of the character of historic districts of the
vintage of the Washington -Willow district. We have a lot of
buildings in that district from different dates. My house was
built in 1895. To go back to that time and up to the 1920's,
neighborhood parks were very important. We do not have one in
that district. In fact, we have almost no green space in the
district. That property, and what I would refer to simply as
the somewhat enlarged lots on North Willow between Rebecca and
Prospect, are really the only open areas we have. Those lots
are privately owned, there are houses on them, and they are
not for public use at all. Certainly the acquisition of this,
not only I think would benefit the people who live in that
neighborhood, but it certainly would be in accordance with the
nature of historic districts of this type. Speaking as a
private citizen, divorced from this district commission, I'm
the old timer. I've lived in Fayetteville since 1946. I have
lived in my house at the corner of Davidson and Willow,
directly across from Betty Lighton, since 1956. This makes me
certainly someone who has lived about as long as anyone else
around in that neighborhood. I have observed the neighborhood
fairly closely, I would say, in all of those years. We need a
neighborhood park; I am speaking simply as a neighbor of other
people. We need a neighborhood park. In the time that I have
lived there there have only been, I would say, two or three
empty lots that now are built on other than the little bit of
green space that I referred to earlier. We do not have a
formal neighborhood organization; I certainly do not pretend
to speak for people with whom I am in contact from time to
time about the neighborhood. Others have expressed to me their
concern about this issue, the need for this, and I certainly
applaud the efforts of Kathy [Thompson] and others who
acquired all of those signatures. What a job this amounts to.
I am giving you the support of the Fayetteville Historic
District Commission, and I am giving you my own support as a
private citizen.
March 2, 1998 • Page 11
Mr. Maxfield distributed a resolution approved by the Historic
District Commission [see attachment "B" following this page]
Chris Huggard: My name is Chris Huggard, and I live on North
Willow Avenue. I have lived there for sixteen years. I am an
avid walker and, as Orland Maxfield has mentioned, I also have
paid attention to what has been going on in the neighborhood.
I strongly support the park. I think it would add something to
the neighborliness of the neighborhood. It would also be nice
to permanently protect, in the operative term these days,
green space that would include trees, grass, and the historic
landscape architecture. I would also like to say that we
should keep parking away from it; we don't need parking there.
It's very narrow there. Just keep it as a walk in; that will
limit the traffic. As Kathy Thompson said, the lighting
probably should be determined by the people who live there;
however, I think lighting would be a security measure. It
would actually make it more secure to have the lighting rather
than to keep it dark as it is now. The other point is, if it
were to be sold, someone might build a new home. Being in the
historic district, by the way I am a professional historian,
I think that would take away from the quality of that area.
Building a new 2 x 4 home I don't think would add to this. I
would like to go on record as saying I strongly support a
walk-in park at the January property.
Jeanie Wyant: I am Jeanie Wyant, and I live at 424 Johnson. I
wasn't home when they came by and didn't sign anything, so I
wanted to put my word in. I've walked around in that area a
lot, and I've not ever gone into the park because I assumed it
was a private person's place. I am in favor of it being a
walk -by neighborhood park; I'd love to go in on my walks or
take some time just to sit. I agree with the comments on the
lighting and the parking that have been made.
Cynthia Peven: My name is Cynthia Peven, and I live at 514
North Mission, down around the corner by Mission and Maple
Street. I am simply here to argue as a resident and a home
Page 12 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
Attachment "S^
299 n UM WELL Off
a
VOVIN4LDOLLCD OR 0E3
2, /998
-ao,Ce_ _ J eL1 --L a -r oC EGccaz--K-
A- • 0 cru tom.- ✓ -c recrtin
• i I}'ly ry - rtc%i /c /998. CJ
/CaL:yt-c.ict-
fri,�L.L t_ -a-4-- -a— .t o "�' r . :
•
March 2, 1998 • Page 13
owner of the area that I would very much like to see this open
space preserved. I greatly fear that if it is not preserved as
a park then like very much of the other property surrounding
the historic district and the Mt. Sequoyah area, then it is
going to be developed into houses. Three or four houses are
capable of fitting into a space that size, and we've seen it
happen all around on the Mt. Sequoyah hillsides and so on. My
argument is please make this a park. Let's not let this
opportunity pass us by so that this becomes more developed
private space. I have a few hopefully logical arguments in
favor of making this a park area. The first is location, that
important element of real estate; the only really sizeable
green space in this entire neighborhood area is the Wilson
Park area and there is no equivalent on the eastern side of
College Avenue and there is no equivalent on Mt. Sequoyah. I
am very much in favor of all of the various efforts that the
Parks Board is considering to conserve and preserve some of
the open spaces that are up there already. Because if we do
not hang on to them, the burgeoning value of the land is going
to force the next generation of people to develop them. They
are very desirable locations to build and reside in. Keeping
this an open park area, however, helps preserve the value of
the living space of all of those houses that already exist
there and that are being added to the area. My second argument
really doesn't hold much water and that is the terrain of the
area; it's a very beautiful natural creek. We have seen houses
hung on hillsides much steeper than this with much worse
drainage problems, but it would be nice to see this really
unique small area of terrain preserved because it has a lot of
charm. The third argument has been made for me by some of the
other people up here—the weight of tradition. It has been a
unique, beautiful area that people have already enjoyed as
part of our historic heritage. It already exists as a green
space and as such it already attracts traffic to it. People
already go into the area and use it as a walk-in park, a park
that is put there without driveways into it, without
playground facilities, but just as a park that people would
walk to with sidewalks and so on. I don't see that much of an
increase in people going into the area over the ones that
already use it. It exists now as an asset and a buffer to the
people who reside around it, and I really do understand and
honestly say that with them I would like for it to remain what
Page 14 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
•
•
•
it is. I would like for it not to change. But I fear that
change is inevitable, and that they're not going to be able to
piggyback the use of that area onto their residences as long
as it remains a private space. Without it being a public
space, the residents around it actually have no control over
what happens to the property. My fifth argument would be
conservation. The size and beauty of the trees and plants in
existence there is worth saving. If it is developed, many of
those trees will go. I would like to see it change somewhat
because I know it is full of poison ivy, so it does need a
little care and maintenance. My final argument is purely
selfish. I want this space to stay open in my neighborhood. We
need more parks in the city of Fayetteville that you do not
drive to, that you do not drive through, that you walk to on
a sidewalk. It's unique to the neighborhood, and I would like
for it to stay there. Once there was plenty, and there still
is plenty, of green space in the historic district and on Mt.
Sequoyah, but this is filling in very, very rapidly. And when
it is all filled in and there are new large and expensive
houses on small yards in all of those spaces then the unique
character of the area will be lost. While I am up here beating
my drum for the Sutton Street property, I'd also like to go on
the record as supporting the purchase or the development of
the area around the water tanks on Fletcher Street, and I
would someday like to see the Parks Board look into the
acquisition or some kind of cooperative arrangement on the gas
company warehouse property that is on Maple Street.
Ms. Dugwyler stated that she had received voice mail from Dr.
Samuel Hucke, a resident of 365 N. Olive Avenue, which adjoins
the Sutton Street property, pledging his support in acquiring
this property as a public park.
Angela Stevens: My name is Angela Stevens, I live at 429
Sutton Street, my house sits directly across the street from
the Sutton property. I feel so blessed to live there and to be
able to look out at that beauty. I have three little boys. We
don't use it that often out of respect for the Januarys. My
whole family loves it very much. I would love to see it
preserved. I'm for it one hundred percent. I cannot find any
March 2, 1998 • Page 15
negativity in it. All the fear that you hear coming out; I
don't live through fear. I live through positive thought, and
I feel like that if the community is positive about it then it
will be a positive, wonderful place for everyone. As far as
the traffic, my understanding is that St. Joseph's is building
a church and middle school east of Highway 265, which will
alleviate a lot of traffic in the neighborhood.
Richard Alexander: My name is Richard Alexander, and I live in
the historic district next to the public library. I'm very
much in favor of the park. A lot of my arguments have already
been well stated by the people who have preceded me. A couple
of things I would like to say: it already is a park. There is
a tremendous amount of infrastructure there, it is frankly a
historic place and probably if it were a building would be
placed on the national register. It is that old and that
significant. The historic district does not have a park. This
is Fayetteville's historic district. I think as a public body
one of the things you are charged with is looking into the
future not just making decisions for today. Fayetteville is
growing. Green space like this will be a premium in the future
both with respect to desirability and affordability. This is
an opportunity, in my opinion, for the Parks Board to do the
right thing and make a wise investment at a very reasonable
price. Not so much for the present, because we live in a nice
town that is not so crowded, but twenty or thirty years from
now. That is what I am talking about. I think our town is
going to be a lot more crowded, and this type of green space
is going to make our city one of the desirable places to live
that we are repeatedly voted for in various surveys and polls.
I work in town, and I've been lobbying to have the Sutton
Street property considered for a park for about a year. I've
met very few people who are opposed to the idea both within
and outside the historic district. I think that the survey
that Kathy [Thompson] and others did proves the point that the
majority of the people are for this as a park. The arguments
that I have heard against the park, and I know some of these
people who are making these arguments because they're my
neighbors and good people who do not have a bad motive, are
arguments that could be used against all of our parks. I would
ask which ones would we not have: Wilson Park? Gulley Park? I
Page 16 • March 2, 1998
•
•
• live next to the public library. On the one hand it would be
nice not to have the library there because people park next to
•
•
my house when they use it. On the other hand it is a great
facility and a great asset for our town and my neighborhood.
I think sometimes we have to consider the overall and the
broader picture, and I think that is certainly the case with
this park.
Harriet Jansma: My name is Harriet Jansma, and you saw me a
few weeks ago speaking on the issue of the city property on
Mt. Sequoyah which is much closer to my house. I live about
six blocks from the Sutton Street property, but I walk by it
several times a week during the winter, spring, summer, and
fall. I've seen pileated woodpeckers come into that area from
way out in the countryside in the winter time when the birds
have larger territories when there is snow on the ground. We
haven't had that this year because it's been such a warm
winter. Because this area is a bowl and is a very wind
protected place it would be a great place to sit in the winter
as well as in the summer when the property is nicely shaded by
the trees. Because the property is a very short city block
from the public library it forms a nice asset in relation to
the public library. I'm not too far from retirement and can
picture myself walking of the morning to the public library to
get a book and walking over to that park to start that book.
That is the kind of use that I can envision that park having.
Thankfully the historic district has many more young children
than it did for awhile, but it also has a great many adults
who will use that park in the way I have mentioned. I would
urge you to consider the purchase of the property.
OPPOSITION:
Nancy Burris: My name is Nancy Burris, and I live at 315
Sutton Street. I am not a public speaker, and I wasn't sure
all day if I would be able to make my feet walk up here, but
here I am. I am going to leave it up to my neighbors who do
not want the park. I've given each board member a copy of the
March 2, 1998 • Page 17
reasons that I am opposed to having a park on Sutton Street
[see attachment "C" following this page]. I am the one who put
out copies around the neighborhood. A wise woman that I talked
to said `don't go too deep, you're the ones who have to live
with it', so I polled the immediate area and left it at that.
I'm also passing on a letter from a Tina Buxton who keeps the
grounds and does the landscaping for the public library.
Wyit Wright: My name is Wyitt Wright, and I live at the corner
of Walnut and Sutton which is immediately adjacent to the
park. I've lived there since 1986, so I think I have a
reasonable idea of what the park is about. Bobbie January and
I have been good friends and neighbors for that entire period.
I have mowed the park myself, so I am intimately familiar with
the terrain of the park. And having lived by it, literally for
twenty-four hours a day for all of those years, I very much
know what goes on in the park and what sort of things the park
is suitable and not suitable. The issue here is not really •
about Bobbie selling the park, but simply whether the city
should buy it. She certainly has the right to sell it to
anyone she wants. What I am here to address is whether it is
appropriate for the city to buy the property. I feel it is
unsuitable as a park for a number of reasons. One of them is
location. As it was mentioned, it is in a bowl shape which
retains noise and sound. It is surrounded by houses, very
closely, unlike a Wilson Park which has a street around it
there is no street around this one. This park is twenty-five
feet away from my house. It is very tightly surrounded by
houses. There is no natural barrier of any kind between this
park and the houses surrounding it. If you sit in that park
and talk I can hear you. It is unsuitable partly because of
the terrain. There is almost no level space in that park. It
Page 18 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
•
Attachment "C" submitted by Nancy Burris
ATTENTION
ALL RESIDENTS OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT
The Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department is currently entertaining a proposal that would
establish a public park on the east end of Sutton Street (on the January property that is currently
for sale). The matter was discussed at their last meeting on Monday, February 2, and will be
discussed again early in March --most likely on Monday, March 2 at 5:30 p.m. Please try to
attend this meeting and make your opinions known to the board. They want very much to
hear from the people who would live in the immediate vicinity of the park—they are the ones
who will be most affected by the establishment of such a park. The idea of a quiet, neighborhood
park is, at first glance, an attractive one; but there are other concerns that the residents of this
area need to address.
1) As the residents of Sutton Street and Willow street know, parking is at a premium on these
streets. With the growth of both St. Joseph's School and the congregation of the church, this will
become more of a problem. Although the park is to be set up as a `walk -by" park, and No
Parking signs are to be posted, enforcement of this rule would be difficult, at best. And the No
Parking signs, if they are effective, might well encourage people to park further down on Sutton,
or Olive, or Willow, thereby exacerbating the problem they were designed to solve.
2) The January property, which has been so beautifully maintained and managed over the years,
will become public property the moment it becomes part of the park system. When this happens,
the neighborhood relinquishes its ability to control those who use the park and even, to a degree,
the manner in which they use it.
3) If lights of any sort were installed—a real possibility—it would encourage usage of the park
at night, and this would not be conducive to the atmosphere of a quiet neighborhood that
generally predominates in the area.
4) The terrain of the lot is such that small children would need increased supervision.
5) It is important to remember that if the city purchases this lot and converts it into public
property, the park as well as any problems that accompany it, would be permanent additions to
the lives of those who live in its immediate vicinity. There is no feasible way to make a trial run.
How certain are we that the advantages of having such a park would outweigh the potential
disadvantages?
March 2, 1998 • Page 19
is a gulley, there is a creek running through it, and for the
most part it is not an easy park to play frisbee in or
something because it is all hill. There is a creek which flows
through the park which tested positive for e -coli [sic]. It
was tested four years ago; this is not the sort of creek in
which little children should be playing. There is a natural
erosion problem there. The park has very poor soil, and it
does not have a good ground cover. For a number of years, Jim
January tried to get vinca to grow there. It grew reasonably
well, but it was always a problem. It is so heavily shaded
because of the trees that there is no good ground cover. It's
a trade off—you can get rid of the trees and have good ground
cover, or you can have trees and not have good ground cover.
With heavy usage erosion would be a real problem in this park.
Even though it has been a private park people have been
allowed to use it. Mrs. January has always been able to
maintain some control over it, and I have assisted her with
that. When things happened in the park I could step out and
say this is not appropriate. There are people here who do not
have an idea of what goes on there. The comment was made that
we are afraid of what we don't know. But I do in fact know
what goes on there. Rather than using my own words, I'll read
an excerpt of the letter written by C.M. Buxton [see
attachment "D" following this page] you have before you. `I
see public grounds at a much more intimate level than most—I
have to clean them up! I am saddened to say I have found
hypodermic needles and countless liquor bottles at the
library. I have witnessed public urination and defecation much
closer to home than I care to admit. Add to these incidents a
layer of cigarette butts, used prophylactics, fast food trash,
dirty diapers, used tissues and cue [sic] tips, and wads of
chewed gum, and you have a "public use" area. This is an
irrefutable fact of life that I deal with daily. To introduce
this to an established neighborhood is unthinkable.' Those are
the types of things I have, from time to time, picked up on
Mrs. January's property. Children use this property to smoke
dope, people fornicate out there, they leave liquor bottles.
This is private property, this is a property that I or Mrs.
January or other neighbors which are concerned, can go out and
say something about. As a public property it would be much,
much more difficult for us to do that. I'm sure we can call
the police, but the fact of the matter is you can be sitting
Page 20 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
Attachment "D" submitted by Wyatt Wright
C•rel • 8w>cton
312 N. W; Wow
Fay eill•Wille, 4t2 1210 i
5Xi-bo3'7
Dove 'Parks Boa.-cl
= hat lived of. 3la- Nor+h Willow fo....
_.
nine yeateS 2 home ac do ree in Rorhicu.l+xre from
-she, (4, 14 a t.d own M IattAccape aa.d. inainttl40i4ce .-
ecmPa.ty • S have. +a.te.& ea.. -e• 0f +he. Foci vkw'•I I
.. Qu.4e1ic- I. -;bra -r•) 5roi.4"41.s. -For Sc./6va-4 years, and -Nie
..I4asking40n.Cottni (awr+-hoitse is o. VA, new accaun+•
`(Bolin
an abosk +wo blocYs frowt ++ie proposed park• )
r set ptblie 5 rands a4 - rri«Lh more
in+imale leveI 4Mgn Most --- 1 have 4o clean +he.n•4F I
r a," "saddevted +o Say 1 ha&+e SivalAi Iypode✓mi c
.netdles .am -4 c.en,nkl-less 'Iry be es amt- 4I1c.- 1.461-04e,, •
..•L.. {ta.sc ..wifnesse•. pLAS! ic. µrim 'len n.+td dafeta-Won
mitch closer +v home +ha.t r ca.-o.+o ad..t;+• field 1, i$tese
.incides*s ai I ayes• of c 9arelte btotfs “sect Q.-orhylar ls_es,
fast •Fd •h.
ooashi olir+y dio.Pe.-s. K.sed } u
isses a,..d Ott +irs,
AMA W0.44 of chewed 9e4.41t, .&M CL yaw have cciP«.b..lCc
Use-" avea.• "chis i5 an iweftt•+able fac+of Ilfc fka?'S
..deal wi+h doily•.To.in�ti..y4ua.-i_+0. a...
tnis esf-abk•Sked__
Ye. t.444.126. -hook is «
n+him ka ble• • ..
o Hy second acct eraily realistib objcol•fon .1-o 4141
pa"k is �vx.(FC. a.wd• pct. -Liu
we Srito.♦l.parf-..of. ill is ttcijhberhoo4..is...._.
.knisttt•.24-is eGsexti'a11j am. .islawo( of .three. .. blocks _
come+ -td by Three o5-l-heb«siet* .s• reMs.._in._.Fay "ui'lle:
.Colle3e Avrnwte,Dicicsos.,.aviik 1a aWeft..5freafs.•_._____.
.140e 4,1 so {.cwe +tic dis+inefient. ohay in j The_ gvstc
.'eV pam..A,l 6+. rose -ph '5 school a ` atkurcKn
i3Oitr
.Milds+. tit +-raifio a.n.d. cornrno+ion cause! `lai.ly by
iYiiS ttii,f;+i vnusi be lt' rtntiZ2d in ordev to make
March 2, 1998 • Page 21
Attachment "D" submitted by Wyatt Wright
.infe(Iia.,nk otecisio-n et,bowf• add( rt anog-her.-_Possible
,...Sokviceaooi more .Q,aAomobiles...
_... _. My StreeF. (Willow) is essewFia.11b a_ parkin,, lot -
for St. Joseph's. The _ i:c problem. _5vhs__ worse
Wei) Near Gvud S resew*this 9rea,}'lb • / heve are
d s when a. Yowfil& stter bus is .pavke4f (runn.ny)
_on cont oy my hoose !_ low bc*wcev'_.Dicksovi
_an4.. Salton is extrovele.l _narrow ..._re...residents_..
_,ave.-parkeol..clown .one. Side, anwt.wiu+2nj pow_en.ots
...Owe pa...eke-etclown -1-he other) rwy St -reek .is._irnpn.sSa61e•
This happe is o f tett _ __..---_.. _ _.---------...
Trnfffc...sirs .aloe ijnored._— S-rorn._s.ta
P_5iy-ns to
110 pa.vkiny'. Signs._ Tlheve._.is...no...hfir . fror+ti police•__ -
Know - ✓✓_' .hare __Called._thew Swevcr.I -h•mes • =
. ;-klot -Wits pa-rk.- . win .hawe. ±'no .pa.rkCa , ._si_711-52.
.Wheve olo you thin k- .people .are Joirt3c 4-o_Pa,rk?
.Tl -1c pavk paAtrans will ?Ott ..ori.._ocx✓._a.Inea.ciy ..
.over- bkrjoeoneat s+rerts •._t hove is. no ..i v •vata-ee_t'ha '
:+1.ic police. .will_vnonikor.._rarkinjo._prv.b.lr�.v<5_or viola-fi'oxs .
Tud in9 from Moir. -lrazk_record , Cam doutAftkA flekey
As The crowning 31ory .}o okr_co n•es±iori problems
_bus . Sfree4l has beta one a_ynajov ��GwFh/ro!h_„scree t
for _those wishlr' 1-o_avoict_dlte__Co.:too e=l-csfa .e7.{fe.
S+opli •. Maw, o f these_.people- fly down- ovr vevj
buoy , very rtawow si-reef-•_Again,_no help from
lou/ ein f o✓cenlewt is evicteauf.._
Z
tis hawd. +-o say' n0"_+-47- .a. Park-'.- _kin- r+14144 -e4 y /
_Pt+..irese+vt, . the (Ms advaaet)psar ow+,Nei _ e adrawFo�es
,Ou•v Neighbovhooet is already tits la ed. -Fo floe Iivnifs •
Sincsvely N, 3 U.x-ro,“
Page 22 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
there with your cooler and boom box at 10:30 at night, making
all the noise in the world, and I don't have much to stand on.
I know we have a noise ordinance, but when you are twenty-five
feet away, it doesn't take much of a noise to penetrate my
house and the neighbors around us. You have a copy of this
neighborhood map on which you will notice the people
surrounding the park who oppose it. These people are the
people who are the closest to the park. Many of the people who
spoke here tonight live at some distance from the park. I
don't think they have a sense or a feel of what type of impact
this could have on our neighborhood. I think these people who
live this close by and who are willing to sign this piece of
paper have that kind of insight. Before Jim January died, he
and Bobbie January had talked about fencing the park because
of some of the problems there. It was a concern to them even
at that time. Those who are concerned about four houses or
more being built there, Bobbie January has told me that she
has talked with her lawyer and if this property sells for
private home usage that the stipulation would be that only one
house could be built there. Her lawyer has assured her that
that could be done. It's easy to see that those who bear the
brunt of this project are those who are opposed to it. Others
who live at a distance will not be affected by the park.
People like myself and others indicated on the map will be the
ones who bear the impact and the noise, the vandalism, and the
lowered property values that this park will produce. I think
I speak for all of my neighbors who signed this petition when
I ask that this board reject this proposal.
Chris Krueger: My name is Chris Krueger, and I live at 317
Sutton Street at the bottom of the hill. I wanted to bring up
a few other concerns we have living in the proximity of the
property. People in our neighborhood do not want to absorb any
more traffic and congestion. St. Joseph's Catholic Church and
school are our neighbors, they are part of our neighborhood,
and since the church's on-site parking is not sufficient then
parking can be bumper to bumper on Lafayette, Walnut, Sutton,
and Willow. The school also brings more traffic into the
neighborhood, and there are safety issues here. Within the
last year a child was hit by a car at the corner of Lafayette
and Walnut while walking home from school. From what I've seen
March 2, 1998 • Page 23
many of Fayetteville's smaller parks are located at the ends
of streets where they are out of the way of traffic. Sutton
Street, however, is part of a gridded street plan and it
already gets its share of traffic from outside of the area.
That includes people driving through the historic district,
parents, church members, and people cutting through from the
top of the mountain. Whoever sees this property would want to
use it because it is so beautiful. Many have already seen it
and asked about it. The people here tonight want to make this
lot a walk -by area with the city providing no parking. I can
tell you that the lot already draws its share of drive-by
lookers, and I feel it would certainly draw people if it were
to become a public park. While many would walk, many would
also drive. That means that they will look for parking on the
nearest available streets, and that's down the hill on Sutton,
Walnut, and Willow. I understand that the rules governing
neighborhood parks are no different than those governing the
large community parks?
Dugwyler: It depends on what rules.
Krueger: The hours that they are open.
Dugwyler: They are the same.
Krueger: That means you can't legislate who can use the
neighborhood park, the size of groups, nor how it could be
used. We couldn't implement more strict rules on park hours?
Judy: You can have stricter hours.
Dugwyler: We have three parks which are closed at dark and
opened at daylight. I think this is determined on a park by
park basis. It depends on the needs of the park.
Krueger: I understand that lighting is also an issue that is
negotiable. We could also not require people to walk in. They
could drive in if they wanted to, correct?
Ackerman: Whatever curb side parking that is there now would
be all that there would be unless we took an entirely
different view of it. I don't anticipate that being the case.
Certainly I do not think that geographically there would be
any place to add additional parking.
Krueger: There are no definitions of a historic park in city
ordinances?
Ackerman: Not currently, no.
Krueger: Let's not lose sight of the fact that to our
knowledge the Sutton Street property has always been privately
owned. You have been told that this property has essentially
Page 24 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
been used as a park by neighbors for years, and if that is
indeed true, it has been subject to the restrictions of the
private property owners. That would not be the case if it were
to become a public facility. There are already three parks
within a short distance of our neighborhood. Those include
Wilson Park, Washington School Park, and the Square Gardens.
You are also exploring the old water treatment plant as a
possible park site. Could you please comment on the status of
that project?
Dugwyler: I don't think at this time the city has made a final
decision on what to do with that piece of property.
Krueger: But it is still under consideration?
Dugwyler: Yes.
Krueger: My neighbors are concerned about traffic, about
safety, and they are concerned about lighting. Some feel that
lighting will draw people to the park at night. Some do not
want lighting. Our area is not free of crime. Just because it
is the historic district doesn't mean that it doesn't have its
share of problems. Thank you for this opportunity to share my
thoughts, and please consider our concerns as you decide
whether a city park is truly a good fit for this piece of
property.
Dick Keating: My name is Dick Keating, and I live directly
across from the proposed park in question. I'd like to say a
few words in opposition of the city's acquisition of this
piece of property. First of all I don't want to come across as
being against parks in general. We were instrumental in the
city obtaining the property which is now the entrance to
Gulley Park. When we bought the property from the church, we
had the church deed lots 4 and 5 of that subdivision directly
to the city at our expense. We thought enough of the park, but
then we built seven houses directly in front of it. I have an
argument in general against these postage stamp -sized lots.
When you speak against the parks the problem is it's like
speaking against motherhood or apple pie. It seems like such
a wonderful idea that people don't understand where you are
coming from. A person walks down the street, and they see that
beautiful piece of property with the trees and the green space
and the creek, and they think of a place where children can
play, mothers can bring their toddlers, I could sit under an
March 2, 1998 • Page 25
oak tree and soothe my withered soul. The problem is these
small parks dilute the city park funds because they are very
expensive to maintain. And when that happens, the reality of
the picture involves trash, vandalism, criminal mischief, and
the opening up of another place in the city where nothing goes
on good after dark. I think the cost of the parking, or this
stopping people from parking, with the lighting, such as it
would be, the general maintenance, the ADA requirements, the
upgrading of the facilities to meet city building codes, the
guardrails over the creek, the well that is there, and most
especially the security requirements are such that it becomes
a very expensive proposition for the city if the park were
donated to the city. It's the continual maintenance and upkeep
that is the problem. I think that is just a matter of
logistics. There is just too much time when city employees are
running around from one little pinpoint park to another and
the city doesn't get the real bang for its buck when you're
doing that as a general way of operating. The other argument
specifically against this park is that the street is such a
narrow street, and the traffic is very heavy right now.
Ironically, I think this park works right now because it is
not a piece of public property. The people
asked to leave. This doesn't happen on city
in closing I would say that the city has the
use its funds in the most effective manner
to spend tax dollars on something like this
in the most effective manner, and the city
from it. Fear has been the reason for a lot
who misbehave are
property. I guess •
responsibility to
possible. I think
is not using them
should steer away
of the opposition
to the park. I submit that the fear of change has been a lot
of the reason for the support of the park. It has been
inferred that all the history would be lost, disappear, if
this park is not sold to the city. It has been my experience
that responsible private ownership also serves history well.
Kitty Gay: My name is Kitty Gay, and I live at 324 Sutton
Street which is basically across the street from Chris
Krueger. I am in the middle block of Sutton Street. The
traffic is the thing that really concerns me. For those of us
who live on Sutton Street it is a terrible, terrible problem.
I come home sometimes when there are functions at the church,
and the street is so narrow that one car can barely drive
Page 26 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
through because both sides are lined with cars. I have
problems turning into my own driveway. I'm certain that if
this becomes a park there will be more traffic problems. The
fact that the city doesn't provide parking doesn't mean people
will not drive from somewhere else and try to park there.
They're going to park in front of my house and walk up to the
park, or even along the dangerous ditch in front of the park.
Trash is another concern. My house backs up to St. Joseph
Church, and they have a basketball goal in the parking lot of
the church that is used sort of as a public park. In the
middle of the night people will come there with their music
blaring loud and shoot baskets; that is annoying. They also
throw their trash over my fence. It's a weekly chore at my
house to go out in the back yard and pick up the candy
wrappers and coke cups and things which have been pitched over
the fence. If we have a public park we are going to have more
of that in the neighborhood. I also would like to say that I
do not like to live in fear either, but we do have crime in
our neighborhood. I have been subjected to crime in my home,
someone tried to break in, and at least one other house that
I know personally has had the same problem. I have never been
in the park, and I have lived in this house since 1985. I
raised a child there and a bunch of her friends, and they were
under strict instructions to not go into the park. That is
private, and you do not go play in other people's yards. My
daughter did tell me that she has been there. She said there
is a culvert you can go under; there are a lot of dark, hidden
places in the park which you cannot possibly watch and police.
I feel like it will be a place where people will come and hang
out and do things we do not want done in our neighborhood. As
far as a concern about whether there is one or two or three
houses built on that piece of property, Mr. Keating's house is
a prime example of how you can build a beautiful home on those
steep hillsides and not destroy the character of the property.
The Woodland character, as far as the animals and birds which
come there, I don't feel like a home development would change
the character of that neighborhood. I wouldn't be unhappy to
see several homes go on that piece of property. I would much
rather see a couple of private homes with people who could
maintain control of what went on in the area than to have it
be a public park. Finally, I haven't done nearly as much
research as most of my neighbors have done, but I was
March 2, 1998 • Page 27
intrigued to hear of some of the other sights that are being
talked about for development as parks. Some of those sites
that were mentioned need to have something done because they
are eyesores. It seems to me that the money of our community
could be much better spent by taking some place ugly and
making it beautiful so it could be useful.
Constance Clack, a resident of 228 E. Dickson, submitted the
following for the record: `I would like to register my
opposition to making the Sutton Street property a city park,
my objection being chiefly the traffic situation, especially
parking.'
PRAB DISCUSSION:
Thiel: I would like to say that I for many years have seen the site
and thought it would be great if the city owned it so that we could
control that amount of green space. But then again, because our
funds are not inexhaustible, I do feel like the amount of money
that we would be spending on such a small area would be extreme. I
think it would remain a neighborhood park; I cannot see people
driving far and wide to this little park because there is not much
to do there. I think once St. Joseph has moved it will eliminate a
lot of the parking problems. I think our funds might be better
spent if we could possibly get the site on Mt. Sequoyah. I'm very
mixed about it; I want the green space, but that is a big price to
pay for green space and to maintain it.
Bleidt: I too am seriously mixed on this. As I was hearing the
comments from the proponents of this issue, I got really excited
when I hear that 165 people are for it, and when I hear about
Friends For Fayetteville and the Fayetteville Historic District
Commission. You really hear, through other people, really the
comments from someone as great as Ms. Fulbright and the history
behind all of this. I too go by it and see one of the most
beautiful places in Fayetteville, and I want to preserve that. I
think that's what we've been hearing—the preservation of this site.
But the issue of traffic, the issue of the expense; then again you
say well we should spend that sum of money for such a great place
Page 28 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
regardless of its size. There are pros and cons on this, and I
think I could fight myself until the very end on it. This is an
issue I will personally have to think about very, very strongly. I
would like to thank everyone on both sides; it's a blessing in my
eyes to have citizens who will put so much work and effort into an
issue like this. Without it, we wouldn't be Fayetteville.
Charboneau: The Fayetteville Historic District Commission: are you
a dues paying group like a property association?
Maxfield: No. We actually have three districts in Fayetteville.
These districts are established under federal and state guidelines.
They are on the national historic register in Washington. The
guidelines come under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the
Interior of the federal government.
Charboneau: My only point is, it is a beautiful piece of land, but
I don't think it's practical for the city to purchase this
property. If the city buys this and it becomes public property it
will change. The land itself may not change, but the use of the
facility will. For those of you who do not want it to, I don't
think that's being practical. In my subdivision we had a property
association and if we wanted to do improvements within our
neighborhood we could assess our members dues and do that. Is there
any kind of option for that district to try to raise the money,
finance through the district and pay it out over time, using dues
from the home owners? That way it will never be developed, the home
owners will own it, and it will remain private. I want everyone to
understand that if the city becomes involved, the property will
change.
Maxfield: There is no way that a national historic district can do
what you are saying. You are speaking of neighborhood associations.
As far as change, it is always inevitable. Having a neighborhood
park is very consistent and compatible with neighborhoods of this
vintage.
Alexander: I think the change the people who proposed the park are
concerned with is the loss of green space. Absent of the city
owning the park, there is no guarantee to what will happen. In my
opinion it will be developed, and you will lose the opportunity to
preserve that green space permanently. I think the majority of the
citizens in the neighborhood as well as groups like the
Fayetteville Historic District Commission and Friends for
Fayetteville understand that it will change with city ownership,
but I think they are comfortable that it would change for the
better in the fact that the city would guarantee that the green
March 2, 1998 • Page 29
space would remain a green space. I think people are asking the
city to make that change. I think there are more proponents than
opponents by any calculation.
Dugwyler: We know what the asking price is; we have not negotiated
with the owners, so we do not yet know the selling price. It's very
distressing to me to hear what terrible reputations our
Fayetteville city parks have and that they are such terrible
places. I just didn't realize that.
Ackerman. With the Board's indulgence, I think we should take the
information we have received tonight and digest the facts and do a
little more research on our behalf. Certainly we need to talk to
the property owner to see if we should agree with some of the
public to attempt to acquire this property. That will still have to
be negotiated at a level that we feel would be reasonable if it
were to come to fruition. We need some time now to digest the
information presented, and we certainly appreciate all of the hard
work and interest which has gone into this presentation. We will
take all of this into consideration as we move forward and evaluate
the comments that were made. I think the Parks & Recreation
Advisory Board were impressed with the property when they toured
it, and we are all atuned to the quality of green space and what it
lends to our individual communities. These are all factors that
will be part of the equation. Certainly we understand and give
strong consideration to those who live immediately in the proximity
of the park and the concerns that you have. I know first hand,
having lived near parks with small children, some of the problems
you face. All of these things are important to us. Your show of
support for your position tonight will give us strong input and
help us make the decision that would be appropriate for our
community. This is a complex issue, and it will take a little time
to resolve it. We would like the opportunity to take a little time
to evaluate it properly and make our recommendations.
Judy: I've always felt like it was very important to protect our
heritage, and that is just a part of our heritage. It's what
Fayetteville is all about. I feel very strong about it. I live near
Wilson Park and the direct traffic, but it has never really been
that much of a problem. I do feel like initally there might be more
traffic, but after a few months things would settle down.
Bleidt: I think it is very important for us all to remember that
this is not any neighborhood park, in my opinion, she said a very,
very important word: heritage. This is our historic district, one
of the three, so this is very important. The last thing I want to
Page 30 • March 2, 1998
•
•
•
• Bleidt: I think it is very important for us all to remember that
this is not any neighborhood park, in my opinion, she said a very,
very important word: heritage. This is our historic district, one
of the three, so this is very important. The last thing I want to
see us do is lose this. I don't think we can just go down some
check list of things to look at and things to not look at because
this is different. This is our historic district.
•
•
VI. Annual Report - Rogers
Ms. Rogers commented on the distribution of the 1997 Parks &
Recreation Annual Report completed by staff. An agenda request
has been submitted to present the report to City Council at
its' March 17 meeting. Mr. Ackerman asked that the request be
resubmitted for a later date, and he would make the
presentation.
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
A report from the Nominating Committee, comprised of Bleidt,
Judy, and Thiel, was presented nominating Mr. Ackerman for
Chairman and Mr. Bleidt for Vice Chairman of the Parks &
Recreation Advisory Board.
MOTION: LUTTRELL/JUDY
Mr. Luttrell moved the nomination cease and the slate of
officers be elected by acclamation.
The motion was approved unanimously 7-0-0.
Meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.
MINUTES APPROVED:
APR 6 1998
MINUTES TAKEN BY: 5,?m4n /a
John Nelson
477
March 2, 1998 • Page 31