Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2023-06-27 - Agendas - Revised Tentative
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 City Council Tentative Agenda Tuesday, June 27, 2023 4:30 PM City Hall Room 219 City Council Members Council Member Sonia Harvey Ward 1 Council Member D'Andre Jones Ward 1 Council Member Sarah Moore Ward 2 Council Member Mike Wiederkehr Ward 2 Council Member Scott Berna Ward 3 Council Member Sarah Bunch Ward 3 Council Member Teresa Turk Ward 4 Council Member Holly Hertzberg Ward 4 Mayor Lioneld Jordan City Attorney Kit Williams City Clerk Treasurer Kara Paxton Pagel of 524 City Council Meeting Tentative Agenda June 27, 2023 ZOOM INFORMATION 1. WEBINAR ID: 852 1156 1893 PUBLIC REGISTRATION LINK: HTTPS://US06WEB.ZOOM.US/WEBINAR/REGISTER/ WN_VTX07TZBSOCRWGYQLTJ H HG CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MAYOR'S ANNOUNCEMENTS, PROCLAMATIONS AND RECOGNITIONS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PRESENTATIONS, REPORTS AND DISCUSSION ITEMS 1. MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT: A. CONSENT A.1. APPROVAL OF THE JUNE 6, 2023 AND JUNE 20, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES (2023-552) A.2. EVANS CONSTRUCTION & REMODELING, LLC (SERVICE CONTRACT): A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A CONTRACT WITH EVANS CONSTRUCTION AND REMODELING, LLC IN THE AMOUNT OF $49,000.00 FOR LABOR AND MATERIALS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT SUBSTATION FOUNDATIONS AND SLAB LOCATED IN THE REPLACEMENT PARKING DECK (2023-793) A.3. SAFE STREETS FOR ALL / VISION ZERO RESOLUTION (ACTION PLAN): A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AND ADOPT A VISION ZERO POLICY IN THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE (2023-815) A.4. FPD DONATIONS FOR YCPA (BUDGET ADJUSTMENT): A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT IN THE AMOUNT OF $4,750.00 RECOGNIZING DONATION REVENUE TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE YOUTH CITIZEN'S POLICE ACADEMY (2023-823) B. UNFINISHED BUSINESS B.1. REZONING-2023-0014: (SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas page 2 Page 2 of 524 City Council Meeting Tentative Agenda June 27, 2023 GOFF FARM ROAD/RIVERWOOD HOMES, 606, 607, 645, 646): AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN REZONING PETITION RZN 2023-014 LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND GOFF FARM ROAD IN WARD ONE FOR APPROXIMATELY 112.98 ACRES FROM R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL AND RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE SUBJECT TO A BILL OF ASSURANCE TO NC, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION; CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES; AND R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL (2023- 792) AT THE 06/20/2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING THIS ITEM WAS LEFT ON THE FIRST READING. C. NEW BUSINESS C.1. FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN: A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN (2023-833) C.2. CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS, INC (CHANGE ORDER #1): A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #1 TO THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK CONTRACT WITH CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS FOR THE LAKE FAYETTEVILLE SOFTBALL RENOVATION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,702,903.00, TO ESTABLISH A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,702,903.00, TO APPROVE A PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $93,500.00, AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - 2019 PARK IMPROVEMENT BOND PROJECT (2023-834) C.3. ORDINANCE AMENDMENT §118.01 (SHORT TERM RENTAL DENSITY CAP): AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND §118.01 APPLICABILITY OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE CITYWIDE DENSITY CAP FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS TO 475, AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY (2023-838) PROPOSED AGENDA ADDITIONS 1. FILL VACANCY FOR CITY COUNCIL MEMBER / WARD ONE, POSITION ONE (RESOLUTION): A RESOLUTION TO CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 14, 2023 TO FILL A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR WARD ONE, POSITION ONE OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE (2023-874) D. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SESSION PRESENTATIONS City of Fayetteville, Arkansas page 3 Page 3 of 524 City Council Meeting Tentative Agenda June 27, 2023 D.1. SALES TAX REPORT - PAUL BECKER AND ENERGY REPORT - PETER NIERENGARTEN E. CITY COUNCIL TOUR F. ANNOUNCEMENTS G. ADJOURNMENT City of Fayetteville, Arkansas page 4 Page 4 of 524 Wade Abernathy Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2023-793 Item ID 6/20/2023 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 5/31/2023 FACILITIES MANAGEMENT (140) Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Approval of proposal from Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC in the amount of $49,000.00 to provide labor and materials for the PD substation foundations and slab in the Replacement Parking Deck. Budget Impact: 2300.200.9300-5804.00 Impact Fees Account Number Fund 07001.7820 Police Impact Fee Impr - Police Substation Project Number Budgeted Item? Yes Does item have a direct cost? Yes Is a Budget Adjustment attached? No Purchase Order Number: Change Order Number: Original Contract Number: Comments: Total Amended Budget Expenses (Actual+Encum) Available Budget Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Project Title $ 605,000.00 605,000.00 $ 49,000.00 ,56,000.00 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Approval Date: V20221130 Page 5 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JULY 6, 2023 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Paul Becker, Chief Financial Officer FROM: Waylon Abernathy, Bond Projects & Construction Dir DATE: June 6, 2023 SUBJECT: PD Substation Foundations and Slab RECOMMENDATION: CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-793 Staff recommends approval of the proposal from Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC in the amount of $49,000.00 to provide labor and materials for the PD Substation foundations and slab located in the Replacement Parking Deck BACKGROUND: In April of 2021, City Council passed resolution #93-21 which authorized Architectural Services for the Replacement Parking Deck. Included in that scope was a new PD Substation located on the ground level of the Deck. DISCUSSION: The staff solicited bids for this work. Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC was the lowest of 3 bids received. With the Replacement Parking Deck nearing completion, staff wants to get this proposal secured in order to start the Substation as soon as possible. The anticipated completion of the Substation is early 2024. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: $49,000.00 will be allocated from the Police Impact Fees Account 2300.200.9300-5804.00 ATTACHMENTS: 2023-793 SRF Police Substation, Contract PD Substation Foundations and Slab, Bid Tabulation PD Substation Foundation and Slab Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 6 of 524 City of Fayetteville Police Substation Foundations and Slab Contract— Between City and Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC This contract executed this day of 2022, between the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and . In consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC at its own cost and expense shall furnish all labor, materials, supplies, machinery, equipment, tools, supervision, bonds, insurance, tax permits, and all other accessories and services necessary to complete items per Olsson Engineered Drawings dated 12-10-21 stated in 5923 bid proposal, dated 5/9/23. 2. The City of Fayetteville shall pay $49,000.00 based on their bid proposal in an amount not to exceed $ $49,000.00 . Payments will be made after approval and acceptance of work and submission of invoice. Payments will be made approximately 30 days after receipt of invoice. 3. The Contract documents which comprise the contract between the City of Fayetteville and Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC consist of this Contract and the following documents attached hereto, and made a part hereof: A. Quote 5923 bid proposal. B. The Bid Tabulation. C. Olsson drawing Labeled Police Substation Plan and Details dated 12-10-21. 4. These Contract documents constitute the entire agreement between the City of Fayetteville and may be modified only by a duly executed written instrument signed by the City of Fayetteville and Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC 5. Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC shall not assign its duties under the terms of this agreement. 6. Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC agrees to hold the City of Fayetteville harmless and indemnify the City of Fayetteville, against any and all claims for property damage, personal injury or death, arising from performance of this contract. This clause shall not in any form or manner be construed to waive that tort immunity set forth under Arkansas Law. 7. Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC shall furnish a certificate of insurance addressed to the City of Fayetteville, showing that he carries the following insurance which shall be maintained throughout the term of the Contract. Any work sublet; the contractor shall require the subcontractor similarly to provide worker's compensation insurance. In case any employee engaged in City of Fayetteville Police Substation Foundations and Slab Contract — Between City and Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC Page 1 of 3 work on the project under this contract is not protected under Worker's Compensation Insurance, Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC shall provide and shall cause each Subcontractor to provide adequate employer's liability insurance for the protection of such of his employees as are not otherwise protected. The premiums for all insurance shall be paid by Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC Workmen's Compensation Statutory Amount Comprehensive General & Automobile Insurance Bodily Injury Liability $500,000 for each person injured. $1,000,000 for each accident. Property Damage Liability $1,000,000 aggregate. This contract may be terminated by the City of Fayetteville or Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC with 30 calendar days written notice. Freedom of Information Act: City of Fayetteville contracts and documents prepared while performing city contractual work are subject to the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act. If a Freedom of Information Act request is presented to the City of Fayetteville, the contractor will do everything possible to provide the documents in a prompt and timely manner as prescribed in the Arkansas Freedom of Information Act (A.C.A. 25-19-101 et. Seq.). Only legally authorized photo coping costs pursuant to the FOIA may be assessed for this compliance. 10. Changes in scope or price: Changes, modifications, or amendments in scope, price or fees to this contract shall not be allowed without a prior formal contract amendment approved by the Mayor and the Fayetteville City Council in advance of the change in scope, cost or fees. 11. Jurisdiction: Legal jurisdiction to resolve any disputes shall be Washington County, Arkansas with Arkansas law applying to the case. 12. Arbitration/Mediation: The City will not agree to be forced to mediate or arbitrate any dispute. 13. Interest charges for late payments by the City: The City of Fayetteville does NOT agree to any interest or penalty for "untimely" payments. The City will pay all invoices within 30 calendar days of accepted invoice. City of Fayetteville Police Substation Foundations and Slab Contract — Between City and Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC Page 2 of 3 WITNESS OUR HANDS THIS DAY OF CONTRACTOR NAME By .l�l Signature �.� � /� G E'✓� .� S yip s : ��� � Printed Contractor Name & Title ATTEST (Signature) Company Secretary (Printed Name) Business Address City, State & Zip Code Date Signed 1,16 6 /Z City of Fayetteville Police Substation Foundations and Slab 2022, CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 0 LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor ATTEST: (Signature) Kara Paxton, City Clerk, Treasurer Contract— Between City and Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC Page 3 of 3 Date Signed: Page 9 of 524 Bid Tabulation PD Substation Foundations and Slab Evans Construction and Remodeling LLC. $49,000.00 Nabholz Construction $73,644.68 Backus Concrete, LLC $91,640 Page 10 of 524 N O O � O �O ON � LO CY LO L) O It m 69. .0 N C O eo � J � C c Cc N C d O) �4 J d w J O C 'C Q O O p � O C cc .� � a) E H E o �a co z 55 cc o 'a c c ' ca V Ui 7 > c O u =Q� °amcu o-W a) >,� �� •. . c U 0 0 N c M cU? � O co a) LL E �. -@ W - COS 0dUiQ m m C cc O N c O_ J L- m �i c"a c cm A' Page 11 of 524 1NTEBRITy Nabholz Construction - HQ 3301 N 2nd Street Rogers, Arkansas 72756 Phone:+14796597800 PCCOR #033 Project: 02-22-2674 - Downtown Parking Deck 325 N. West Ave Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Prime Contract Change Order Request #033: Police Station Slab TO: CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE FROM: Nabholz Construction Corporation ATTN TRACY / ACCOUNTING 113 W MOUNTAIN FAYETTEVILLE, Arkansas 72701 CHANGE ORDER REQUEST 03310 PRIME CONTRACT None NUMBER / REVISION: CHANGE ORDER: STATUS: Pending - In Review CREATED BY SCHEDULE IMPACT: DATE CREATED: EXECUTED: No SIGNED CHANGE ORDER RECEIVED DATE: TOTAL AMOUNT: CHANGE ORDER REQUEST TITLE: Police Station Slab Jacob Keeney (NABHOLZ CONSTRUCTION CORP/ROG) 4/25/2023 $73,644.68 CHANGE ORDER REQUEST DESCRIPTION: CE #070 - Police Station Slab Cost to bring the Police Department Substation to subgrade and pour a slab per the attached drawings from Olsson. ATTACHMENTS: Police Station Slab wlfh Gravel.odf , POLICE STATION DETAILS.pdf , Police Plan on West Ave 031822.odf , 2023-04-20 020- 02750 Structural Police $talon Slab.odf POTENTIAL CHANGE ORDERS IN THIS CHANGE ORDER REQUEST- PCO # I Contract Company Title Schedule Impact Amount 033 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE Police Station Slab $73,644.68 Total: $73,644.68 CHANGE ORDER REQUEST LINE ITEMS: PCO # 033[ PolirP Statinn Slah # I Budget Code Description Ice Amount 1 32-4750.SUB SITE CONCRETE.SUBCONTRACT Bring in additional fill, grade to subgrade, and form and pour slab. $69,545.00 Subtotal: $69,545.00 General Liability Insurance: $591.13 Builders Risk Insurance: $6.95 Fee: $3,192.12 PP Bond: $309.48 Grand Total: $73,644.68 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ATTN TRACY/ACCOUNTING 113 W MOUNTAIN FAYETTEVILLE, Arkansas 72701 Nabholz Construction Corporation Nabholz Construction - HQ SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE DATE Page 1 of 1 Printed On: 5/22/2023 03:21 PM Page 12 of 524 BUDGET BID PROPOSAL NABHOLZ CONSTRUCTION -CONCRETE 3301 NORTH 2ND STREET NA 0 ill 1z ROGERS, AR 72756 Contact: JASON HAYDUK Phone: 479-270-2216 Email: JASON.HAYDUK@NABHOLZ.COM i )uotc To: Jacob Keeney Job Name: Police Room at Fay PG Date of Plans: Phone: Revision Date: Fax: ITEM DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT BUILDING 540 SLAB ON GRADE 2,379.00 SF 21.05 50,077.95 760 REINFORCING STEEL 1.75 TN 3,552.06 6,216.11 830 PLACE & FINISH SLAB ON GRADE 2,379.00 SF 5.57 13,251.03 BUII,DING 69,545.09 GRAND TOTAL 69,545.09 NOTES: Terms and Conditions Building only Add Alternate - Additional gravel fill: S2,975.00 Total w/ Add Alternate: S72,520.00 Page 1 of 1 Page 13 of 524 II CWHAVOt COORDNATE SLAB LAYOUT WH tEC%llAL 0— fil OTHERS coNTRACTOR CCCR=',A= — FIELD VERIFY Dl.E-DHS POLICE STATION FLOOR PLAN Page 14 of 524 ILAN ; i, 11.0-M. : :: 1 2 f M, Page 15 of 524 C 0 N C H E T' Customer / Address City of Fayetteville AR Wade Abernathy Facilities Management 115 S. Church Avenue Fayetteville, AR 72701 Proposal Backus Concrete, LLC Project # Date Quote # P.O. Box 10451 Fayetteville, AR 72703 PD Substation Pad 5/4/2023 22-0265 C05 Descripl PD Substation Pad Per Plan 12/10/2021 Slab On Grade 2385 SF - Install Gravel base - Install Reinforcement - Place and finish concrete per plan Thicken interior footing - Includes excavation - install reinforement Stair/landing - Install reinforcement - place and finish concrete EXCLUSIONS: - All Items Not Listed Above - Utilities - Permits and Associated Fees - Concrete Testing - Colored & Polished Concrete - Hard Rock and Oversized Rock Excavation - Additional Excavation Due to Soil Quality - Termite Treatment - Anchor Bolts and Embed Materials - Barricades, Traffic Control, and Lane Closu - Handrail Materials and Installation - Trench Drains - Sealants and Caulking - Masonry Rebar - Waterproofing - Specialty Rebar Including ChromX (MMF) - Engineered Drawings and Shop Drawings - Building Perimeter and Underslab Insulatioi - Landscape Protection - Subgrade to be f 0.10' Prior to Work Comn Signature Project Address Total Page 1 Page 16 of 524 Proposal Backus Concrete, LLC BACKIL15 Project # Date Quote # P.O. Box 10451 Fayetteville, AR 72703 PD Substation Pad 5/4/2023 22-0265 CO5 Customer / Address City of Fayetteville AR Wade Abernathy Facilities Management 115 S. Church Avenue Fayetteville, AR 72701 Description DISCLAIMER: Project Address - Proposal does not include layout, testing, or permits. - Proposal price based on listed items and quantities only. - Proposal has been priced to perform work during normal duty hours Monday through Friday. - Evenings, weekends, and holidays may incur additional costs. - Invoices are due within 30 days of receipt. - This estimate is valid for 14 days. Please confirm price if scheduling after 14 days. LEGAL STATEMENT: Customer acknowledges and agrees that the above scope of work and pricing is an only and is based on the visible project area. Customer further acknowledges and agrees that the scope of work to be performed and th related pricing is subject to change should Backus Concrete, LLC, encounter unforeseen circumstances including, but not limited to, unmarked utility lines, unstable or unsettled subsurfaces, and/or hidden defects within the project area. Upon encountering such circumstances, unless an emergency exists (i.e., ruptured utility lines), Backus Concrete, LLC, will make all reasonable efforts to advise Customer of the estimated increased costs of said unforeseen circumstances as they occur. Customer agrees to pay to Backus Concrete, LLC, any additional sums expended by Backus Concrete, LLC, for labor, materials, and overhead, necessitated by such unforeseen circumstances. Further, Customer acknowledges and agrees that the above estimate is based on representations made to Backus Concrete, LLC, by Customer as it relates to scope of wo. to be performed and materials to be used. Thus, any changes, additions, or upgrades requested by Customer after acceptance of this estimate may result in an increased scope work and a resultant overall price increase and Customer acknowledges same and agrees pay the amount of any such increase promptly when invoiced for same by Backus Concr, LLC. Signature Estimator Qty I Cost Total SE Total 591,640.00 Page 2 Page 17 of 524 A•Z• Evans Construction & Remodeling, LLC (Service Contract) Item Approvals Name: Signature: Waylon Abernathy L'-'\ C- Paul Becker Holly Black v�.� (l+ecxo11 Les McGaugh QoocoyC'N' rnn G•-v%c. G`cr�t jaei+-B Blake Pennington Paul Becker 0` Susan Norton Lioneld Jordan - Date: o SI-ZS k Z-S OGto6 Z.'S C> 6 ( oT 7-'3 Page 18 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-815 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Chris Brown, Public Works Director Susan Norton, Chief of Staff FROM: Matt Mihalevich, Active Transportation Manager DATE: June 13, 2023 SUBJECT: Safe Streets for All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan & Vision Zero Resolution RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval a Safe Streets for All Comprehensive Safety Action plan and a Vision Zero resolution to achieve the policy goal of eliminating all traffic fatalities and severe injuries while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all. BACKGROUND: The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) has accepted a grant through the 2022 Safe Streets for All program to develop a comprehensive safety action plan for the Region. Toole Design Group has developed the comprehensive safety action plan through a series of public meetings and workshops. This Safety Action Plan uses the Safe System Approach to reduce and eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes on our transportation system and creates eligibility for Fayetteville to apply for Safe Streets for All grant funding for safe street infrastructure and programs. Three projects have been identified for the 2023 grant funding cycle including Maple Street Improvements, College Avenue and Joyce Blvd. safety improvements along with several safety programs. The purpose of this resolution is to establish Fayetteville's commitment to Vision Zero as a goal and to ensure that the Safe System Approach is used when evaluating existing infrastructure and when implementing new infrastructure projects and programs. To accomplish these purposes, the Active Transportation Advisory Committee will be responsible for working with the community — including groups that traditionally have been underrepresented — to promote the Safety Action Plan and work toward achieving the goals of Vision Zero through a variety of strategies, prioritizing speed reduction and roadway infrastructure in underinvested areas that overlap with high -crash corridors. DISCUSSION: The Safe System Approach has been embraced by the transportation community as an effective way to address and mitigate the risks inherent in our enormous and complex transportation system. It works by building and reinforcing multiple layers of protection to both prevent crashes from happening in the first place and minimize the harm caused to those involved when crashes do occur. It is a holistic and comprehensive approach that provides a guiding framework to make places safer for people. This is a shift from a conventional safety approach because it focuses on both human mistakes AND human vulnerability and designs a system with many redundancies in place to protect everyone. Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 19 of 524 The principles of a Safe System Approach are: • Death and Serious Injuries are Unacceptable • Humans Make Mistakes • Humans are Vulnerable • Responsibility is Shared • Safety is Proactive • Redundancy is Crucial The Vision Zero model resolution commits Fayetteville to the following actions: • Actively working to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries on their streets within a specified time period. • Collecting, analyzing, and using data to understand trends and potential disproportionate effects of traffic deaths on specific populations. • Incorporate Vision Zero as part of the duties of the Active Transportation Advisory Committee to promote the Safety Action Plan that is guided by community input. • Prioritizing the safety of pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, scooter riders, and people with disabilities over the ease of use of personal automobiles. • Prioritizing strategies that benefit the safety of communities in historically underinvested areas and ensuring that no strategy results in racial profiling or otherwise exacerbates racial inequities. The Active Transportation Advisory Committee has been updated on the development of the Safety Action Plan and have been involved in the surveys and workshops. On May 30th, 2023 the Transportation Committee reviewed the Safe streets for All information and the Vision Zero resolution and gave unanimously support. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: Item A.3 Approvals Signatures, NW Arkansas Safety Action Plan DRAFT_6-5-23, Fayetteville Vision Zero Resolution, Revised NW -Arkansas -Vision -Zero -Plan Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 20 of 524 == City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Y 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479)575-8323 - Legislation Text File #: 2023-815 Safe Streets for All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan & Vision Zero Resolution A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AND ADOPT A VISION ZERO POLICY IN THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE WHEREAS, the life and health of all persons living and traveling within the City of Fayetteville is our utmost priority, and no one should die or be seriously injured while traveling on our city streets; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero is the concept that traffic deaths and serious injuries on our roadways are unacceptable; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero is a holistic strategy aimed at eliminating all traffic fatalities and severe injuries suffered by all road users while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all; and WHEREAS, streets and transportation systems have traditionally been designed primarily to move cars efficiently and Vision Zero supports a paradigm shift by designing streets and transportation systems to move all people safely, including people of all ages and abilities, pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit users, scooter riders, and motorcyclists, as well as drivers and passengers of motor vehicles; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero recognizes that people will sometimes make mistakes, so the road system and related policies should be designed to ensure that those inevitable mistakes do not result in severe injuries or fatalities; therefore, transportation planners and engineers and policymakers are expected to improve the roadway environment, policies, and other related systems to lessen the severity of crashes; and WHEREAS, 26 people in Fayetteville lost their lives to traffic deaths and 193 were seriously injured between 2017 to 2021, and traffic crashes are among the leading cause of deaths in the United States; and WHEREAS, Fayetteville's transportation infrastructure serves an increasing number of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists; and WHEREAS, according to data from the Arkansas Department of Transportation, non -motorists including pedestrians and bicyclists account for 8 of the 26 (31 %) of the traffic deaths in Fayetteville; and WHEREAS, speed is recognized as a major determining factor of survival in a crash and the likelihood of a pedestrian surviving a crash is only 10% if hit by a vehicle moving 40 miles per hour; and Page 1 Page 21 of 524 Resolution: File Number: 2023-815 WHEREAS, Fayetteville adopted Ordinance 6488 in 2021 to establish a default speed limit of 20 miles per hour in residential and business districts; and WHEREAS, children, older adults, people of color, people with disabilities, people who are unhoused, and people with low income face a significantly disproportionate risk of traffic injuries and fatalities; and WHEREAS, making streets safer for all people using all modes of transportation will encourage people to travel on foot, by bicycle, and by public transit, which supports a healthier, more active lifestyle and reduces environmental pollution; and WHEREAS, successful Vision Zero programs are a result of both a complete government approach and community support of Vision Zero objectives and action plans; and WHEREAS, Vision Zero resolutions have been adopted by many jurisdictions across the United States; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2023, the City Council approved an update to the Fayetteville Active Transportation Plan, which sets a goal for zero fatalities and severe injuries for vulnerable roadway users by the year 2030. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby affirms the policies set forth in the Fayetteville Active Transportation Plan and adopts the goal of zero traffic deaths and serious injuries, stating that no loss of life or serious injury is acceptable on our streets. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby adopts the goal of eliminating traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030 and endorses Vision Zero as a comprehensive and holistic approach to achieving this goal. Page 2 Page 22 of 524 A•3 Safe Streets for All/Vision Zero Resolution (Action Plan) Item Approvals Name: Signature: Matt Milhalevich Chris Brown Susan Norton -v— Lioneld Jordan (� o�--- Date: 6 - 1 Li - zo Z3 Page 23 of 524 r"NWA Regional • Northwest Arkansas Safety Action May 2023 1 DRAFT Information contained in this document is for planning purposes and should not be used for final design of any project. All results, recommendations, concept drawings, cost opinions, and commentary contained herein are based on limited data and information and on existing conditions that are subject to change. Further analysis and engineering design are necessary prior to implementing any of the recommendations contained herein. Page 25 of 524 Contents Executive Summary _v 1. A Paradigm Shift............................................................................................2 What is a Vision Zero Action Plan?...........................................................................................2 VulnerableUsers...........................................................................................................................2 TheSafe System Approach........................................................................................................5 2. Roadway Safety in Northwest Arkansas.....................................................10 Plans, Policies, and Programs....................................................................................................10 RoadwaySafety Analysis.............................................................................................................16 Equity.................................................................................................................................................18 3. Community Outreach.....................................................................................24 4. Goals and Actions...........................................................................................34 Goals................................................................................................................................................... 34 Actions...............................................................................................................................................35 Page 26 of 524 Northwest Arkansas' Vision Zero Plan (NWA Vision Zero Plan) recognizes that one life lost on the streets within the region is too many and that something must change. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWAPRC) has developed this Plan and sets a target to eliminate all killed and serious injuries (KSI) crashes that occur on the regional roadway network by 2038. Although the horizon is 15 years from the development of this Plan, action starts now. Traditional safety strategies have not proven to decrease the number of life -altering crashes, highlighted by the increase of fatal crashes in recent years. This Plan emphasizes a shift towards the prioritization of safe, accessible, and equitable mobility for all roadway users and away from the disproportionate focus on moving vehicles efficiently —less delay that often results in higher speeds. iv I NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 27 of 524 Executive Summary The purpose of the NWA Vision Zero Plan is to emphasize change related to traffic safety because fatal and serious injury crashes cannot be tolerated. The Plan outlines strategies and actions that should be taken within the next ten years, yet it must not be considered unchangeable. As a living document, this plan must be dynamic to address safety in a region that is experiencing rapid growth. The recommended actions included are meant to be a starting point, not an all -encompassing list. Over time, the actions taken by the NWARPC, member agencies, and partner organizations should measure and report actions that are proving to reduce fatal and serious injuries along with continuing to incorporate safety innovations and opportunities to eliminate traffic fatalities and injuries as time passes. This Vision Zero Plan is organized into four sections. An overview of each section is provided below to serve as a summary of the NWA Vision Zero Plan in its entirety. 1. A Paradigm Shift Fatal and serious injury crashes have increased across the nation, the state of Arkansas, and in the Northwest Arkansas Region. In the traditional approach to roadway safety, traffic deaths have been understood as inevitable. This alone is not acceptable and therefore a new approach to safety is needed. This section describes how Vision Zero is grounded in the Safe System Approach that anticipates human mistakes and Traditional Approach • Traffic deaths are inevitable • Aims to fix humans • Expects perfect human behavior • Prevents collisions • Exclusively addresses traffic engineering • Doesn't consider disproportionate impacts ensuring that when collisions occur that they do not result in death or serious injury. A clear understanding of the Principles and Elements of the Safe System Approach is foundational to the NWA Vision Zero Plan and will be instrumental in increasing safety for all roadway users moving forward. 2. Roadway Safety in NWA Crashes over a 5-year period (2017-2021), resulted 220 people —mothers, fathers, children, grandparents, friends, and coworkers —losing their lives in Northwest Arkansas. An average of 44 people each year; however, 2021 alone was a year that 55 people died in roadway crashes —a 2% increase from the year before. These sobering numbers are part of today's roadway safety narrative in Northwest Arkansas. This section reviews existing plans, policies, and programs that are already in place that are attempting to increase safety in several communities in the region. It notes opportunities for communities to refine or add policies that can impact safety through capital projects and new development. This section uses crash data to establish a High Injury Network (HIN)—representing the corridors in Northwest Arkansas with the highest number of fatal and serious injury crashes. Along with the HIN, the Vision Zero Plan identifies historically disadvantaged communities, areas of persistent poverty, and locations with varying degrees of social vulnerability to understand where equitable investments can be made to increase safety Vision Zero • Traffic deaths are preventable • Changes systems • Integrates human failure • Prevents fatal and serious crashes • Considers the road system as a whole • Regards road safety as an issue of social equity <CHAPTER> I v Page 28 of 524 pin WN01 i oeiy impacted. ar, Bella Vista ^� Gravette 't'.' All Modes High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Centerton j 1 Rog( Siloam Springs Springdale 41 Tontitown Ozark National Forest Fayetteville i 7 Prairie Grove I r� 62 "71 Lincoln Ozark National Forest Hobbs State low f-7; Goshen Like Sequoyah Par i f rr Ozark National Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m 11A]PO IN High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries vi I NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 29 of 524 3. Community Outreach Starting a conversation around roadway safety was a key component of the NWA Vision Zero Plan. Information about the current state of safety along with opportunities for feedback were distributed across the region. Online resources were developed that included surveys, an interactive map, and a series of safety webinars. To compliment online engagement opportunities, a "go -to" approach to engagement resulted in tabling and interacting with people at over a dozen existing events. Materials were available in English and Spanish to provide opportunities for people to review and provide input in the most convenient way possible. Additionally, a Regional Working Group provided guidance for the development of the NWA Vision Zero Plan through a series of meetings and listening sessions. Two safety demonstration site walks were included to see and experience how the Safe System Framework is already being used within the region. These site walks allowed municipal staff, local advocates, and elected officials to hear why the decisions made related to safety can have such an enormous impact. Engagement during the Vision Zero Plan devlopment is only the beginning and must be continued at the regional and local levels to see real change occur. 4. Goals and Actions Achieving the goal of zero fatal and serious injury crashes by 2038 will not happen if the status quo is maintained. Roadway safety must be integrated into the work of various agencies and individual departments to see results. This section establishes goals that capture the desires for safety by the Regional Working Group along with a variety of actions that can be taken to change the roadway safety narrative in Northwest Arkansas. Goals include: • Promote a culture that prioritizes people's safety • Reduce conflicts between roadway users • Establish policies, practices, and programs that focus on safety at all levels • Slow vehicle speeds For each action, a timeline, action leader, and supporting partners are noted. Additionally, Elements of the Safe System Approach that align with each action are listed. The actions in this Vision Zero Plan are not intended to be an exhaustive list; rather, they are strategic and can begin to eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes on the transportation network. <CHAPTER> I vii Page 30 of 524 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 31 of 524 r.- 4` rg IF . , a ram., � t � � `► _ --� � <c _ - t. A Paradigm Shift 1. A Paradigm Shift What is a Vision Zero Safety Action Plan? Every year, people in the NWA Region lose family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues to preventable traffic crashes on our roads. Between 2017 and 2021 1,369 people were killed or seriously injured in crashes in NWA, averaging more than five people every week. Across the state, motor vehicle crashes account for more than twice the number of deaths as homicides. For the last century, our transportation system has been built on the belief that these crashes are accidents — events no one can fully prevent or predict. While no one thinks traffic deaths among friends and family are acceptable, the historical approach to transportation has taken roadway fatalities as an unfortunate inevitability rather than a preventable public health crisis. Vision Zero is a traffic safety philosophy rooted in the belief that nothing on our roadways is more important than a human life. It represents paradigm shift in the region's approach to road safety beginning with the 21% simple idea that traffic deaths and serious injuries are preventable. Since the 1990s Vision Zero has been successfully implemented across Europe and in more than 45 communities in the US-- some of which have now had consecutive years of zero roadway fatalities. Vision Zero lays out a new set of principles for engineering roads, educating travelers, and creating a sense of collective responsibility for ourselves and our fellow travelers. Vulnerable Users When a crash occurs, people walking, bicycling, and riding motorcycles are more likely to be killed or seriously injured. Vehicle safety technology has seen significant advancements in the last decades with airbags, anti -lock brakes and lane -awareness sensors all working to protect a driver in a crash. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists however are unprotected and are especially vulnerable to the impact of a crash. In Northwest Arkansas, vulnerable roadway users accounted for only 3% of all roadway crashes but 33% of serious injuries and fatalities. 7% �• 0.6% �O O O 2% 2 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 33 of 524 All Modes Crash Map All Modes Crash Map ' Jane f Northwest Arkansas _. ••. ,.�!" !..'•�":fir"�- Gateway�,�1 .•• '� • • • ' ••Bella Vista+` �. ,S' t %'�+� . • Je vils Eyebro • •r^ _. — �Gravette it ��! •-: • �� �• � . . It _� •• �i, r+�, '.•. •• .,-•. . . • ___. ._Cpnl,e'r4'1 •� Bentonville :C. •• Wo t :Rogers r •: :. •'' ' . .r. • `� . • • _ r •_ •`.:•y_�- t v i ` Hobbs State pal rinqdal �►: • ' •• Tontitown r • , A`•'• -Ozark National Forest !' ; : j �� �,'r L u• , y� ot • f th .-il �, - keSequoyahVar vp i Prairie Gr �. Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021. 0 2.5 5miLA, m • • Fatal or Serious Injury Crash • Other Reported Crash Parks & Open Space City Boundaries ,CHAPTER, 1 3 Page 34 of 524 Between 2017 and 2021 1,369 people were killed or seriously injured in crashes in NWA, averaging more than five people every week. 15,000 12,000 900 300 275 50 40 30 ti Total Crashes Fatalities & Severe Injuries Fatalities The Safe System Approach This Plan is the NWA Region's roadmap to achieving Vision Zero. It is grounded in the Safe System Approach, which aims to eliminate fatal and serious injuries by anticipating human mistakes and minimizing impacts on the human body when crashes do occur. The six Safe System Principles shown around the outside ring are the fundamental beliefs that the approach is built on. 1. Humans make mistakes Even the best drivers will inevitably make mistakes that can lead to a crash. How we design and operate our transportation system can ensure these mistakes don't have life altering impacts. 2. Death & serious injuries are preventable No one likes to get in a fender -bender but this plan will focus on crashes that lead to deaths and serious injuries. 3. Humans are vulnerable Human bodies can only withstand so much impact from a crash before death or serious injuries occur 4. Responsibility is shared. Every part of our transportation system, from elected officials to everyday users, to planners and engineers, has a role to play in vision zero. 5. Safety is Proactive Rather than waiting for crashes to occur, transportation agencies should seek to proactively identify and address dangerous situations. b. Redundancy is crucial Redundancy means making sure every part of the transportation system is safe. This way if one part fails people are still protected. P�NIS�00 INJURY IS UIygCCFp�ge 10 �F RESPONSIBILITY IS SHAR(�O <CHAPTER> I 5 Page 36 of 524 The Safe System Approach is implemented through five Elements 1. Safe Road Users Working towards a culture of safety starts with developing a network of civic partners, educating road users and creating personal connections to the community's vision zero efforts. 2. Safe Vehicles Making vehicles safer can be done through advanced driver assistance systems and by ensuring future technology prioritizes vulnerable roadway users. 3. Safe Speeds Slower vehicle speeds increase visibility and reaction times for drivers and reduce impact forces when a crash occurs. Moving towards safe speeds can be done through reducing speed limits and through traffic calming and roadway design. 4. Safe Roads Safer roads come from providing physical separation (like separated bike lanes and sidewalks) as well as designing to accommodate human mistakes. 5. Post -Crash Care A system -wide approach means working towards safety even after a crash has occurred. This comes from improving emergency response, and traffic incident reporting and management. b 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 37 of 524 SEPARATE USERS IN SPACE ANTICIPATE HUMAN ERROR SEPARATE USERS IN TIME INCREASE ATTENTIVENESS & AWARENESS ACCOMMODATE REDUCE SPEEDS - HUMAN INJURY TOLERANCES REDUCE IMPACT FORCES o THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 39 of 524 nSir W7— A.JIL '1J. PE N�c:�M■■■ii■r 0 . : F { ` 1 iJ r. Roadway Safety in Northwest Arkansas 2. Roadway Safety in Northwest Arkansas Plans, Policies, and Programs In response to rapid population growth and an increase in fatal and serious crashes, Northwest Arkansas has addressed road safety both through targeted interventions and by integrating it into existing planning, policies, programs. Planning Efforts Many existing local, regional, and statewide plans have addressed the issue of road safety in some capacity. Examples include transportation plans, bicycle and pedestrian plans, and corridor studies. See Table 1 for a summary of plans reviewed during the development of this Plan. Local Plans At the local level, road safety has largely been addressed through transportation plans, bicycle and pedestrian plans, and safe routes to school plans. Many of these plans include recommendations for reducing vehicle speeds on local roads, improving sidewalk and bike lane networks, and increasing driver education and awareness. Recent examples include the Fayetteville Mobility Plan, the Bella Vista Trail and Greenway Master Plan, the Bentonville Bike & Pedestrian Master Plan, and the University of Arkansas Active Transportation Plan. Regional Plans Regional plans addressing road safety include the NWA Bike Infrastructure Plan, NWARPC 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, and the NWA Congestion Management Process. These plans coordinate efforts across the region and offer insight on emerging trends and funding opportunities, many of which inform this Plan's approach to regional road safety. Statewide Plans Arkansas and Missouri have both adopted Strategic Highway Safety Plans that provide a statewide framework to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries through the Safe System Approach. The plans include strategies to address the top contributing factors to fatal and serious factors. Arkansas also has a statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, which includes a focus on bicycle and pedestrian safety. Regional Plan Highlight: 2019 NWA Bike Infrastructure Plan The Northwest Arkansas Bike Infrastructure Plan identifies a priority network of bikeways focused on increasing safety and connectivity. It includes corridor concepts designed to make bicycling a safe and accessible travel option for riders of all ages and abilities. 10 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 41 of 524 Table 1: Summary Plans Reviewed Bella Vista Trail and Greenway 2015 Bella Vista Master Plan Bentonville Bike and Pedestrian 2021 Bentonville Master Plan Fayetteville Active 2015 Fayetteville Transportation Plan Fayetteville Mobility Plan University of Arkansas Transportation Plan NWARPC 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan NWA Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan NWA Congestion Management Process NWA Bike Infrastructure Plan NWA Regional ITS Architecture and Deployment Plan NWA Transportation Alternatives Analysis Study Connect Northwest Arkansas 10-Year Transit Development Plan Arkansas Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan ARDOT Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) Missouri Show -Me Zero 2018 Fayetteville 2022 2021 2014 2022 2019 2007 2014 2020 2017 2022 2021 Policies Safe Routes to School Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs enable students to safely walk and bicycle for their school commute. SRTS includes planning, development, and implementation of projects and activities that will improve safety and reduce traffic, fuel consumption, and air pollution around schools. Fayetteville Complete Streets Complete Streets policies direct transportation NWA Region planners and engineers to consistently design the right of way to accommodate all users, including drivers, NWA Region transit riders, pedestrians, and bicyclists, as well as for older people, children, and people with disabilities. NWA Region Most local jurisdictions in Northwest Arkansas have NWA Region not adopted any form of Complete Streets policy. The 2015 NWA Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan NWA Region identified the adoption of these policies as a catalyst program and provided a sample Complete Streets NWA Region Resolution designed for NWA communities. NWA Region Statewide Statewide Statewide Design Standards Street design standards have a significant impact on road safety. Context appropriate street design encourages safe behavior and reduces conflicts between users. Existing standards vary across the region, but some include provisions that promote safety. For example, the City of Bentonville Minimum Standard Specifications for Streets includes a section on Neighborhood Traffic Safety that includes design criteria for various traffic calming devices. Design Standards Highlight: Fayetteville Minimum Street Design Standards The City of Fayetteville Minimum Street Design Standards provide an example of how to prioritize safety for all road users. They include an emphasis on multimodal level of service and reference best practice design guidance such as NACTO's Don't Give Up at the Intersection and FHWA's Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations. r-� <CHAPTER> 1 11 Page 42 of 524 Traffic Calming Traffic calming consists of physical design and other measures put in place on existing roads to reduce vehicle speeds and improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. Several cities in NWA have implemented traffic calming policies that facilitate the installation of traffic calming on residential streets. Emergency Response One component of the Safe System Approach is to streamline emergency response and medical care. Based on discussions from the NWA Active Transportation Committee, Bentonville and Fayetteville have updated their CAD systems and improved GIS data to assist with quicker emergency response on the trail system. Parking Requirements Minimum parking requirements for developments present a barrier to the creation of dense, walkable urban environments. The City of Fayetteville abolished its commercial parking minimums citywide in 2015 while retaining downtown parking maximums. This change has enabled new businesses to open using long -disused sites and buildings. Traffic Calming Policy Highlight: Springdale Traffic Calming Policy The City of Springdale has a policy that enables the installation of traffic calming measures such as curb extensions, raised intersections, speed cushions to address speeding and conflicts between people walking and driving. Criteria for installation include observed speeds, sidewalk connectivity, crash history, and the presence of children walking to school. Evaluation of Existing Codes and Ordinances The table on the following page provides a high-level review of local codes and ordinances for cities with over 2,000 residents' For each element (e.g. building entrances) a score was assigned for each city to indicate the state of policy on that issue, ranging from 1 (Codes / ordinances do not include this element) to 3 (Codes / ordinances include this element and it generally meets best practices). This evaluation was based on the information available to the project and should be viewed as a starting point for where to focus attention with regard to code and ordinance amendments to promote road safety. Some issues, such as speed limits and crosswalk markings, were not included due to the limited presence of local policy on these issues. 1 Population based on 2021 ACS data. Most cities with fewer than 2,000 residents do not have codes and ordinances addressing road safety through street design or land use, though there are some exceptions, including Highfill, Decatur, and Greenland. 12 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 43 of 524 H m U +O+ y N c a E a) L u c (n a) u cu tm > u LC ._ Q c G M rn c c a Y E L u � u a 1p a M c Y L • m a y o) d c u m L m C Lc, • • Y tl) u O) y C m y in u y a u p Q u > y r O1 Ln u Y u c o c p m u W � C U) N y O d c L I- LL a N E CL CD O C N 0 a° >. 0 N M LO LO y rn L O. Ln E 0 u n O 3 0 J N co C O QI LL a M O M M CD M O O W M O M (T O O n Iq IO O O� m M M L- m m It M M M M N N N N N (n O) y N .` C u a)m J Y vC2. 3 °) o LL L CL Li c c Cr � L y C y U)p L N C > N E w u 10 a,IL Y a" y C U F U W U -) J 2 W J U' C C N E c a) S > L O L 0- E U) L a ( � s O U L E 7 L O S] f O C C U) (U C S= E E m L a � ( L) L S C C � O U U) U) L O O C LU U C C ! (CI (6 f C C L v v LL L L O O C U) V) L N O ( a a z O O C QJ U U L <CHAPTER: Pa 13 ge 44 of 524 Laws and Enforcement Traffic laws and enforcement has been a central piece of Northwest Arkansas' approach to addressing traffic fatalities and serious injuries. Speed Limits Addressing speed is a crucial step to making streets safer. Vehicle speed increases both the likelihood of a crash, as well as the severity of the crash. Higher speeds diminish drivers' ability to recognize and avoid potential conflicts and increase the force of impact, increasing the chances of fatalities and serious injuries, particularly for more vulnerable road users. Many streets throughout NWA have relatively high speed limits that do not match the roadway context. Distracted Driving Since 2009, when Arkansas first banned texting while driving for all drivers, the state has strengthened laws around distracted driving to include a ban on all use of handheld devices for drivers under 18 and in certain areas. In 2021, the State passed a new distracted driving law that prohibits all drivers from holding or using a handheld device while driving, with a few exceptions, such as using a phone in a hands -free mode or in an emergency. Driving Under the Influence Arkansas also has strict laws around driving under the influence. In 2015, the State lowered the blood alcohol level (BAC) limit for drivers to 0.08%, which is consistent with recommendations from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Arkansas also mandates ignition interlock devices (IIDs) for certain driving under the influence (DUI) offenders, as a condition of license reinstatement. Washington and Benton Counties have established diversion court programs that offer an alternative to traditional punitive measures, such as jail time, and allows participants to receive treatment, counseling, and other support services to help them overcome their addiction and avoid future DUI offenses. Benton County also has a Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) unit that is responsible for the pro -active detection, investigation and arrest of alcohol and/or drug -impaired drivers.2 Automated Enforcement Arkansas prohibits the use of unmanned traffic enforcement systems, which includes both red light cameras and speed cameras. Speed cameras are only allowed in school zones or rail crossings and a police officer must be present and issue citation at time and place of violation.' Red light cameras are not allowed under any circumstances. These legal requirements severely limit the potential use and efficacy of automated enforcement in Northwest Arkansas. Programs Bicycle Education Over the last decade, bicycle education has become a part of the school curriculum in Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville. These programs, provided by NWA Trailblazers, help to train the next generation of responsible road users by teaching kids the rules of the road and make bicycling accessible to kids who may not otherwise have the opportunity to ride. Pilot and Demonstration Projects Resolution 2016-2 authorized NWARPC to coordinate, manage, and assist with the implementation of bicycle pilot/demonstration projects in various locations to test protected bike lane concepts. NWA Trailblazers has 2 Benton County Sherriff's Office. DWI Unit. 3 Governors Highway Safety Association. Speed and Red Light Cameras: Arkansas. 14 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 45 of 524 partnered with NWARPC and the Walton Foundation on a series of pilot projects in Bella Vista, Bentonville, Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, and Siloam Springs. These projects tested the feasibility of design treatments focused on creating safer streets for all users. Slow Streets Local cities have partnered with Trailblazers on the temporary installation of Slow Streets. Through temporary installations of traffic calming materials, Slow Streets create safe, family -friendly routes for people to bike and walk, sometimes for a single day or weekend and sometimes seasonally. _ A temporary Slow Street installation in Bentonville Pilot Project Highlight: Siloam Springs Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Project Trailblazers worked with the City of Siloam Springs to design and install a Neighborhood Greenwak pilot project from downtown Siloam Springs to the Dogwood Springs Walking trail. A neighborhood greenway is a traffic calmed, slow -speed street that creates a shared space for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. The project rollout included an evaluation of vehicle speeds and volumes, bicycle volumes, and crash data, as well as a post -installation survey to collect public feedback. <CHAPTER> 1 15 Page 46 of 524 Roadway Safety Analysis Crashes occur because of a variety and often a combination of contributing factors. These factors may include excessive speed, roadway conditions, equipment failure, inexperience, environmental conditions (e.g., weather, lighting, glare), and human behaviors, including distraction, impairment, and not complying with traffic laws. With 1,369 KSI crashes over a five-year period, the HIN represents the most critical corridors that should be addressed in the region. Crash analysis resulted in numerous findings related to street characteristics and contexts in Northwest Arkansas. The following highlights a few of those findings along with the full HIN map for all modes. 16 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 47 of 524 High Injury Network \Jar_ Bella Vista T Gravette *?UAll All Modes High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Centerton I Rog .11 Inam Springs � Springdale 41 d00%b' Tontitown Ozark National Forest Fayetteville i 7 Prairie Grove r >a 62 " 71 ncoln--/ Ozark National Forest Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2. mi crashes between 2017-2021. vils Eyebr -11%c -, Hobbs State 71 Goshen Like Sequoyah r rr Ozark National High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries <CHAPTER> 1 17 Page 48 of 524 Equity Increasing safety across the region cannot succeed without a focus on equity and identifying communities that have disproportionate traffic safety impacts. The transportation system in Northwest Arkansas must work for everyone across the region; therefore, equity is integrated throughout the NWA Vision Zero Plan. Together with the Safe System Approach, recommended actions can address safety for people that have experienced a historical disadvantage, persistent poverty, and/or social vulnerability. To create a broad characterization of communities that have sociodemographic vulnerabilities and to define the populations this Plan used criteria for Areas of Persistent Poverty, Historically Disadvantaged Communities as identified by the USDOT RAISE Mapping Tool, and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Historically Disadvantaged Communities" refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life. • Transportation access disadvantage identifies communities and places that spend more, and take longer, to get where they need to go. • Health disadvantage identifies communities based on variables associated with adverse health outcomes, disability, as well as environmental exposures. • Environmental disadvantage identifies communities with disproportionately high levels of certain air pollutants and high potential presence of lead -based paint in housing units. • Economic disadvantage identifies areas and populations with high poverty, low wealth, lack of local jobs, low homeownership, low educational attainment, and high inequality. • Resilience disadvantage identifies communities vulnerable to hazards caused by climate change. • Equity disadvantage identifies communities with a with a high percentile of persons (age 5+) who speak English "less than well." Area of Persistent Poverty' is defined by the USDOT as any County or Census Tract that has consistently had greater than or equal to 20 percent of the population living in poverty over a defined period. Social Vulnerability" refers to the potential negative effects on communities caused by external stresses on human health. Factors include: • Socioeconomic status (below 150% poverty, unemployed, housing cost burden, no high school diploma, no health insurance) • Household characteristics (aged 65 or older, aged 17 or younger, civilian with a disability, single -parent households, English language proficiency) • Racial and ethnic minority status (Hispanic or Latino (of any race); Black and African American, Not Hispanic or Latino; American Indian and Alaska Native, Not Hispanic or Latino; Asian, Not Hispanic or Latino; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Not Hispanic or Latino; Two or More Races, Not Hispanic or Latino; Other Races, Not Hispanic or Latino) • Housing type & transportation (multi -unit structures, mobile homes, crowding, no vehicle, group quarters) The Vision Zero Plan identified and prioritized investments in communities that have experienced varying degrees of disadvantage. Additionally, recommended actions have been intentionally developed to ensure policing and other enforcement efforts do not create or perpetuate disparities and unintended consequences in communities of color or areas of persistent poverty. 18 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 49 of 524 Vulnerable roadway users that live in disadvantaged areas are overrepresented in fatal and serious injury crashes. 6% of roadway network 16% of total KSI crashes � "004 /001* Equity Analysis Overlap and HIN 11 A Equity Analysis Overlap & High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista Gravette AL Bentonville Centerton � r I Rogers ; .,-i,am Springs I :21 � Springdale 41 Tontitown Ozark National Forest I V Fayettevillt�OA 7 Prairie Grove r 62 Hobbs State 1 Goshen Like Sequoyah 711 r Ozark National Forest Ozark National Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2. rT1i . crashes between 2017-2021. Degrees of Disadvantage High Moderate Low All Modes High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries <CHAPTER> 1 21 Page 52 of 524 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 53 of 524 77 MFiR! ' \ Y ,FRE.q 7Mr� Community Outreach 3. Community Outreach The Northwest Arkansas Vision Zero Plan employed a wide range of digital and in -person engagement tools to inform the community and solicit feedback on roadway safety. Communicating the importance of roadway safety during the development of this Plan is an important step in long-lasting efforts to engage and empower people in the region to make changes that save lives. Five key elements were foundational for engagement: 1. Listen First: Events and outreach were structured so people could have multiple opportunities and options to share their experiences, interests, and concerns related to safety. 2. Provide an Open and Transparent Process: Engagement was accessible to as many members of the community as possible. 3. Educate on Positive Traffic Safety Culture: Each engagement event incorporated education components about the personal and community benefits of safety. 4. Give Proper Notice: Engagement would provide the community members time to attend one of several events as well as online opportunities for feedback. Source https://nwa.pressreader.com/article/281878712709691 5. Prioritize Equity: Engagement activities will ensure that input from minority populations and low-income populations are heard and reached out too and provided materials in Spanish. 24 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 55 of 524 Promotion for the Vision Zero Plan relied on digital/ social media, word of mouth, and traditional print media. The Northwest Arkansas Democrat -Gazette for the May 8, 2023 Issue highlighted the Safety Demonstration Site Walk in Fayetteville that took a group of municipal staff, local advocates, and elected officials from across the region on a tour near the intersection of M.L.K. Jr. Boulevard and S. School Avenue (US Business 71) to discuss and see different implemented solutions for safety along with street characteristics that should still be addressed. Listening Sessions Scheduled listening sessions with municipal staff provided understanding and background for the state of safety within the region along with past efforts that have increased safety. Each listening session included conversation related to: • Traffic safety culture, • Process for project implementation, • Effective tools already being used, • Challenges to increasing safety, • Specific locations where changes should be made, and • Concerns about staff capacity and/or resources available. Listening sessions revealed that while ongoing efforts are being made at the local level, there is still a lot of work left to do. Major arterials moving through communities present some of the biggest threats. Simultaneously, there is a need for policies and programs to target speed, distracted driving, and prioritize people walking and bicycling to achieve a safer system as a whole. Public Interaction In -person activities are showcased in Table 3. They included a mix of pop ups at various events and safety demonstration site walks around the region. Table 3: In -Person Engagement Events Bentonville Moves 4/27/2023 Bentonville Springdale EV Meeting NWARPC 4/28/2023 Springdale Beaver Watershed LID Smart Growth 4/27/2023 Springdale Bentonville Safety Project Demo 5/2/2023 Bentonville Fayetteville Safety Demonstration Project 5/3/2023 Fayetteville Safe Streets for All Working Group 3 Meeting 5/4/2023 Springdale Bentonville First Friday 5/5/2023 Bentonville Lower Ramble 5/5/2023 Fayetteville First Friday Rogers Concert Series Square 2 Square Ride Bentonville End Bentonville Farmers Market Coler Noon to Moon Rogers Concert Series 5/5/2023 5/5/2023 5/6/2023 5/6/2023 5/6/2023 5/6/2023 Huntsville Rogers Bentonville Bentonville Bentonville Rogers Rogers Farmers Market 5/6/2023 Rogers Square 2 Square (halfway halt) 5/6/2023 Springdale Farmers Market Springdale 5/6/2023 Springdale <CHAPTER> I 25 Page 56 of 524 Safety Demonstration Site Walks Two Safety Project Demonstration Site Walks were held, one in Bentonville and one in Fayetteville, that gave residents, municipal staff, and advocates from around the region the opportunity to walk and talk about infrastructure problems and solutions that local municipalities have. Approximately 40 people attended the two Safety Demonstrations. Bentonville's Safety Demonstration focused on touring the quick build parking protected two-way separated bike lane on SW 8th Street, while the Fayetteville Safety Demonstration focused on examining different pedestrian and bicycle constraints: large state-owned arterials and intersections and a few successful pedestrian crossings for the Razorback Greenway. The demonstrations also allowed advocates and residents to discuss problems they experience and witness along the route. Pop -Up Booths A go -to approach to engagement led to multiple events with pop-up booths for the NWA Vision Zero Plan throughout the region. The pop -ups included posters showcasing the number of fatalities and serious injury crashes in the region and business cards with QR codes for the public survey. Pop-up booth locations included the Square 2 Square Halfway Halt, Bentonville First Friday, Huntsville First Friday, Rogers Concert Series, Rogers Farmers Market, and the Farmers Market in Springdale. Square 2 Square is a biannual bike ride along the Razorback Regional Greenway for 30 miles between Fayetteville and Bentonville with nearly 2,000 riders, both local and regional, attending. Two events, the Rogers Concert Series and the Springdale Cinco de Mayo Farmers Market, had large Latino and Hispanic attendance which gave the opportunity to engage Spanish speaking residents. 26 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 57 of 524 Regional Safety Working Group The regional safety working group met four times over the course of the NWA Vision Zero Plan development. It consisted of municipal staff, elected officials, regional advocates, and more. A key role of the working group was to discuss safety in the region, to guide recommended actions for policies, programs, and projects. Using the Safe System Approach foundation, the regional working group helped shape the NWA Vision Zero Plan and customize the recommendations that will reduce serious injury and fatal crashes in the region. i COt1MEwEnsurr5 lV*, Mlsns iu'fosc fowv.++.I RY o RJ? f3 a IVNr2� �MCS (��J Off1Ce DEPOT 11 it I104� �1-- ti YIriD SAt°t�'! , uNueosTooD e 11w) '21nw, Puucv 7tHr-n�#r inKu�:ra: yea*t r NEw. 'j>6Vt�lPsF1-�f� D `CMIrJwrs. h9pur 'D6vhcl+..tyr 7n11LQ °Is n CT •N TV11ilr- N�c A 7VA[u°T Twe utryRMdN[� n (:pHG[fQ 4p,ICh�IK. S1.T lyC1y,7 OFFVALL OW iTI'OYMY cam( F RJVGfelMG N.IiEf TC£tK'STN(,E D lA.-�t f ta�DwkV 4Y0M neb[Ig4J ° E4NMN�I YaIY[ Ryy,.�t • CVS Safety Webinar Series Educating decision -makers and the general public about safety in the region and specifically the Safe System Approach was an important role of engagement for the NWA Vision Zero Plan. Safety Webinars were developed to serve as a lasting resource to explain how addressing safety should emphasize the characteristics of the roadways that are leading to the lives being lost and that a system approach should be both reactive — implementing solutions along the High Injury Network — and proactive —deploying safety countermeasures to reduce risk. The Safety Webinar Series was recorded and was posted to the project website to allow for on - demand listening. Safety Vocabulary • Crashes not accidents • KSt- Killed or Serious Injury Crashes Proven Safety Countermeasure- an action designed to reduce the frequency and/or the severity of crashes Systemic Safety- applying changes to a system based on risk and not just crash history TOOLE oe sion Road Diet/Roadway Reconfiguration FocusSafetyExpected Crash xpece Type Relative Cost i gced Reduction ' r i TOOLE <CHAPTER> I 27 Page 58 of 524 Public Feedback Digital tools included an online survey and map. Participants that provided feedback on the interactive map were asked to identify: • Locations where they feel unsafe • Locations where they feel safe • Places where a roadway improvement could be made Most people who commented live in the eastern part of the region, yet most of the points are shown in the larger, more dense areas of Fayetteville and Bentonville. Overall, 316 people responded to the survey placing over 600 points on the interactive map. When asked what the major issues are affecting your safety on the roadways in Northwest Arkansas, community members responded that distracted driving, lack of sidewalks and/or continuous sidewalks, and people driving too fast were the top three major issues. When asked how you typically get around Northwest Arkansas, most respondents drove, walked, or rode their bike. When asked how often they bike or walk, 39% walked or biked daily and 76% walked or biked at least once a week. How do you typically get around N WA? Walk or bike daily Walk or bike at least once a week t r� 28 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 59 of 524 Interactive Map Comments Pit Survey Comments Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista o• Gravette • Bentoonville CenterV4 00 O • •• E 0 8 ••• 10 o • O fRogers 0 0 • 71� Siloam Springs Springd'ale, • 412 Tontitown O • �. Ozark National Forest • • • • ),Goshen Fayetteville O ' 0 L ke Sequoyal � Elkins 7 Prairie Grove �� ,- l � _ l P% 62 71 Lincoln Hobbs State Ozark National Forest ) Ozark National Fore Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m A rt 11 Comment Types Improvement Idea o Location where I feel safe • Location where I feel unsafe Parks & Open Space City Boundaries <CHAPTER> 1 29 Page 60 of 524 Public Survey Results 3.0% (34) 1.9% (22) Fear of physical Unfair treatment 3.7% (42) assault and/or in traffic enforcement Speed limits verbal harassment too high 4.0% (46) Inadequate traffic enforcement 6.3% (72) ' Negative interactions with drivers 16.7% (1 S Distracted Di What are the major issues affecting your safety on the roadways in Northwest Arkansas? 30 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 61 of 524 Amisr;• ■ �m i AL r" 'A 4 ft <CHAPTER> I 31 Page 62 of 524 THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK Page 63 of 524 1 Is bmw Goals and Actions We 4. Goals and Actions Goals The mission of Vision Zero —to Save Lives —requires changing how we design and operate our transportation system. The Safe System Approach is the foundation for this change that prioritizes human life above everything else. Through this Plan's analysis, a High Injury Network has been established based on severity of crashes, roadway characteristics, individual behaviors, and unsafe speeds which highlights corridors where fatal and serious crashes are overrepresented on the regional roadway network. This plan establishes four goals for addressing roadway safety and implementing Vision Zero in Northwest Arkansas: • 1. Promote a culture that prioritizes people's safety _�_ 2. Reduce conflicts °d between roadway users i 3. Establish policies, practices, and programs that focus on safety at all levels n 4. Slow vehicle speeds -8 34 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 65 of 524 Actions Achieving goals is not always quick or easy. Effective implementation comes from coordinating various agencies and people to take action focused on safety. The staffs of agencies and their partners must have clear tasks. Institutions must have proper incentives and authority to implement their mission. Each goal is supported by actions that are assigned lead agencies and timeframes. By breaking overarching goals into specific actions this Plan builds a comprehensive set of efforts that together will implement Vision Zero and save lives. What you'll see here... A. Action items, Each action item is a discrete, specific effort that can be advanced by a Vision Zero partner. B. Timeframe, Action items are assigned general timeframes to help action leaders prioritize their efforts. Although the timeframes note a number of years, these timeframes align with the level of effort for completing these actions. Timeframes include: a. Immediate: 0-2 years; b. Short: 2-5 years; or c. Medium -Long: 5-10 years. A.1 Prioritize Vision Zero Investments in Areas with High Social Vulnerability A 2 Increase Frequency, Speed, and Service Area for Public Transportation Work with Media Partners to Report Traffic A.3 Crashes More Accurately, to Avoid Victim Blaming, and Report Crashes in the Context of Vision Zero Partner with Youth Organizations to Create A.4 Peer -To -Peer Anti -Distraction Messaging Campaigns Medium C. Safe System Elements, Individual actions support one or more elements of the Safe System Approach. Those elements include: a. Safer Road Users b. Safer Roads c. Safer Speeds d. Safer Vehicles e. Post -Crash Care. D. Action Leader and Supporting Partners, Each action item is led by an action leader and supported by various agency partners. Safer Roads NWARPC Medium Safer People Transit Agency Member Agency Medium Safer People NWARPC Member Agency Short Safer People Member Agency <CHAPTER> 1 35 Page 66 of 524 n Promote a culture that prioritizes people's safety C1 I D H LOOK i i�_ _ . P..� a' Ongoing communication along with projects that put safety first is critical to culture change. Culture is more than messaging; it is a set of behaviors and a way of life that values the safety of fellow roadway users by every person during every trip. <CHAPTER> I 37 Page 68 of 524 ■ A.1 Prioritize Vision Zero investments in areas with high social vulnerability Medium -Long Safer Roads NWARPC A.2 Increase Frequency, Speed, and Service Area Medium -Long for Public Transportation Work with Media Partners to Report Traffic A.3 Crashes More Accurately, to Avoid Victim Medium -Long Blaming, and Report Crashes in the Context of Vision Zero Partner with Youth Organizations to Create A.4 Peer -To -Peer Anti -Distraction Messaging Short Campaigns Enhance Training for Law Enforcement Personnel Responsible for Crash Reporting A.5 to Address the Unique Attributes Required Medium -Long to Accurately Report Crash Circumstances Involving People Walking and Bicycling A.b Support DUI/DWI Court Programs that Focus Medium -Long on Education and Treatment over Punishment Promote TOM, and Street Design Policies A.7 that Reduce Vehicle Miles Travelled and Short Automobile Dependence Promote Street Networks and Land Use A.8 Patterns that Reduce Trip Distances and Short Automobile Dependence Develop a Region -Wide Safety Campaign to A.9 Share Information with the Community about Short Traffic Safety for All Modes Safer Users Transit Agency Member Agency Safer Users NWARPC Member Agency Safer Users Member Agency Safer Users Member Agency Safer Users Member Agency Safe Roads; NWARPC Member Agency Safer Users Safe Roads; NWARPC Member Agency Safer Users Safer Users NWARPC Member Agency A.10 Encourage large employers of truckers to put Medium -Long Safer Vehicles; NWARPC speed governors on trucks Safer Users A.11 Install pedestrian -scale lighting where trails Medium -Long Safer Roads Member Agency are present 38 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 69 of 524 ■ A.12 Install lighting on all arterial roadways A.13 Conduct roadway safety audits after every fatality Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member NWARPC Agency Short Safer Users, NWARPC Safer Roads A.14 Implement a micro sidewalk gap program Immediate Safer Users Conduct ongoing safety campaigns and events A.15 with the community - community safety Medium -Long Safer Users advisory team (religious leaders, community centers, rec centers) A.16 Analyze growth areas adjacent to HIN Medium -Long Safer Roads A.17 Conduct economic and equity analysis A.18 Conduct analysis of inequities within native populations Medium -Long Safer Users NWARPC NWARPC Member Agency NWARPC NWARPC Short Safer Users NWARPC <CHAPTER> 1 39 Page 70 of 524 1, Reduce conflicts between roadway users 0 o`er►_ AV �® - r J ems' Anticipating human error means provide more space between users to minimize crash severity if and when it happens. Reducing conflicts is rooted in designing streets that consider how different users move in time and space and using effective strategies and best practices to increase safety. <CHAPTER> 1 41 Page 72 of 524 ■�i Elements B 1 Reduce Distances Between Crossings along Medium -Long Safer Roads State Highways Implement Road Diets along the High Injury B.2 Medium -Long Safer Roads Network B 3 Close Gaps in Bicycle and Pedestrian Medium -Long Safer Roads Networks ARDOT NWARPC, Member Agency NWARPC NWARPC B.4 Close all slip lanes Medium -Long Safer Roads Member Agency B 5 Implement leading pedestrian intervals at all Short Safer Roads ARDOT, Member signalized intersections Agency B.6 Implement pedestrian recall on all permissive Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member and through phases Agency B 7 No right -turns on red on the HIN or high Short Safer Roads ARDOT, Member pedestrian routes Agency Access management to combine driveways B 8 to adjacent properties OR building medians Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member to restrict left turns near driveways and Agency intersections B.9 Install or retrofit countdown ped heads Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member Agency B.10 Implement pedestrian friendly cycle lengths, Short Safer Roads ARDOT, Member maximum 3' per second of walking speed Agency B.11 Elliminate of dual center turn lanes on Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member arterials Agency B 12 Protected left turn signal phasing, eliminate Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member both yield and flashing yellow Agency B.13 Standardize crosswalk design standards Short Safer Roads NWARPC, ARDOT Member Agency including ladder spacing and widths 42 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 73 of 524 Action Timeframe Safe System Action Leader Supporting Elements Partners B.14 Review crosswalk spacings and distance of Short Safer Roads ARDOT, Member crossings (include pedestrian refuge islands) Agency Shared path or separated/raised/protected ARDOT, Member B.15 facilities for bicycle routes on roadways with Medium -Long Safer Roads speeds above 35 mph Agency B.16 Edge and center line treatment with bicycle- Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member friendly rumble strips Agency Implement a sidewalk gap program to fill ARDOT, Member B.17 short segments outside of development Short Safer Roads Agency process Identifying walking zones for schools, ARDOT, Member B.18 recreation centers, and other community Medium -Long Safer Roads Agency School Board identified priorities for connectivity B.19 Overpass or tunnel for trail crossing with 55 Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member mph+ vehicle speeds Agency B.20 Daylighting intersections and urban town Medium -Lang Safer Roads ARDOT, Member centers Agency B 21 Convert front -in angle parking to back -in Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member angle or parallel parking in downtown areas Agency B.22 Provide buffers to sidewalks Medium -Long Safer Roads ARDOT, Member Agency B 23 Assess bicycle and pedestrian projects to Short Safer Roads NWARPC Member Agency increase seperation <CHAPTER> 1 43 Page 74 of 524 Establish policies, practices, and programs that focus on safety at all levels TURNING _ VEHICLES r+ V TO Accomplishing zero fatal and serious injury crashes requires changes at every level. Policy sets the stages for daily decisions to change and can influence practices, programs, and mindsets that are essential for the Safe System Approach to be effective. <CHAPTER> I 45 Page 76 of 524 ■Timeframe Safe System Action Leader Supporting Safer speeds; NWARPC, C.1 Adopt Complete Streets Policies Immediate Safer Users; Member Agency, Safer Roads ARDOT C.2 Address Safety within Routine Facility Medium -Long Safer speeds; ARDOT, Member Maintenance Safer Roads Agency C.3 Identify and Implement Road Safety Medium -Long Safer speeds; ARDOT, Member Improvements Through Routine Resurfacing Safer Roads Agency Develop a Multimodal Safety Toolbox that CA identifies strategies available to address Short Safer speeds; NWARPC Safer Roads safety concerns for all modes Establish a Multi -Disciplinary Crash Response Safer speeds; ARDOT, Member C.5 Team to evaluate and address fatal and Short Safer Roads NWARPC Agency serious injury crashes and crash locations Adopt Specifications for Incorporating Safety C.6 Features in New Fleet Vehicle Purchases and Short Safer Roads NWARPC Member Agency Retrofit Existing Vehicles Advocate for Changes to State Law to Expand Safer speeds; C.7 the Use of Automated Traffic Enforcement Short Safer Users; NWARPC (ATE) Safer Roads Establish zero tolerance policies and Safer speeds; Member C.8 incentive programs to reduce and eliminate Immediate Safer Users; Agency, Police speeding Safer Roads Department Conduct roadway safety audits after every C 9 Immediate Safer Roads NWARPC, ARDOT Member Agency fatality Consider alternatives primary access to C.10 schools on arterials or HIN for future school Medium -Long Safer Roads School Board Member Agency sites Conduct crash analysis by type of vehicle due ARDOT, Member C.11 to semis and large trucks with trailers on Short Safer Roads NWARPC Agency roads 46 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 77 of 524 ■Timeframe Safe System Action Leader Supporting Conduct analysis of crashes on curves and ARDOT, Member C.12 Short Safer Roads NWARPC hills in region Agency Conduct analysis of crashes related to dual ARDOT, Member C.13 center turn lane and commercial access Short Safer Roads NWARPC management on arterials Agency C.14 Compare crashes within new greenfield Short Safer Roads NWARPC Member Agency development, housing, and commercial C.15 Analyze before and after crash trends along Medium -Long Safer Roads NWARPC, ARDOT recent roadway projects <CHAPTER> I 47 Page 78 of 524 48 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Page 79 of 524 5PEED LIMIT oi4r <CHAPTER> 1 49 Page 80 of 524 ■Timeframe Review Speed Limits on the High Injury D.1 Medium -Long Network D 2 Reduce speed limits on local streets to 20 Short mph D.3 Conduct a special speed study in local Short jurisdictions for blanket speed limit reduction DA Engage state legislature to change laws Short related to speed limit setting D.5 Adjust signal timing and signage for speed Short limit on arterials Tighten turning radii, include truck aprons on D.b Medium -Long freight routes D.7 Post nighttime speed limits 20 MPH 30/° Likelihood of fatality or severe injury Immediate 30 MPH Safer speeds; Safer Users; NWARPC Safer Roads Safer speeds; Safer Users; Member Agency Safer Roads Safer speeds; NWARPC, Safer Users; Safer Roads Member Agency Safer speeds; NWARPC, Safer Users; Member Agency Safer Roads Safer speeds; Safer Users; Member Agency, ARDOT Safer Roads Safer speeds; Safer Users; Member Agency, ARDOT Safer Roads Safer speeds; Member Agency, Safer Users; ARDOT Safer Roads • ���nmmmh • • . . . . . • 11111iff 400/' Likelihood of fatality or severe injury 730/° Likelihood of fatality or severe injury Data Citation: Tefft, B.C. (2011). Impact Speed and a Pedestrian's Risk of Severe Injury or Death (Technical Report). Washington, D.C.: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. 50 1 NWA REGIONAL VISION ZERO PLAN Member Agency, ARDOT 40 MPH Page 81 of 524 Acknowledgements The creation of the NWA Vision Zero Plan would not have been possible without the dedication of numerous NWARPC staff, municipal staff from member agencies, elected officials, and community partners. This effort was lead by the NWARPC, in partnership with the Regional Working Group. TO BE UPDATED Name, Title Name, Title Name, Title M NWA Regional VISION ZERO Safety Action Plan A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ADOPTING A VISION ZERO POLICY WHEREAS, the life and health of all persons living and traveling within the Fayetteville are our utmost priority, and no one should die or be seriously injured while traveling on our city streets; WHEREAS, Vision Zero is the concept that traffic deaths and serious injuries on our roadways are unacceptable; WHEREAS, Vision Zero is a holistic strategy aimed at eliminating all traffic fatalities and severe injuries suffered by all road users while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all; WHEREAS, streets and transportation systems have traditionally been designed primarily to move cars efficiently, and Vision Zero supports a paradigm shift by designing streets and transportation systems to move all people safely, including people of all ages and abilities, pedestrians, bicyclists, public transit users, scooter riders, and motorcyclists, as well as drivers and passengers of motor vehicles; WHEREAS, Vision Zero recognizes that people will sometimes make mistakes, so the road system and related policies should be designed to ensure that those inevitable mistakes do not result in severe injuries or fatalities; therefore, transportation planners and engineers and policymakers are expected to improve the roadway environment, policies, and other related systems to lessen the severity of crashes; WHEREAS, 26 people in Fayetteville lost their lives to traffic deaths and 193 were seriously injured between 2017 to 2021, and traffic crashes are among the leading cause of deaths in the United States; WHEREAS, the Fayetteville's transportation infrastructure serves an increasing number of vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and bicyclists; WHEREAS, according to data from the Arkansas Department of Transportation, non - motorists including pedestrians and bicyclists account for 8 of the 26 (31%) of the traffic deaths in Fayetteville; WHEREAS, speed is recognized as a major determining factor of survival in a crash. The likelihood of a pedestrian surviving a crash is 10% if hit by a vehicle moving 40 mph; Page 84 of 524 WHEREAS, the Fayetteville adopted ordinance 6488 in 2021 to establish a default speed limit of 20 miles per hour in residential and business districts. WHEREAS, children, older adults, people of color, people with disabilities, people who are unhoused, and people with low income face a significantly disproportionate risk of traffic injuries and fatalities; WHEREAS, making streets safer for all people using all modes of transportation will encourage people to travel on foot, by bicycle, and by public transit, which supports a healthier, more active lifestyle and reduces environmental pollution; WHEREAS, successful Vision Zero programs are a result of both a complete government approach (i.e., interdepartmental, coordinated initiatives) and community support of Vision Zero objectives and action plans; WHEREAS, Vision Zero resolutions have been adopted by many jurisdictions across the United States; and WHEREAS, the Fayetteville has already adopted the Active Transportation Plan update in 2023 which sets a goal for zero fatalities and severe injuries for vulnerable roadway users by the year 2030. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the Fayetteville, State of Arkansas, as follows: 1. The Fayetteville adopts the goal of zero traffic deaths and serious injuries, stating that no loss of life or serious injury is acceptable on our streets. 2. The Fayetteville adopts the goal of eliminating traffic deaths and serious injuries by 2030 and endorses Vision Zero as a comprehensive and holistic approach to achieving this goal. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the Fayetteville, State of Arkansas on 2023, by the following vote: PA Page 85 of 524 IrNWA Regional • Northwest Arkansas Safety Action Plan June 2023 1 DRAFT M� rV... ,^ 1 �. r. . 6.4 file, / • .1r i ' • I •L a' ON "_ •'� �"�'�r� �' IJ r AIL Fayetteville, AR I Credit: NWAonline, Spencer Tirey s .• Lig vii i t i I � ' L _ m , i. mom Information contained in this document is for planning purposes and should not be used for final design of any project. All results, recommendations, concept drawings, cost opinions, and commentary contained herein are based on limited data and information and on existing conditions that are subject to change. Further analysis and engineering design are necessary prior to implementing any of the recommendations contained herein. FEDERAL PARTICIPATION: This notice is in accordance with the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, the Federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) in cooperation with local agencies, the Arkansas Department of Transportation (ARDOT), the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). This document was funded in part through grant(s) from the FHWA, FTA, and/or the United States Department of Transportation. The views and opinions of the NWARPC expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Department of Transportation. NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF NONDISCRIMINATION POLICY The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) complies with all civil rights provisions of federal statues and related authorities that prohibit discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. Therefore, the NWARPC does not discriminate on the basis of race, sex, color, age, national origin, religion or disability, in the admission, access to and treatment in NWARPC's programs and activities, as well as the NWARPC's hiring or employment practices. Anyone with special communication or accommodation needs may contact Nicole Gibbs at (479) 751-7125 ext.106 or email ngibbs@ nwarpc.org. For complaints of alleged discrimination and inquiries regarding the NWARPC's nondiscrimination policies contact Nicole Gibbs, AICP, Regional Planner — EEO/DBE (ADA/504/TitleVl Coordinator), 1311 Clayton, Springdale, AR 72762, (479) 751-7125 ext. 106, (Voice/TTY 7-1-1 or 1-800-285-1131) or the following email address: ngibbs@nwarpc.org. This notice is available from the ADA/504/Title VI Coordinator in large print, on audiotape and in Braille. If information is needed in another language, contact Nicole Gibbs. Si se necesita informacion en otro idioma, comunigese Nicole Gibbs, ngibbs@nwarpc.org. AVISO DE NO DISCRIMINACION DE LA COMISION DE PLANIFICACION DEL NORODSTE ME ARKANSAS EL NWARPC cumple con todas [as disposiciones de derechos civiles de los estatutos federales y autoridades relacionadas que prohiben la discriminacion on programas y actividades que reciben asistencia financiera federal. Por to tanto, to NWARPC no discrimina por razoes de raza, sexo, color, edad, origen nacionat, religion o discapacidad, el la admision, el acceso y el tratamiento on los programas y actividades NWARPC, asi como de contratacion de empleados de la NWARPC. Lasque jas de supuesta discriminacion y consuttas sobre la politica antidiscriminatoria de to NWARPC pueden ser dirigidas a Nicole Gibbs, AICP, planificador regional— EEO/DBE (ADA/504/Tituto Coordinador VI), 1311 Clayton, Springdale, AR 72762, (479) 751-7125, (Voz/TTY 7-1-1 o 1-800-285-1131) o en la siguiente direccion de correo electronico: ngibbs@nwarpc.org. Este aviso esta disponible en el Coordinador de ADA/504/Titulo VI en tetra grande, cinta de audio y en Braille. Si se necesita informacion en otro idioma, pongase on contacto con Nicole Gibbs, ngibbs@nwarpc.org. Page 89 of 524 Contents Executive Summary........................................................................................ vii 1. A Paradigm Shift..........................................................................................2 What is a Vision Zero Safety Action Plan?.......................................................................... 2 VulnerableUsers........................................................................................................................ 2 TheSafe System Approach..................................................................................................... 5 2. Roadway Safety in Northwest Arkansas.................................................10 Plans, Policies, and Programs...............................................................................................10 RoadwaySafety Analysis........................................................................................................16 Equity............................................................................................................................................18 3. Community Outreach..................................................................................24 4. Goals and Actions.......................................................................................34 Goals.............................................................................................................................................. 34 Actions..........................................................................................................................................35 Proactive Systemic Safety Countermeasures..................................................................51 Highest Priority Projects.........................................................................................................52 Proven Safety Countermeasures..........................................................................................54 TakingAction.............................................................................................................................56 Appendix A: Crash Maps Report Appendix B: Descriptive Crash Analysis Report Appendix C: Equity Framework Appendix D: Project Prioritization Page 90 of 524 List of Abbreviations ACAT: Arkansas Crash Analytics Tool ACS: American Community Survey AR: Arkansas ARDOT: Arkansas Department of Transportation ATSDR: Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry CDC: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention DUI: Driving Under the Influence FHWA: Federal Highway Administration FTA: Federal Transit Administration GTFS: General Transit Feed Specification HIN: High Injury Network KABCO: Injury Severity Scale (Arkansas): K: Fatal injury A: Suspected serious injury B:Suspected minor injury C: Possible injury 0: No apparent injury Injury Severity Scale (Missouri) 1: Fatal 2: Disabling 3: Evident — Not Disabling 4: Probable — Not Apparent 5: None Apparent KSI: Killed or Serious Injury (K and A on KABCO scale also 1 and 2 on Injury scale) LRS: Linear Referencing System MO: Missouri MODOT: Missouri Department of Transportation MP: Mile Post NWA: Northwest Arkansas NWARPC: Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission OSM: OpenStreetMap PCSi: Proven Safety Countermeasure initiative RRFB: Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon SRTS: Safe Routes to School STARS: Missouri Statewide Traffic Accident Records System SVI: Social Vulnerability Index TDM: Transportation Demand Management USDOT: United States Department of Transportation VRU: Vulnerable Road User includes Pedestrian, Bicyclists, or Motorcyclist* *Note this Plan is using the National Safety Council definition that includes Motorcycles. USDOT does not include motorcycles in their definition and only includes non -motorized users. NWARPC Members Avoca Bella Vista Benton County Bentonville Cave Springs Centerton Decatur Elkins Elm Springs Farmington Fayetteville Garfield Gateway Gentry Goshen Gravette Greenland Highfill Hindsville* Huntsville* Jane, Missouri Johnson Lincoln Little Flock Lowell McDonald County, Missouri Pea Ridge Pineville, Missouri Prairie Grove Rogers Siloam Springs Springdale Springtown Sulphur Springs Tontitown Washington County West Fork Winslow ARDOT MODOT Beaver Water District* Razorback Transit University of Arkansas* National Airport Authority *Indicates non -voting member • M IR W— The Northwest Arkansas Vision Zero Safety Action Plan (NWA Vision Zero Plan) recognizes that one life lost within the region's transportation network is one too many and something must change. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) has developed this Plan and sets a target to eliminate all killed and serious injury (KSI) crashes that occur on the regional roadway network by 2038. Although the horizon is 15 years from the development of this Plan, action starts now. Traditional safety strategies have not proven to decrease the number of life -altering crashes, highlighted by the increase of fatal crashes in recent years. This Plan emphasizes a shift towards the prioritization of safe, accessible, and equitable mobility for all roadway users and away from the disproportionate focus on moving vehicles efficiently —less delay that often results in higher speeds. W viii I NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 93 of 524 Executive Summary The purpose of the NWA Vision Zero Plan is to emphasize change related to traffic safety because fatal and serious injury crashes cannot be tolerated. The Plan outlines strategies and actions that should be taken within the next ten years, yet it must not be considered unchangeable. As a living document, this Plan must be dynamic to address safety in a region that is experiencing rapid growth. The recommended actions included are meant to be a starting point, not an all -encompassing list. Over time, the actions taken by the NWARPC, member agencies, and partner organizations should measure and report actions that are proving to reduce fatal and serious injuries along with continuing to incorporate safety innovations and opportunities to eliminate traffic fatalities and injuries as time passes. The NWA Vision Zero Plan is organized into four sections. An overview of each section is provided below to serve as a summary of the Plan in its entirety. 1. A Paradigm Shift Fatal and serious injury crashes have increased across the nation, the state of Arkansas, and in the Northwest Arkansas Region. In the traditional approach to roadway safety, traffic deaths have been understood as inevitable. This alone is not acceptable and therefore a new approach to safety is needed. This section describes how Vision Zero is grounded in the Safe System Approach that anticipates human mistakes and ensuring that when collisions occur that they do not Traditional Approach • Traffic deaths are inevitable • Aims to fix humans • Expects perfect human behavior • Prevents collisions • Exclusively addresses traffic engineering • Doesn't consider disproportionate impacts result in death or serious injury. A clear understanding of the Principles and Elements of the Safe System Approach is foundational to the NWA Vision Zero Plan and will be instrumental in increasing safety for all roadway users moving forward. 2. Roadway Safety in NWA Crashes over a 5-year period (2017-2021) resulted in 220 people —mothers, fathers, children, grandparents, friends, and coworkers —losing their lives in Northwest Arkansas. An average of 44 people each year; however, 2021 alone was a year when 55 people died in roadway crashes —a 25% increase from the five year average. These sobering numbers are part of today's roadway safety narrative in Northwest Arkansas. This section reviews existing plans, policies, and programs that are already in place that are attempting to increase safety in several communities in the region. It notes opportunities for communities to refine or add policies that can impact safety through capital projects and new development. This section uses crash data to establish a High Injury Network (HIN)—representing the corridors in Northwest Arkansas with the highest number of fatal and serious injury crashes. Along with the HIN, the Plan identifies historically disadvantaged communities, areas of persistent poverty, and locations with varying degrees of social vulnerability to understand where equitable investments can be made to increase safety for people that may be disproportionately impacted. Vision Zero • Traffic deaths are preventable • Changes systems • Integrates human failure • Prevents fatal and serious crashes • Considers the road system as a whole • Regards road safety as an issue of social equity EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I ix Page 94 of 524 High Injury Network Map \---Ja Bella Vista ^� Gravette 't'.' All Modes High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Centerton j 1 Rog( Siloam Springs Springdale 41 Tontitown Ozark National Forest Fayetteville i 7 Prairie Grove I r� 62 "71 Lincoln Ozark National Forest Hobbs State low f-7; Goshen Like Sequoyah Par i f rr Ozark National Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m 11A]PO IN High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries x I NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 95 of 524 3. Community Outreach Starting a conversation around roadway safety was a key component of the NWA Vision Zero Plan Information about the current state of safety along with opportunities for feedback were distributed across the region. Online resources were developed that included surveys, an interactive map, and a series of safety webinars. To complement online engagement opportunities, a "go -to" approach to engagement resulted in tabling and interacting with people at over one dozen existing events. Materials were available in English and Spanish to provide opportunities for people to review and provide input in the most convenient way possible. Additionally, a Regional Working Group provided guidance for the development of the NWA Vision Zero Plan through a series of meetings and listening sessions. Two safety demonstration site walks were included to see and experience how the Safe System Framework is already being used within the region. These site walks allowed municipal staff, local advocates, and elected officials to hear why decisions made related to safety can have such an enormous impact. Engagement during Plan devlopment is only the beginning and must be continued at the regional and local levels to see real change occur. 4. Goals and Actions Achieving the goal of zero fatal and serious injury crashes by 2038 will not happen if the status quo is maintained. Roadway safety must be integrated into the work of various agencies and individual departments to see results. This section establishes goals that capture the desires for safety by the Regional Working Group along with a variety of actions that can be taken to change the roadway safety narrative in Northwest Arkansas. Goals include: • Promote a culture that prioritizes people's safety • Reduce conflicts between roadway users • Establish policies, practices, and programs that focus on safety at all levels • Slow vehicle speeds For each action, a timeline, action leader, and supporting partners are noted. Additionally, Elements of the Safe System Approach that align with each action are listed. The actions in this Plan are not intended to be an exhaustive list; rather, they are strategic and can begin to eliminate fatal and serious injury crashes on the transportation network. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I xi Page 96 of 524 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 97 of 524 r.- 4` rg IF . , a ram., � t � � `► _ --� � <c _ - t. A Paradigm Shift 1. A Paradigm Shift What is a Vision Zero Safety Action Plan? Every year, people in the NWA Region lose family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues to preventable traffic crashes on our roads. Between 2017 and 2021, 1,369 people were killed or seriously injured in crashes in NWA, averaging more than five people every week. Across the state, motor vehicle crashes account for more than twice the number of deaths as homicides. For the last century, our transportation system has been built on the belief that these crashes are accidents — events no one can fully prevent or predict. While no one thinks traffic deaths among friends and family are acceptable, the historical approach to transportation has taken roadway fatalities as an unfortunate inevitability rather than a preventable public health crisis. Vision Zero is a traffic safety philosophy rooted in the belief that nothing on our roadways is more important than a human life. It represents a paradigm shift in the region's approach to road safety, beginning with the simple idea that traffic deaths and serious injuries are preventable. Since the 1990s, Vision Zero has % of fatalities & serious injuries 21% been successfully implemented across Europe and in more than 45 communities in the US - some of which have now had consecutive years of zero roadway fatalities. Vision Zero lays out a new set of principles for engineering roads, educating travelers, and creating a sense of collective responsibility for ourselves and our fellow travelers. Vulnerable Users When a crash occurs, people walking, bicycling, and riding motorcycles are more likely to be killed or seriously injured. Vehicle safety technology has seen significant advancements in recent decades, with airbags, anti -lock brakes, and lane -awareness sensors all working to protect a driver in a crash. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists however are unprotected and are especially vulnerable to the impact of a crash. This Plan is using the National Safety Council's definition for vulnerable roadway users that includes motorcyclists. USDOT does not include motorcycles in their definition and only includes non -motorized users. In Northwest Arkansas, vulnerable roadway users accounted for only 3% of all roadway crashes but 33% of serious injuries and fatalities. 97% �• 0.6% • • /� 0.4% �O O O 2% 2 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 99 of 524 All Modes Crash Map All Modes Crash Map Northwest Arkansas Gatewa so • ' ••Bella Vista+` �. ,S' t %'�+� . • Je vils Eyebro • .ram •. _ I�Gravette it ��! •-: • �� �• � • • t _� •• �i, r+1, '.•. •• .,-•. .. , • Z t .1k: i •: •' • ___. ._Cp,�r4'1 •� Bentonville :C. •• _ _r:�: t • • :JRogers r •: ,•, ••''or • •-•t ` Ht)bbs State Pa �►: .• ' � •• Tontitown r • , •� •' A`•'•• _Ozark National Forest !' ; : j �� �,'r L u• , y� • _ ' : yr� S •� w` Goshen' • f ('tto. -ill ') - ke S'equoyah VarA + Prairie Gr tiy, i • ,Lincoln \. •�, • Fatal or Serious `~ Injury Crash • ` Other Reported • Crash Parks & + Open Space Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m ■ • ■ ri 1. A PARADIGM SHIFT 1 3 Page 100 of 524 Between 2017 and 2021 1,369 people were killed or seriously injured in crashes in NWA, averaging more than five people every week. Averaging 44 fatalities KSI crashes a year 5a week �— over 5 years 15,000 12,000 Total Crashes 900 '10�� ti010 tiO1Q `LO00 'L0�1 Fatalities & Severe 300 Injuries EL 275 250 60 50 40 30 ti Fatalities `ONO, `Logo 'L p 4 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN The Safe System Approach This Plan is the NWA Region's roadmap to achieving Vision Zero. It is grounded in the Safe System Approach, which aims to eliminate fatal and serious injuries by anticipating human mistakes and minimizing impacts on the human body when crashes do occur. The six Safe System Principles shown around the outside ring are the fundamental beliefs that the approach is built on. 1. Death & serious injury is unacceptable While no one likes to get in a fender -bender, this plan focuses on crashes that lead to deaths and serious injuries. 2. Humans make mistakes Even the best drivers will inevitably make mistakes that can lead to a crash. How we design and operate our transportation system can ensure these mistakes don't have life -altering impacts. 3. Humans are vulnerable Human bodies can only withstand so much impact from a crash before death or serious injuries occur 4. Responsibility is shared. Every part of our transportation system, from elected officials to everyday users, to planners and engineers, has a role to play in Vision Zero. 5. Safety is proactive Rather than waiting for crashes to occur, transportation agencies should seek to proactively identify and address dangerous situations. b. Redundancy is crucial Redundancy means making sure every part of the transportation system is safe. This way, if one part fails, people are still protected. P�NIS�00 INJURY IS UIygCCFp�4e 10 �F RESPONSIBILITY IS SHAR(�O 1. A PARADIGM SHIFT 1 5 Page 102 of 524 The Safe System Approach is implemented through five Elements. 1. Safe Road Users Working towards a culture of safety starts with developing a network of civic partners, educating road users, and creating personal connections to the community's Vision Zero efforts. 2. Safe Vehicles Making vehicles safer can be done through advanced driver assistance systems and by ensuring future technology prioritizes vulnerable roadway users. 3. Safe Speeds Slower vehicle speeds increase visibility and reaction times for drivers and reduce impact forces when a crash occurs. Moving towards safe speeds can be done through speed limit reduction, traffic calming, and roadway design. 4. Safe Roads Safer roads come from providing physical separation (like separated bike lanes and sidewalks) as well as designing to accommodate human mistakes. 5. Post -Crash Care A system -wide approach means working towards safety even after a crash has occurred. This comes from improving emergency response, traffic incident reporting, and traffic management. I b 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 103 of 524 SEPARATE USERS IN SPACE ANTICIPATE HUMAN ERROR SEPARATE USERS IN TIME INCREASE ATTENTIVENESS & AWARENESS ACCOMMODATE REDUCE SPEEDS - HUMAN INJURY TOLERANCES REDUCE IMPACT FORCES o Bentonville, AR THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 105 of 524 0 '�N�c:�M■■■ii1■rf �� .' '�1l1�'11111111�� f 1� Fayetteville, AR Roadway Safety in Northwest Arkansas 2. Roadway Safety in Northwest Arkansas Plans, Policies, and Programs In response to rapid population growth and an increase in fatal and serious crashes, Northwest Arkansas has addressed road safety both through targeted interventions and by integrating it into existing planning, policies, and programs. Planning Efforts Many existing local, regional, and statewide plans have addressed the issue of road safety in some capacity. Examples include transportation plans, bicycle and pedestrian plans, and corridor studies. See Table 1 for a summary of plans reviewed during the development of this Plan. Local Plans At the local level, road safety has largely been addressed through transportation plans, bicycle and pedestrian plans, and Safe Routes to School plans. Many of these plans include recommendations for reducing vehicle speeds on local roads, improving sidewalk and bike lane networks, and increasing driver education and awareness. Recent examples include the Fayetteville Mobility Plan, the Bella Vista Trail and Greenway Master Plan, the Bentonville Bike & Pedestrian Master Plan, and the University of Arkansas Active Transportation Plan. Regional Plans Regional plans addressing road safety include the NWA Bike Infrastructure Plan, NWARPC 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan, and the NWA Congestion Management Process. These plans coordinate efforts across the region and offer insight on emerging trends and funding opportunities, many of which inform this Plan's approach to regional road safety. Statewide Plans Arkansas and Missouri have both adopted Strategic Highway Safety Plans that provide a statewide framework to eliminate traffic deaths and serious injuries through the Safe System Approach. The plans include strategies to address the top contributing factors to fatal and serious injuries. Arkansas also has a statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, which includes a focus on bicycle and pedestrian safety. Regional Plan Highlight: 2019 NWA Bike Infrastructure Plan The Northwest Arkansas Bike Infrastructure Plan identifies a priority network of bikeways focused on increasing safety and connectivity. It includes corridor concepts designed to make bicycling a safe and accessible travel option for riders of all ages and abilities. 10 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 107 of 524 Table 1: Summary Plans Reviewed Bella Vista Trail and Greenway 2015 Bella Vista Master Plan Bentonville Bike and Pedestrian 2021 Bentonville Master Plan Fayetteville Active 2023 Fayetteville Transportation Plan Fayetteville Mobility Plan University of Arkansas Transportation Plan NWARPC 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan NWA Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan NWA Congestion Management Process NWA Bike Infrastructure Plan NWA Regional ITS Architecture and Deployment Plan NWA Transportation Alternatives Analysis Study Connect Northwest Arkansas 10-Year Transit Development Plan Arkansas Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan ARDOT Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) Missouri Show -Me Zero 2018 Fayetteville Policies Safe Routes to School Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs enable students to safely walk and bicycle for their school commute. SRTS includes planning, development, and implementation of projects and activities that will improve safety and reduce traffic, fuel consumption, and air pollution around schools. 2022 Fayetteville Complete Streets Complete Streets policies direct transportation 2021 NWA Region planners and engineers to consistently design the right of way to accommodate all users, including drivers, 2014 NWA Region transit riders, pedestrians, and bicyclists, as well as for older people, children, and people with disabilities. 2022 NWA Region Most local jurisdictions in Northwest Arkansas have 2019 NWA Region not adopted any form of Complete Streets policy. The 2015 NWA Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan 2007 NWA Region identified the adoption of these policies as a catalyst program and provided a sample Complete Streets 2014 NWA Region Resolution designed for NWA communities. 2020 NWA Region Design Standards Street design standards have a significant impact 2017 Statewide on road safety. Context appropriate street design encourages safe behavior and reduces conflicts 2022 Statewide between users. Existing standards vary across the 2021 Statewide region, but some include provisions that promote safety. For example, the City of Bentonville Minimum Standard Specifications for Streets includes a section on Neighborhood Traffic Safety that includes design criteria for various traffic calming devices. Additionally, roundabouts constructed on Highway 112 are examples of proven safety countermeasures on the ground. Design Standards Highlight: Fayetteville Minimum Street Standards The City of Fayetteville Minimum Street Standards provide an example of how to prioritize safety for all road users. They include an emphasis on multimodal level of service and reference best practice design guidance such as the National Association of City Transportation Officials' (NACTO's) Don't Give Up at the Intersection and the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA's) Guide for Improvinq Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled Crossing Locations. 2 Feyetteville, AR (credit: NWARPC) 2. ROADWAY SAFETY IN NORTHWEST ARKANSAS 1 11 Page 108 of 524 Springdale, AR (credit: NWARPQ Traffic Calming Traffic calming consists of physical design and other measures put in place on existing roads to reduce vehicle speeds and improve safety for pedestrians and bicyclists. Several cities in NWA have implemented traffic calming policies that facilitate the installation of traffic calming on residential streets. Emergency Response One component of the Safe System Approach is to streamline emergency response and medical care. Based on discussions from the NWA Active Transportation Committee, Bentonville and Fayetteville have updated their CAD systems and improved GIS data to assist with quicker emergency response on the trail system. Parking Requirements Minimum parking requirements for developments present a barrier to the creation of dense, walkable urban environments. The City of Fayetteville abolished its commercial parking minimums citywide in 2015 while retaining downtown parking maximums. This change has enabled new businesses to open using long -disused sites and buildings. Traffic Calming Policy Highlight: Springdale Traffic Calming Policy The City of Springdale has a policy that enables the installation of traffic calming measures such as curb extensions, raised intersections, and speed cushions to address speeding and conflicts between people walking and driving. Criteria for installation include observed speeds, sidewalk connectivity, crash history, and the presence of children walking to school. Evaluation of Existing Codes and Ordinances The table on the following page provides a high-level review of local codes and ordinances for cities with over 2,000 residents.1 For each element (e.g. building entrances) a score was assigned for each city to indicate the state of policy on that issue, ranging from 1 (Codes / ordinances do not include this element) to 3 (Codes / ordinances include this element and it generally meets best practices). This evaluation was based on the information available to the project and should be viewed as a starting point for where to focus attention with regard to code and ordinance amendments to promote road safety. Some issues, such as speed limits and crosswalk markings, were not included due to the limited presence of local policy on these issues. 1 Population based on 2021 American Community Survey data. Most cities with fewer than 2,000 residents do not have codes and ordinances addressing road safety through street design or land use, though there are some exceptions, including Highfill, Decatur, and Greenland. 12 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 109 of 524 H � u +O+ y (U c a cu E ; L u c (n a) tm > u m ._ Q c G m rn c c a Y E L u � u a 1p a. rn c Y L a c u :5 c m L m c W • Y , to u to O y C m y to a u o � L Q u >. y to u .1 m u c O c o m u to � c y (Dcn y m m d c L L LL a t1f E C O :3 N ao a° _T u N m O W 0 C) N N m M LO n m y tT C L O. Ln E 0 u t- 0 3 O J O n N rn fY N a T N O O O 4 +L+ N 0 M 2 R0i J ,DW N AY N co N y tT L C1 (n E W iAF M =TY N 10 O M N O J IN 1 4OR C CU E CV S O C N CC c N c ? t u S C .- C O i C O t -a ! y t a) C u t C ! ru f C ! 0 C t_ t O C to t N C _0 "C O C U L �C V- r THWEST ARK -t i r ANf I 3 3 AS 1 13 gage 110 of 524 Laws and Enforcement Traffic laws and enforcement have been a central piece of Northwest Arkansas' approach to addressing traffic fatalities and serious injuries. Speed Limits Addressing speed is a crucial step to making streets safer. Vehicle speed increases both the likelihood of a crash, as well as the severity of the crash. Higher speeds diminish drivers' ability to recognize and avoid potential conflicts and increase the force of impact, escalating the chances of fatalities and serious injuries, particularly for more vulnerable road users. Many streets throughout NWA have relatively high speed limits that do not match the roadway context. Distracted Driving Since 2009, when Arkansas first banned texting while driving for all drivers, the state has strengthened laws around distracted driving to include a ban on all use of handheld devices for drivers under 18 and in certain areas. In 2021, the State passed a new distracted driving law that prohibits all drivers from holding or using a handheld device while driving, with a few exceptions, such as using a phone in a hands -free mode or in an emergency. Driving Under the Influence Arkansas also has strict laws around driving under the influence. In 2015, the State lowered the blood alcohol level (BAC) limit for drivers to 0.08%, which is consistent with recommendations from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Arkansas also mandates ignition interlock devices (IIDs) for certain driving under the influence (DUI) offenders, as a condition of license reinstatement. Washington and Benton Counties have established diversion court programs that offer an alternative to traditional punitive measures, such as jail time, allowing participants to receive treatment, counseling, and other support services to help them overcome their addiction and avoid future DUI offenses. Benton County also has a Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) unit that is responsible for the pro -active detection, investigation, and arrest of alcohol and/or drug -impaired drivers.2 Automated Enforcement Arkansas prohibits the use of unmanned traffic enforcement systems, which includes both red light cameras and speed cameras. Speed cameras are only allowed in school zones or at rail crossings, and a police officer must be present and issue citation at time and place of violation.' Red light cameras are not allowed under any circumstances. These legal requirements severely limit the potential use and efficacy of automated enforcement in Northwest Arkansas. Programs Bicycle Education Over the last decade, bicycle education has become a part of the school curriculum in Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville. These programs, provided by Trailblazers, help to train the next generation of responsible road users by teaching kids the rules of the road and make bicycling accessible to kids who may not otherwise have the opportunity to ride. Pilot and Demonstration Projects Resolution 2016-2 authorized NWARPC to coordinate, manage, and assist with the implementation of bicycle pilot/demonstration projects in various locations to test protected bike lane concepts. Trailblazers 2 Benton County Sherriff's Office. DWI Unit. 3 Governors Highway Safety Association. Speed and Red Light Cameras: Arkansas. 14 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 111 of 524 has partnered with NWARPC and the Walton Family Foundation on a series of pilot projects in Bella Vista, Bentonville, Rogers, Springdale, Fayetteville, and Siloam Springs. These projects tested the feasibility of design treatments focused on creating safer streets for all users. Slow Streets Local cities have partnered with Trailblazers on the temporary installation of Slow Streets. Through temporary installations of traffic calming materials, Slow Streets create safe, family -friendly routes for people to bike and walk, sometimes for a single day or weekend and sometimes seasonally. EA A temporary Slow Street installation in Rogers (credit: Trailblazers) Pilot Project Highlight: Siloam Springs Neighborhood Greenway Pilot Project Trailblazers worked with the City of Siloam Springs to design and install a Neighborhood Greenway pilot project from Downtown Siloam Springs to the Dogwood Springs Walking Trail. A neighborhood greenway is a traffic calmed, slow -speed street that creates a shared space for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. The project rollout included an evaluation of vehicle speeds and volumes, bicycle volumes, and crash data, as well as a post -installation survey to collect public feedback. 1 �l SPEED HUMP 20 Y y 4 � N t Siloam Springs Neighborhood Greenway Instalation (credit: Trailblazers) 2. ROADWAY SAFETY IN NORTHWEST ARKANSAS 1 15 Page 112 of 524 Roadway Safety Analysis Crashes occur because of a variety and often a combination of contributing factors. These factors may include excessive speed, roadway conditions, equipment failure, inexperience, environmental conditions (e.g., weather, lighting, glare), and human behaviors, including distraction, impairment, and not complying with traffic laws. With 1,369 KSI crashes over a five-year period, the HIN represents the most critical corridors that should be addressed in the region. Crash analysis resulted in numerous findings related to street characteristics and contexts in Northwest Arkansas. The following highlights a few of those findings along with the full HIN map for all modes. 16 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 113 of 524 High Injury Network All Modes High Injury Network nJan. Northwest Arkansas Gateway Bella Vista evils Eyebro Gravette \ Centerton � 1 Bentonville \ _ "T I 1 ' . �, Rogers i Hobbs State Pa . .,dnam Sprinqs `l Springdale 41 Tontitown Ozark National Forest Goshen Fayetteville, Like Sequoyah Par doft 7 Prairie Grove r� 62 71 11 Lincoln I�High Injury Network Parks & Winslow Open Space Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi ® • crashes between 2017-2021. m ■ • ■ t■ 2. ROADWAY SAFETY IN NORTHWEST ARKANSAS 1 17 Page 114 of 524 Equity Increasing safety across the region cannot succeed without a focus on equity and identifying communities that have disproportionate traffic safety impacts. The transportation system in Northwest Arkansas must work for everyone across the region; therefore, equity is integrated throughout the NWA Vision Zero Plan. Together with the Safe System Approach, recommended actions can address safety for people that have experienced a historical disadvantage, persistent poverty, and/or social vulnerability. To create a broad characterization of communities that have sociodemographic vulnerabilities and to define the populations, this Plan used criteria for Areas of Persistent Poverty, Historically Disadvantaged Communities as identified by the USDOT, and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Historically Disadvantaged Communities" refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life. • Transportation access disadvantage - communities and places that spend more, and take longer, to get where they need to go. • Health disadvantage - communities based on variables associated with adverse health outcomes, disability, as well as environmental exposures. • Environmental disadvantage - communities with disproportionately high levels of certain air pollutants and high potential presence of lead -based paint in housing units. • Economic disadvantage - areas and populations with high poverty, low wealth, lack of local jobs, low homeownership, low educational attainment, and high inequality. • Resilience disadvantage - communities vulnerable to hazards caused by climate change. • Equity disadvantage - communities with a high percentile of persons (age 5+) who speak English "less than well." Area of Persistent Poverty' is defined by the USDOT as any County or Census Tract that has consistently had greater than or equal to 20 percent of the population living in poverty over a defined period. Social Vulnerability' refers to the potential negative effects on communities caused by external stresses on human health. Factors include: • Socioeconomic status (below 150% poverty, unemployed, housing cost burden, no high school diploma, no health insurance) • Household characteristics (aged 65 or older, aged 17 or younger, civilian with a disability, single -parent households, English language proficiency) • Racial and ethnic minority status (Hispanic or Latino (of any race); Black and African American, Not Hispanic or Latino; American Indian and Alaska Native, Not Hispanic or Latino; Asian, Not Hispanic or Latino; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Not Hispanic or Latino; Two or More Races, Not Hispanic or Latino; Other Races, Not Hispanic or Latino) • Housing type & transportation (multi -unit structures, mobile homes, crowding, no vehicle, group quarters) The NWA Vision Zero Plan identified and prioritized investments in communities that have experienced varying degrees of disadvantage. Additionally, recommended actions have been intentionally developed to ensure policing and other enforcement efforts do not create or perpetuate disparities and unintended consequences in communities of color or areas of persistent poverty. 4 Historically Disadvantaged Communities Methodology: https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/dustice4O/transportation-disadvantaged- census-tracts-historically-disadvantaged 5 Areas of Persistent Poverty: https://www.transportation.gov/RAISEgrants/raise-app-hdc 6 Social Vulnerability: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandheaLth/svi/at-a-glance svi.html 18 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 115 of 524 Vulnerable roadway users that live in disadvantaged areas are overrepresented in fatal and serious injury crashes. 6% of roadway network /001* 16% of total KSI crashes I Equity Analysis Overlap and HIN Equity Analysis Overlap & High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista evils E ebro ALGravette l Bentonville� Centerton Rogers ; i Hobbs State Pa .,-'i,am Springs Springdale 41 Tontitown Ozark National Forest Goshen Fayetteville ^ Like Sequoyah Par 7 Prairie Grove r 62 71� Lincoln ' Degrees of Disadvantage High Moderate Low All Modes High Injury Network Parks & Winslow Open Space 6 Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes 0 2.5 5 mi between 2017-2021. Disadvantage layers from USDOT m • RAISE Tool and 2021 American Community Survey ' • • 2. ROADWAY SAFETY IN NORTHWEST ARKANSAS I ? Page 118 of 524 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 119 of 524 77 MFiR! ' \ Y ,FRE.q 7Mr� Community 'outreach 3. Community Outreach The NWA Vision Zero Plan employed a wide range of digital and in -person engagement tools to inform the community and solicit feedback on roadway safety. Communicating the importance of roadway safety during the development of this Plan was an important step in long-lasting efforts to engage and empower people in the region to make changes that save lives. Five key elements were foundational for engagement: 1. Listen First: Events and outreach were structured so people could have multiple opportunities and options to share their experiences, interests, and concerns related to safety. 2. Provide an Open and Transparent Process: Engagement was accessible to as many members of the community as possible. 3. Educate on Positive Traffic Safety Culture: Each engagement event incorporated education components about the personal and community benefits of safety. 4. Give Proper Notice: Engagement provided community members sufficient advanced notice for in -person events as well as online feedback opportunities, allowing them to plan and prioritize their participation. Source https://nwa.pressreader.com/article/281878712709691 5. Prioritize Equity: Activities ensured that minority and low-income populations were specifically engaged and heard and materials were provided in English and Spanish. 24 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 121 of 524 Promotion and Media Coverage Promotion for the Plan relied on digital/social media, word of mouth, and traditional print media. The Northwest Arkansas Democrat -Gazette for the May 8, 2023 Issue highlighted the Safety Demonstration Site Walk in Fayetteville that took a group of municipal staff, local advocates, and elected officials from across the region on a tour near the intersection of M.L.K. Jr. Boulevard and S. School Avenue (US Business 71) to discuss and see different implemented solutions for safety along with street characteristics that should still be addressed. Listening Sessions Scheduled listening sessions with municipal staff provided understanding and background for the state of safety within the region along with past efforts that have increased safety. Each listening session included conversation related to: Traffic safety culture, • Process for project implementation, • Effective tools already being used, • Challenges to increasing safety, • Specific locations where changes should be made, and • Concerns about staff capacity and/or resources available. Listening sessions revealed that while ongoing efforts are being made at the local level, there is still a lot of work left to do. Major arterials moving through communities present some of the biggest threats. Simultaneously, there is a need for policies and programs to target speed, eliminate distracted driving, and prioritize people walking and bicycling to achieve a safer system as a whole. Public Interaction In -person activities are showcased in Table 3. They included a mix of pop -ups at various events and safety demonstration site walks around the region. Table 3: In -Person Engagement Events Bentonville Moves 4/27/2023 Bentonville Springdale EV Meeting NWARPC 4/28/2023 Springdale Beaver Watershed LID Smart Growth 4/27/2023 Springdale Bentonville Safety Project Demo 5/2/2023 Bentonville Fayetteville Safety Demonstration Project 5/3/2023 Fayetteville Safe Streets for All Working Group Meeting 3 5/4/2023 Springdale Bentonville First Friday 5/5/2023 Bentonville Lower Ramble 5/5/2023 Fayetteville First Friday 5/5/2023 Huntsville Rogers Concert Series Square 2 Square Ride (Bentonville End) 5/5/2023 5/6/2023 Rogers Bentonville Bentonville Farmers Market 5/6/2023 Bentonville Coler Noon to Moon 5/6/2023 Bentonville Rogers Concert Series 5/6/2023 Rogers Rogers Farmers Market 5/6/2023 Rogers Square 2 Square Ride (Springdale Halfway Halt) 5/6/2023 Springdale Farmers Market Springdale 5/6/2023 Springdale 3. COMMUNITY OUTREACH 1 25 Page 122 of 524 Safety Demonstration Site Walks Two Safety Project Demonstration Site Walks were held, one in Bentonville and one in Fayetteville, that gave residents, municipal staff, and advocates from around the region the opportunity to walk and talk about local municipality infrastructure problems and solutions. Approximately 40 people attended the two Safety Demonstrations. Bentonville's Safety Demonstration focused on touring the quick build, parking protected, two-way separated bike lane on SW 8th Street, while the Fayetteville Safety Demonstration focused on examining different pedestrian and bicycle constraints: large state-owned arterials and intersections and a few successful pedestrian crossings for the Razorback Greenway. The demonstrations also allowed advocates and residents to discuss problems they experience and witness along each route. Pop -Up Booths A go -to approach to engagement led to multiple events with pop-up booths for the NWA Vision Zero Plan throughout the region. The pop -ups included posters showcasing the number of fatalities and serious injury crashes in the region and business cards with QR codes for the public survey. Pop-up booth locations included the Square 2 Square Halfway Halt, Bentonville First Friday, Huntsville First Friday, Rogers Concert Series, Rogers Farmers Market, and the Farmers Market in Springdale. Square 2 Square is a biannual bike ride along the Razorback Regional Greenway for 30 miles between Fayetteville and Bentonville with nearly 2,000 riders, both local and regional, attending. Two events, the Rogers Concert Series and the Springdale Cinco de Mayo Farmers Market, had large Latino and Hispanic attendance which gave the opportunity to engage Spanish speaking residents. 26 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 123 of 524 Regional Safety Working Group The regional safety working group met four times over the course of the NWA Vision Zero Plan development. It consisted of municipal staff, elected officials, regional advocates, and more. A key role of the working group was to discuss safety in the region, to guide recommended actions for policies, programs, and projects. Using the Safe System Approach foundation, the regional working group helped shape the NWA Vision Zero Plan and customize the recommendations that will reduce serious injury and fatal crashes in the region. III COt1MEwEnsurr5 lV*, Mlsns iu'fosc fowv.++.I RY o RJ? f3 a IVNr2� �MCS (��J Off1Ce DEPOT 11 it I104� �1-- ti YIriD SAt°t�'! , uaUCas'AoD e 11w) '2ww, Fducv 7tHi-n�#r inKu u y�arl r NEw. 'j>6Vt�lPsF1-�f� D `CMIrJwrs. h9pur 'D6vhcl+..tyr 7n11LQ °Is n CT •N TV11ilr- N�c A 7VA[u°T Twe utryRMdN[� n (:pHG[fQ 4p,ICh�IK. S1.T lyC1y,7 OFFVALL OW iTI'OYMY cam( F RJVGfelMG N.IiEf TC£tK'STN(,E D lA.-�t f ta�DwkV 4Y0M neb[Ig4J ° E4NMN�I YaIY[ Ryy,.�t • CVS Safety Webinar Series Educating decision -makers and the general public about safety in the region and specifically the Safe System Approach was an important role of engagement for the NWA Vision Zero Plan. Safety Webinars were developed to serve as a lasting resource to explain how addressing safety should emphasize the characteristics of the roadways that are leading to the lives being lost and that a Safe System Approach should be both reactive —implementing solutions along the High Injury Network —and proactive —deploying safety countermeasures to reduce risk. The Safety Webinar Series was recorded and posted to the project website to allow for on -demand listening. Safety Vocabulary • Crashes not accidents • KSt- Killed or Serious Injury Crashes Proven Safety Countermeasure- an action designed to reduce the frequency and/or the severity of crashes Systemic Safety- applying changes to a system based on risk and not just crash history TOOLE oe sion Road Diet/Roadway Reconfiguration SafetyExpected Crash xpece Type Relative Cost i AreaFocus Reduction ' r i TOOLE 3. COMMUNITY OUTREACH Page 124 of 524 Public Feedback Digital engagement tools included an online survey and map. Participants that provided feedback on the interactive map were asked to identify the following: • Locations where they feel unsafe • Locations where they feel safe • Places where a roadway improvement could be made Most people who commented live in the eastern part of the region, yet most of the points are shown in the larger, more dense areas of Fayetteville and Bentonville. Overall, 316 people responded to the survey, placing over 600 points on the interactive map. When asked what the major issues are affecting your safety on the roadways in Northwest Arkansas, community members responded that distracted driving, lack of sidewalks and/or continuous sidewalks, and people driving too fast were the top three major issues. When asked how you typically get around Northwest Arkansas, most respondents drove, walked, or rode their bike. When asked how often they bike or walk, 39% walked or biked daily and 76% walked or biked at least once a week. How do you typically get around NWA? 41, OC Walk or bike daily Walk or bike at least once a week 28 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 125 of 524 Interactive Map Comments Pit Survey Comments Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista o• Gravette • Bentoonville CenterV4 00 O • •• E 0 8 ••• 10 0 • 0 fRogers 0 0 • 71� Siloam Springs Springd'ale, • 412 Tontitown O • �. Ozark National Forest • • • • ),Goshen Fayetteville 0 ' 0 L ke Sequoyal � Elkins 7 Prairie Grove �� ,- l � _ l P% 62 71 Lincoln Hobbs State 11 rt Comment Types Improvement Idea o Location where I feel safe • Location where I feel unsafe Parks & Open Space Ozark National Forest ) Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi©� MIN crashes between 2017-2021.• 3. COMMUNITY OUTREACH Page 126 of 524 Public Survey Results 3.0% (34) 1.9% (22) Fear of physical Unfair treatment 3.7% (42) assault and/or in traffic enforcement Speed limits verbal harassment too high 4.0% (46) Inadequate traffic enforcement 6.3% (72) ' Negative interactions with drivers 16.7% (1 S Distracted Di What are the major issues affecting your safety on the roadways in Northwest Arkansas? 30 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 127 of 524 3. COMMUNITY OUTREACH 1 31 Page 128 of 524 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 129 of 524 1 Is bmw Goals and Actions We 4. Goals and Actions Goals The mission of Vision Zero —to Save Lives —requires changing how we design and operate our transportation system. The Safe System Approach is the foundation for this change that prioritizes human life above everything else. Through this Plan's analysis, a High Injury Network has been established based on severity of crashes, roadway characteristics, individual behaviors, and unsafe speeds which highlights corridors where fatal and serious crashes are overrepresented on the regional roadway network. This Plan establishes four goals for addressing roadway safety and implementing Vision Zero in Northwest Arkansas: • 1. Promote a culture that prioritizes people's safety _�_ 2. Reduce conflicts °d between roadway users i 3. Establish policies, practices, and programs that focus on safety at all levels n 4. Slow vehicle speeds 34 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 131 of 524 Actions Achieving goals is not always quick or easy. Effective implementation comes from coordinating various agencies and people to take action focused on safety. The staff of agencies and their partners must have clear tasks. Institutions must have proper incentives and authority to implement their mission. Each goal is supported by actions that are assigned lead agencies and timeframes. By breaking overarching goals into specific actions this Plan builds a comprehensive set of efforts that together will implement Vision Zero and save lives. All actions consider and support the five Safe System Elements. What you'll see here... A. Action items - Each is a discrete, specific effort that can be advanced by a Vision Zero partner. B. Asterisk (*) - Items followed by an astrisk represent systemic safety countermeasus that can be installed on the HIN or proactively jurisdiction -wide where similar conditions exist for crashes to potentially occur. Learn more about these actions on page 51. C. Timeframe - Action items are assigned general timeframes to help action leaders prioritize their efforts. Although the timeframes note a number of years, these timeframes align with the level of effort for completing these actions. I.- r. r Timeframes include: a. Immediate: 0-2 years; b. Short: 2-5 years; or c. Medium -Long: 5-10 years. D. Cost - There is an anticipated annual cost level listed with each step based on the following ranges: a. $ - low (less than $100k) b. $$ - medium (between $100k-$500k) c. $$$ - high ($500k and above) E. Action Leader and Supporting Partners - Each action item is led by an action leader and supported by various agency partners. 1-3 Create guidance for micro sidewalk gap Immediate $ Member Agency, program NWARPC 1-11 Conduct roadway safety audits after every KSI crash Install lighting on arterial roadways, starting 1-18 with the HIN * Short $ - $$ Member Agency ARDOT, MODOT, Medium -Long $$$ Member Agency NWARPC The Actions that follow are understood to be general recommendations. For some Actions, implementation would only occur when and where appropriate based on further analysis, engineering design, and environmental assessment. Other Actions may require policy changes in alignment with other agency goals. Due to staffing, financial, and other constraints, each agency will need to consider how to prioritize implementation of these Actions in support of Vision Zero. 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 35 Page 132 of 524 4r. Promote a culture that prioritizes people's safety 0 c� 1 Ongoing communication along with projects that put safety first are critical to culture change. Culture is more than messaging; it is a set of behaviors and a way of life that values the safety of fellow roadway users by every person during every trip. 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS Page 134 of 524 Action Timeframi Work with media partners to report traffic 1-1 crashes more accurately, to avoid victim Immediate blaming, and report crashes in the context of Vision Zero Enhance training for law enforcement and emergency service personnel responsible 1-2 for crash reporting to address the unique Immediate attributes required to accurately report crash circumstances involving people walking and bicycling 1-3 Create guidance for micro sidewalk gap Immediate program Consider hiring Vision Zero staff dedicated 1-4 to safety projects and programs across Immediate departments Develop branded Vision Zero signage to be 1-5 deployed with Vision Zero infrastructure Immediate projects during construction 1-6 Promote using transit to reduce vehicle trips Immediate Partner with youth organizations to create 1-7 peer -to -peer anti -distraction messaging Short campaigns Promote Transportation Demand Management (TDM) and street design policies that reduce 1 8 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and automobile Short dependence Promote Street Networks and Land Use 1-9 Patterns that Reduce Trip Distances and Short Automobile Dependence Develop a Region -Wide Safety Campaign to 1-10 Share Information with the Community about Short Traffic Safety for All Modes Conduct roadway safety audits after every 1-11 Short KSI crash $ NWARPC Member Agency $ - $$ NWARPC Member Agency $ Member Agency, NWARPC $ - $$ Member Agency NWARPC $ Member Agency NWARPC $ Member Agency, NWARPC $ Member Agency $ - $$ NWARPC Member Agency $ Member Agency NWARPC $ - $$ NWARPC Member Agency $ - $$ Member Agency 38 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 135 of 524 Action Timeframe Cost Action Leader Supporting Partners 1-12 Conduct analysis of inequities within native Short $ NWARPC populations Prioritize Vision Zero investments in areas 1-13 Medium -Long $$ - $$$ Member Agency NWARPC with high social vulnerability Pursue a sustainable funding source for 1-14 transit to increase frequency, reduce travel Medium -Long $$ - $$$ Transit Agency Member Agency time, and expand service area Support DUI/DWI court programs that focus 1-15 Medium -Long $ Member Agency on education and treatment over punishment Encourage large employers of truckers to put 1-16 Medium -Long $ NWARPC speed governors on trucks Install pedestrian -scale lighting along the 1-17 Medium -Long $$ - $$$ Member Agency HIN, especially at trail crossings * Install lighting on arterial roadways, starting 1-18 with the HIN * Medium -Long Conduct ongoing safety campaigns and events with the community - community safety 1-19 advisory team (religious leaders, community Medium -Lang centers, rec centers) 1-20 Analyze growth areas adjacent to HIN for Medium -Long future planned development 1-21 Conduct economic and equity analysis Medium -Long $$$ ARDOT, MODOT, NWARPC Member Agency $ - $$ NWARPC Member Agency $ NWARPC Member Agency $ NWARPC 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 39 Page 136 of 524 Reduce conflicts between roadway users 0 O ' 6 � - j]j1 sC ems' Anticipating human error means providing more space and/or time between users to minimize crash severity if and when it happens. Reducing conflicts is rooted in designing streets that consider how different users move in time and space and using effective strategies and best practices to increase safety. Bentonville, AR 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 41 Page 138 of 524 Action Timeframe 2 1 Implement no right turn on red on the HIN or Short high -volume pedestrian routes 2 2 Implement pedestrian friendly cycle lengths, Short maximum 3' per second of walking speed 2 3 Standardize crosswalk design standards Short including ladder spacing and widths 2 4 Review crosswalk spacings and distance of Short crossings (include pedestrian refuge islands) Implement a sidewalk gap program to fill 2-5 short segments outside of development Short process Identify walking zones for schools, recreation 2-6 centers, and other community identified Short priorities for connectivity 2 7 Assess and install bicycle and pedestrian Short projects to increase separation Install median refuge and pedstrian crossing signals (RRFB or PHB) for mid -block 2 8 crossings, starting with transit stops on the Short HIN Reduce distances between crossings along 2-9 arterials with long distances between Medium -Long signalized intersections 2-10 Implement road diets along the HIN where Medium -Long applicable 2-11 Close gaps in bicycle and pedestrian networks Medium -Long 2 12 Close slip lanes where applicable, starting with the HIN Medium -Long Implement leading pedestrian intervals 2-13 at signalized intersections, specifically on Medium -Long applicable HIN corridors $ ARDOT, Member Agency $ $$ ARDOT, Member Agency $ NWARPC, ARDOT Member Agency $ ARDOT, Member Agency ARDOT, Member Agency ARDOT, Member School Board Agency Member Agency NWARPC, ARDOT $$$ Member Agency, ARDOT $$ - $$$ ARDOT NWARPC, Member Agency $$$ Member Agency ARDOT $$ - $$$ Member Agency $ - $$$ Member Agency $ $$ ARDOT, Member Agency 42 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 139 of 524 Action Timeframe Cost Action Leader Implement pedestrian recall on all permissive ARDOT, Member 2-14 and through signal phases specifically on Medium -Long $ - $$$ Agency applicable HIN corridors 2-15 Install or retrofit countdown pedestrian signal Medium -Long $$ _ $$$ ARDOT, Member heads Agency 2-16 Consider removing permissive left turns Medium -Long $$ ARDOT, Member during active pedestrian signal phase Agency Install sidepath or separated/raised/ protected facilities for bicycle routes on ARDOT, Member 2-17 roadways with speeds above 35 mph in Medium -Long $$$ accordance with FHWA Bikeway Selection Agency Guide Install edge and center line treatment with ARDOT, MODOT, 2-18 bicycle -friendly rumble strips on roadways Medium -Long $$ - $$$ Member Agency with marked shoulders Design and install overpass or tunnel for trail ARDOT, Member 2-19 crossings of roadways with 55 mph+ vehicle Medium -Long $$$ speeds Agency Daylight intersections (removing obstacles 2-20 that impair sight lines) in town centers and in Medium -Long ARDOT, Member $ high -volume pedestrian areas Agency 2 21 Convert front -in angle parking to back -in Medium -Long $$ Member Agency angle or parallel parking in downtown areas 2 22 Provide buffers to sidewalks and sidepaths Medium -Long $$ _ $$$ ARDOT, Member (paint, greenspace, trees, etc.) Agency Install backplates with retroreflective 2 23 boards at all signalized intersections and use Medium -Long $$ _ $$$ Member Agency, reflectors on curves and bridges, starting ARDOT with the HIN Deploy access management strategies to 2 24 combine driveways to adjacent properties Medium -Long $$ _ $$$ ARDOT, Member OR build medians to restrict left turns near Agency driveways and intersections 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 43 Page 140 of 524 Establish policies, practices, and programs that focus on safety at all levels r� r Accompli changes change ai are essen 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 45 Page 142 of 524 ■ 3-1 Adopt Complete Streets policies Immediate $ Establish equitable zero tolerance policies 3-2 and incentive programs to reduce and Immediate eliminate speeding 3-3 Establish program and procedures to conduct Immediate roadway safety audit after KSI crash Create regional and local roadway safety 3-4 education program for practitioners, boards, Immediate and elected officials Develop a Vision Zero dashboard to track performance metrics related to KSI crashes, 3-5 safety projects, completed actions, and Immediate other items that focus on the Safe Systems Approach Publish annual report on crashes and 3-6 other safety metrics for transparency and Immediate accountability 3 7 Create policy to site transit stops closer to Immediate intersections to reduce dart and dash crashes Review and update land use policies and development standards to prioritize the safety 3 $ Immediate of all road users (e.g., block size, crosswalk spacing, access management) Develop a multimodal safety toolbox that 3-9 identifies strategies available to address Short safety concerns for all modes Establish multidisciplinary crash response 3-10 teams to evaluate and address fatal and Short serious injury crashes at crash locations Adopt specifications for incorporating safety 3-11 features in new fleet vehicle purchases and Short retrofit existing vehicles $ NWARPC, Member Agency, ARDOT Member Agency, Police Department Member Agency NWARPC, ARDOT, MODOT NWARPC, Member Agency NWARPC ARDOT, Member Agency NWARPC, ARDOT, MODOT Member Agency Member Agency, NWARPC Transit Agency $ Member Agency NWARPC $ NWARPC $ Member Agency NWARPC, ARDOT, MODOT $ NWARPC Member Agency 46 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 143 of 524 Action Timeframe Advocate for changes to state law to expand 3-12 Short the use of automated safety cameras Conduct crash analysis by type of vehicle due 3-13 to semis and large trucks with trailers on Short roads Conduct analysis of crashes on curves and 3-14 Short hills in region Conduct analysis of crashes related to two- 3-15 way left -turn lanes and access management Short on arterials, especially in commercial areas Analyze crashes within new greenfield 3-16 Short development, housing, and commercial Establish policy to conduct routine walking 3-17 audits to review safety needs for roadway Short projects during scoping phase Address safety through installing proven 3-18 countermeasures during routine roadway Medium -Long maintenance Identify and implement applicable road safety 3-19 Medium -Long countermeasures through routine resurfacing Consider policies that provide alternatives for 3-20 primary access to schools on arterials or HIN Medium -Long for future school sites Analyze before and after crash trends along 3-21 Medium -Lang recent roadway projects Conduct ongoing safety analyses for 3-22 Medium -Lang intersections, specifically along the HIN $ NWARPC Member Agency $ NWARPC ARDOT, Member Agency $ NWARPC ARDOT, Member Agency $ NWARPC ARDOT, Member Agency $ NWARPC Member Agency $ Member Agency $ $$$ ARDOT, MODOT, Member Agency $$ $$$ ARDOT, MODOT, Member Agency $ School Board Member Agency $ NWARPC, ARDOT $ - $$ NWARPC Member Agency 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 47 Page 144 of 524 48 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 145 of 524 5PEED LIMIT oi4r 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 49 Page 146 of 524 ■ 4-1 Post nighttime speed limits * Immediate Develop guidance for equitable traffic calming 4-2 Immediate policies and resources 4-3 Reduce speed limits on local streets to 20 Short mph * 4-4 Conduct a special speed study in local Short jurisdictions for blanket speed limit reduction Engage state legislature to change laws 4-5 Short related to speed limit setting 4-6 Adjust signal timing and signage for speed Short limit on arterials * 4-7 Review speed limits on the HIN Medium -Long 4 8 Tighten turning radii to reduce turning speeds Medium -Long and include truck aprons on freight routes * Pedestrian vulnerability when struck by a vehicle at this speed Data Citation: Tefft, B.C. (2011). Impact Speed and a Pedestrian's Risk of Severe Injury or Death (Technical Report). Washington, D.C.: AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. 20 MPH ♦ Mi IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 111111111111111114ft 3"/° Likelihood of fatality or serious injury $ $$ Member Agency, ARDOT $ NWARPC Member Agency $ Member Agency $$ NWARPC, Member Agency $ $$ NWARPC, Member Agency $ $$ Member Agency, ARDOT $ NWARPC Member Agency, ARDOT $$ Member Agency, ARDOT 30 MPH nn- Pffikii(minfilip If M1111#11111111#1 40% Likelihood of fatality or serious injury 40 no H 111111111111 73% Likelihood of fatality or serious injury 50 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 147 of 524 Proactive Systemic Safety Countermeasures Systemic safety countermeasures can be installed on the HIN or proactively across the region and in member agency jurisdictions where similar conditions exist for crashes to potentially occur. Generally, systemic safety improvements increase safety of all road users. These proactive systemic safety countermeasures will likely require additional funding for implementation and perpetual maintenance for staffing and materials and/ or changing a policy or standard by member agencies or the State to allow the measures to be installed for use in a more widespread manner. These systemic safety countermeasures could also be implemented proactively or established as safety standards as part of other safety projects, such as street reconstruction or as part of new land use development projects. The following highlights several safety countermeasures for proactive, systemic implementation in Northwest Arkansas that were listed in the previous action tables. Proactive and systemic safety countermeasures should be installed on the HIN first, as part of other street projects, in similar conditions where crashes could occur and eventually in a more widespread fashion, as budget and staff resources allow. 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS Page 148 of 524 Highest Priority Projects The following map shows prioritized HIN project corridors for the region. The Top 15 highest scoring projects are listed below. OWest Robinson Avenue (US 412) South Thompson Street to Turner Street (Springdale) ©South Thompson Street (US 71B) West Emma Avenue to Curchill Avenue/West Lakeview Drive (Springdale) ©North Garland Avenue West Lawson Street to West Berry Street (Fayetteville) ONorth Old Missouri Road (Hwy 265) Old Wire Road/Dick Trammel Highway to East Emma Avenue (Springdale) ©Southeast 14th Street (Hwy 102) Phyllis Street to West Hudson Road/Water Tower Road/Bekaert Drive (Bentonville) O• West Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard South School Avenue to West Ozark Trail/East Main Street (Favetteville) ONorth College Avenue (US 71B) East Center Street to East Township Street (Fayetteville) • Q West Sunset Avenue (US 412) Westside Village Street/East Henri de Tonti Boulevard to South Thompson Street (Springdale) OWest Wedington Drive West North Street/North Garland Avenue to MP 16.40 (Fayetteville) 0 South Mountie Boulevard West Oak Street/South 5th Street to West Olrich Street (Bentonville) US 412; AR 59 West extent of US 412;AR 59 to Arkotex Road (Siloam Springs) ®US 412 MP 11.65 to Arkotex Road/US 412; AR 59 (Siloam Springs) ®North Thompson Street (US 71B) West Emma Avenue to West County Line Road (Springdale) 0 West Hudson Road (US 62) Water Tower Road to North 2nd Street (Ropers) ®East Huntsville Avenue Mill Street to East Emma Avenue/Butterfield Coach Road (Springdale) 52 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 149 of 524 High Injury Network Projects High Injury Network Project Corridors \Jars Northwest Arkansas uatewz �� r� r Bella Vista el J .Gravette t 1 Centerton� Bentonville Rogers -, 71 Ic�Siloam Springs ® 0 Springdale ® O own © 412 TontitQ© % 0 Ozark National Forest Zi 1 r- Hobbs State Fayetteville f1ke Sequoyah Par i� J Elkins 7 Prairie Grove \ ro 62 `71 1 Lincoln r� ) Prioritization Tier � High Medium — Low Parks & Winslow Open Space Ozark National Fo. Ozark National For City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all 0 2.5 5 mi recorded crashes between 2017-2021. m • 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 53 Page 150 of 524 Proven Safety Countermeasures Addressing safety in Northwest Arkansas will require the deployment of proven safety countermeasures across the regional transportation network, starting with the HIN. Selection and design of safety countermeasures on every street project in the region should be decided through the lens of the Safe System Approach, so that if a crash occurs it will not result in a fatal or serious injury. Safety countermeasures should not be compromised or simplified during the design or construction phases. These modifications can reduce the level of safety for all road users. The FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasures initiative (PCSi) is a collection of specific design or operational changes to streets that have been proven nationally to improve safety. Safety countermeasures are listed below along with hyperlinks to provide a more detailed description and effectiveness of the full safety countermeasure. Speed Management SPEED Appropriate Speed Limits LIMIT Speed Safety Cameras 7 for All Road Users 0 Bicycle Lanes Pedestrian/Bicyclist 19 Crosswalk Visibility Enhancements © Medians and Pedestrian Pedestrian Hybrid Refuge Islands Beacons Road Diets (Roadway Walkways Configuration) SPEED LIMIT Variable Speed Limits Leading Pedestrian Interval Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons RRFB 54 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 151 of 524 Roadway Departure � Enhanced Delineation for Longitudinal Rumble Strips and Stripes on Median Barriers Horizontal Curves Two -Lane Roads Roadside Design Safety Edge Wider Edge Lines Improvements at Curves I& Intersections /OOOM Dedicated Left- and Backplates with Retro- Corridor Access Right -Turn Lanes at reflective Borders Management Intersections 141111W qu + Systemic Application Reduced Left -Turn of Multiple Low -Cost Roundabouts Countermeasures Conflict Intersections at Stop -Controlled Intersections Yellow Change Intervals 7 Crosscutting a.A_ Pavement Friction Lighting 01-N_ Local Road Safety Plans Management Road Safety Audit 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 55 Page 152 of 524 Taking Action The NWA Vision Zero Plan is a commitment along with an initial set of goals and actions to reach the vision of zero fatal and serious injuries on roadways across Northwest Arkansas. However, Vision Zero must be more than a document; it must be embraced, discussed, emphasized, and reinforced every day. This Plan must be a living document that unites people across agencies, departments, organizations, and the region to prioritize roadway safety. Performance Measures NWARPC and member agencies will need to monitor the success of individual Vision Zero actions related to each goal. Evaluation and regular reporting are essential for the data -driven approach to Vision Zero. There must be accountability to the commitment of eliminating traffic deaths and severe injuries. If certain actions are not successful, not moving fast enough, or not working for another reason, the region and member agencies should assess and modify actions as needed. However, it is critical that monitoring does not reduce or minimize the focus on the ultimate performance measure of eliminating fatal and serious injuries on all roadways in Northwest Arkansas by 2038. Actions such as the data dashboard and annual reporting can track progress and provide insight into a number of metrics, including but not limited to: - '7- • Crashes involving bicycles and pedestrians • Crashes resulting from unsafe speeds • Crashes in rural versus urbanized areas • Crashes occurring on roadways in Historically Disadvantaged Communities, Areas of Persistent Poverty, and/or Socially Vulnerable communities. Sharing Responsibility for Vision Zero To carry out everything presented in this Vision Zero Plan and to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries on all roadways across Northwest Arkansas by 2038, everyone —from elected officials and municipal staff to local employers and residents of all ages and abilities —will need to take action. We all have a personal responsibility to make the right choices and to communicate the importance of why roadway safety matters —making the region's efforts even more effective. a., ! ., ,.• - ., ors-�_ i 56 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN 4. GOALS AND ACTIONS 1 57 Page 154 of 524 4., Acknowledgements The creation of the NWA Vision Zero Plan would not have been possible without the dedication of numerous NWARPC staff, municipal staff from member agencies, elected officials, and community partners. This effort was led by the NWARPC, in partnership with the Regional Working Group. NORTHWEST ARKANSAS REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION Elizabeth Bowen Tim Conklin MEMBER AGENCIES ADVOCACY ORGANIZATIONS Trailblazers Bentonville Moves Bentonville Coalition Runway Group Walton Family Foundation Bentonville Traffic Safety Committee Fayetteville Traffic Safety Committee STATEWIDE AGENCIES ARDOT MODOT PROJECT CONSULTANT Toole Design Group NWA Regional VISION ZERO Safety Action Plan NWA Regional VISION ZERO Safety Action Plan Appendices THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 158 of 524 Contents Appendix A: Crash Maps Report......................................................................5 CrashData Sources.................................................................................................................... 5 Killed and Seriously Injured Crash Maps............................................................................. 5 Sliding Windows Analysis Methodology.............................................................................11 Development of High Injury Network..................................................................................16 Safer Streets Priority Finder (SSPF) Tool..........................................................................22 Appendix B: Descriptive Crash Analysis.......................................................27 Overview of State Crash Report Forms and Guidance...................................................27 Overview of Data Resources..................................................................................................28 Descriptive Crash Analysis Methodology & Data Sources............................................28 Summaryof Key Findings......................................................................................................33 CrashTrends...............................................................................................................................35 CrashCausation.........................................................................................................................37 PartiesInvolved.........................................................................................................................44 Behaviors.....................................................................................................................................45 Roadway Characteristics........................................................................................................47 Environmental Characteristics..............................................................................................57 Appendix A - Crash Code Value Consolidations................................................................64 Appendix C: Equity Analysis Framework......................................................69 Introduction.................................................................................................................................69 Definitions....................................................................................................................................69 EquityAnalyses..........................................................................................................................69 AdvancingEquity.......................................................................................................................76 Recommendations.................................................................................................................... 78 Appendix D: Project Prioritization.................................................................79 Project Prioritization Framework.........................................................................................79 Northwest Arkansas Regional Priority Location -Specific Projects ............................82 Disclaimer: Information contained in this document is for planning purposes and should not be used for final design of any project. All results, recommendations, concept drawings, cost opinions, and commentary contained herein are based on limited data and information and on existing conditions that are subject to change. Further analysis and engineering design are necessary prior to implementing any of the recommendations contained herein. Geographic and mapping information presented in this document is for informational purposes only, and is not suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Data products presented herein are based on information collected at the time of preparation. Toole Design Group, LLC makes no warranties, expressed or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, or suitability of the underlying source data used in this analysis, or recommendations and conclusions derived therefrom. Federal law 23 United States Code Section 409 governs use of the data in this report. Under this law, data maintained for purposes of evaluating potential highway safety enhancements "...shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a federal or state court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data" If you should attempt to use the information in this report in an action for damages against City, the State of Washington, or any other jurisdiction involved in the locations mentioned in the data, these entities expressly reserve the right, under Section 409, to object to the use of the data, including any opinions drawn from the data. A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 3 Page 159 of 524 List of Abbreviations AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic ACAT Arkansas Crash Analytics Tool ACS American Community Survey AR Arkansas ARDOT Arkansas Department of Transportation DUI Driving Under the Influence FHWA Federal Highway Administration GTFS General Transit Feed Specification HIN High Injury Network KABCO Injury Severity Scale (Arkansas): K: Fatal injury A: Suspected serious injury B: Suspected minor injury C: Possible injury 0: No apparent injury Injury Severity Scale (Missouri) 1: Fatal 2: Disabling 3: Evident - Not Disabling 4: Probable - Not Apparent 5: None Apparent KA/KSI Killed or Serious Injury LRS Linear Referencing System MO Missouri MODOT Missouri Department of Transportation NWA Northwest Arkansas NWARPC Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission OSM OpenStreetMap STARS Missouri Statewide Traffic Accident Records System VRU Vulnerable Road User includes Pedestrian, Bicyclists, or Motorcyclist VPD Vehicles Per Day 4 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 160 of 524 Appendix A: Crash Maps Report Toole Design has prepared the following High Injury Network (HIN) and Sliding Windows Analysis maps for the Northwest Arkansas (NWA) Region as part of the Regional Vision Zero Action Plan. The following memo describes our crash data sources, methodologies, and thresholds for development of the maps created. Crash Data Sources Maps are based on Arkansas Department of Transportation (ADOT) Arkansas Crash Analysis Tool (ACAT) and the Missouri Department of Transportation (MDOT)Statewide Traffic Accident Records System (STARS) for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021.' 2 Killed and Seriously Injured Crash Maps The Safe System Approach focuses identifying and addressing the factors that lead to fatal or suspected serious injury (KA) crashes, similar conditions where they could occur, or proactive and system -wide safety solutions before a crash occurs. This report includes maps highlighting where KA crashes have occurred for each mode as well as non-KA crash locations. Areas with high concentrations of KA crashes will become the basis of the HIN. 1 https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/l911f992cabc484a98f64e7c36c2b262/ 2 https://www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/MSHPWeb/SAC/stars_index.html A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 5 Page 161 of 524 Figure 1: Pedestrian Crash Map I= �71 • Bella Vista ^ ~ T Gravette)� Pedestrian Crash Map Northwest Arkansas Centertoni• •_�'%. Be6tonville Siloam Springs • =����� 412'- r , , I Ozark National Forest 7 Prairie Grove 62 Lincoln Rogers' Hobbs State Springdale • :�M Tontitown • t~ t • fSequoyah n yetteville • Par fl , Ozark National Forest Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m �� • Fatal or Serious Injury Crash Other Reported Crash Parks & Open Space Ozark National Fores City Boundaries 6 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 162 of 524 Figure 2: Figure 2: Bicycle Crash Map I= (71 . Gravette Bella Vista ^� Bicycle Crash Map Northwest Arkansas ' 411. �,-IrQe6ntonville Centerton• • Siloam Springs 412 t- 1. Ozark National Forest 7 Prairie Grove 62 Lincoln Hobbs State Springdale• Tontitown •- • ,r 1 M Goshen Fayetteville Lake Sequoyah Elkin . Ozark National Forest Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m �� • Fatal or Serious Injury Crash Other Reported • Crash Parks & Open Space Ozark NatioJForres City Boundaries all '• A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 7 Page 163 of 524 Figure 3: Motorcycle Crash Map 71 ja Pineville —Ja Motorcycle Crash Map -- Z Northwest Arkansas - .- / •• • • Gat ewaY " Bella Vista• • ' • • • Devi e6ro • • .s • • •• GraY ette • • • • • e Bentonville t ' Centertoll •N • _ to • • •Rogers:•, J .� • Hob4s State Pa 71� • • Siloam Springs • • �� • ' �•a'' Springdale,'412 • • • J Tontitown• _ • % • Ozark National Forest r ins• = • . 1b �. • • r '10. • • JV Goshen Fayetteville] , • t .• like Sequoyah Par • • • . • Elkins t^ Prairie Grove y • r. 62 71 Lincoln � • • • Fatal or Serious ' Injury Crash • Other Reported Crash • Parks & window Open Space Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data • and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi A crashes between 2017 2021. 8 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 164 of 524 Figure 4: Motor Vehicle Crash Map Pineville 710,Motor Vehicle Crash Map - Jane Northwest Arkansas �. ••. .-•' .:' r•..r—� ' Gateways � •' ••Bella .Vistar'r �'+� � � � r � evil E ebro Gravelle — •' ..?• : _-• .- :: '4 ''�.,. r• `Bentonville :� .• + Centerton .46 •1 f �. (Rogers t r ". %. •• '-"•�.:,+i • yr't �t, ��•' • . •flCbi;sStkePa ' ' • siloaam Springs' ' ~. •..� • , •� • Springdale' •: - t 412 •� •• Tontitown i' .• jJl .Ozark National Forest !' '' . t , •.� • _ •. `+• 't L S •!' `' . "Goshen'. • . • Fayetteville: - ke SVquoyah ar .•:- it >!'' f Elkins `�--•!� : ! • Prairie G ve• _ • f �.+ -� t». • rM 62 r 71 t : .• •incolnw ' •. .1i r ;e • ? # - • . t • Fatal or Serious •• r • • �- • • Injury Crash Other Reported • ! Crash Parks & Winslow• Open Space Ozark National Forest , Ozark National Fores City Boundaries I` Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi / A crashes between 2017-2021. ■��11• • �y • ■ � .!,' A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 9 Page 165 of 524 Figure 5: All Modes Crash Map Pine ille 71 All Modes Crash Map Jane . Northwest Arkansas -. •.. .�-' f r...- GatewaY��� ••Bella Vista+` evi e ro ' ram. Gr�a^vette .� ', .� } • • , �• •• ?. � __• ._ • � ',, -a• *• iBentonville �• M Cent 't—n MAI t ' f AR ers r ; ti � •.'' •HbbbsStatePa . • 71 • • tilm"Springs' f , • • ••• -• • , ..� Springdale' _'• ;. •!'' 412 •• s Tontitown i' •' A`•••,Ozark National Forest !'`, •� :} •�>. �_y •• 1M C. t •': *."Goshen,', Fayetteville - ke Svquoya60ar • •:- jr .. �" - i • , Elkins Prairie Grove• 62 71 •' •'�1Lincoln r y r •� 1 r • i. ? ; ti # - ! 1. • Fatal or Serious '• r ,f+ �� • • Injury Crash Other Reported • l Crash Parks & WinsloW� Open Space Ozark National ForesA , Ozark National Fores City Boundaries I` Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi / A crashes between 2017-2021. ■��11• • �y • ■ � .!,' 10 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 166 of 524 Sliding Windows Analysis Methodology A sliding window analysis helps understand crashes throughout a transportation network and identify segments with the highest crash density and crash severity. For the NWA Region, the analysis was done by determining the number and severity of crashes in a one -mile window on a roadway and shifting that window along the roadway 1/10 of a mile at a time. In this approach, a virtual "window" is moved along each corridor, counting the number of crashes by density and severity by mode that occurred within each successive one -mile segment. The one -mile moving window slides along a corridor scoring crashes, only stopping for a road name or functional road classification change. Both intersection and segment crashes were included in this evaluation, as the focus is on overall corridor conditions. An example of a Sliding Windows analysis is shown below. Figure 6: Example of the Sliding Windows analysis. Source: Toole Design. • Crashes Sliding windows The Sliding Windows score is calculated by multiplying the number of Fatal Injury/Fatal (K/1) and Suspected Serious Injury/ Disabling (A/2) crashes by 3 and multiplying the number of Suspected Minor Injury/ Evident -Not Disabling crashes (B/3) by 1, and not including Possible Injury/ Probable -Not Apparent (C/4), and No Apparent Injury/ None Apparent (0/5) crashes. Once the weights are established and applied to the crashes, the number of crashes is aggregated along a corridor while incorporating the crash severity weighting. Lower injury crashes (C/4 and 0/5) crashes were excluded from the motor vehicle Sliding Windows analysis but included for bicycle, pedestrian, and motorcycle Sliding Windows due to the potential for a crash to result in an injury when a vulnerable roadway user is involved. Each segment is scored based on this methodology and those Sliding Windows scores are shown in the Sliding Windows maps for pedestrian, bicyclists, motorcyclists, and motor vehicles accordingly. For instance, with KA crashes weighted at three times minor injury crashes, a corridor with two KA crashes will have the same weighted total as a corridor with six minor injury crashes. A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 11 Page 167 of 524 Figure 7: Pedestrian Sliding Windows Analysis Pedestrian Sliding Windows Analysis Northwest Arkansas Gateway ( Bella Vista Devi e6ro Gravette l� l \ Centerton�— I Bentonville — Rogers l Hobbs State Pa 71 Siloam Springs t f Springdale. l 412 Tontitown 1 Ozark National Forest t� Goshen ;00 ;- �r Fayetteville _ ri L eke Sequoyah Par Pedestrian Score Elkins 1 - 2 is 7 Prairie Grove / 2-4 �162 71 —4-7 Lincoln — 7 - 1 1 I � i 11 - 14 Parks & Open Space City Boundaries Note: Higher sliding Winslow window scores indicate higher reported crashes Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores and injury severity. t Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi A crashes between 2017-2021. m ��11 • 12 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 168 of 524 Figure 8: Bicycle Sliding Windows Analysis Bicycle Sliding Windows Analysis Northwest Arkansas Gateway � t Bella Vista A ^ � Devi e6ro Gravette r l Centeiton Bentonville r I Rogers Hobbs State Pa —.� iloam Springs Springdale• 'I 41 Tontitown I Ozark National Forest tr I Goshen rFayetteville L ke Sequoyah Par J, Bicycle Score Elkin. 0-1 fl 7 Prairie Grove / , 1 - 2 P6 62 71 —2-3 Lincoln — 3-5 �5-8 Parks & Open Space City Boundaries Note: Higher sliding Winslow window scores indicate Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores higher reported crashes and injury severity. Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi A crashes between 2017-2021. m ��11 • A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 13 Page 169 of 524 Figure 9: Motorcycle Sliding Window Analysis 71 Pineville Motorcycle Sliding Windows Analysis Jane Northwest Arkansas 1 Gateway is � T f Bell J�a Devi ebr\o, Gravette �\ Centerton Bentonville 1 Rogers'� Hobbs State Pa C71 Siloam Springs Springdale) J 412 -Tontitown Ozark National Forest J t L i Goshen 1 Fayetteville Like Sequoyah Par Motorcycle Score l , 1 (� Elkn, . 1 - 2 1 Prairie Grove 2 4 r. 62 71 S — 4-7 Cincoln� ` �- —7-13 I � 1 — 13-21 Parks & ..` Open Space City Boundaries 1 Note: Higher sliding 1 S Winslow window scores indicate Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores higher reported crashes and injury severity. Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 ml A crashes between 2017-2021. m : - • ��.�� T • 14 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 170 of 524 Figure 10: Motor Vehicle Sliding Windows Analysis 71 Motor Vehicle Sliding Windows Analysis Jane Northwest Arkansas GatewarJ S �Bella'Vista evi ebro Gravette 1 J � l r• Z. t�,` ry Centerton T Bentonville L Rogers H to Pa f 71 -Siloam Springs Springdale �412 Tontitown Ozark National Forest G/o(sh_en�� Fayetteville r ke Se4uoya ar F ' Motor Vehicle Elkins Score Prairie Grove 1 - 3 4 r.62 71 3 8 �Lincol I 8 - 17 — 17-32 s 1 —32-66 Parks & Open Space I Z City Boundaries J 1 ' Note: Higher sliding I Winslow window scores indicate Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores higher reported crashes and injury severity. Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi A crashes between 2017-2021. A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 15 Page 171 of 524 Development of High Injury Network The development of a HIN is a key element of a safety plan to help prioritize where historic crashes have occurred at the greatest density and severity. The HIN development process involves developing crash density estimates along street corridors throughout the region, weighing them by crash severity, and then identifying the highest crash risk sections for each mode individually from the Sliding Windows analysis. HIN corridors are identified by applying a one -mile moving window aggregation to the street network. High Injury Network Process Development of the HIN should emphasize that the key goal of Vision Zero is elimination of fatal and serious injury crashes, and therefore the more severe crashes count for more in the analysis but still including lesser injury crashes in the analysis. The combination of crash injury severity and the density of all crashes from the Sliding Windows analysis is how the HIN maps, for each mode and all modes combined, were developed using the following steps: 1. Map the Sliding Windows analysis results for each mode (pedestrian, bicycle, motorcycle, and motor vehicle) individually 2. For each mode, determine the threshold of the Sliding Windows output required to be included in the HIN. This step eliminates streets that have a lower crash density thereby prioritizing streets that have higher crash severities and frequencies. 3. Review false -positive segments that have a high crash score due to a single intersection crash but do not have any other crashes along the corridor. High Injury Network Thresholds The goal of setting higher HIN Sliding Windows score threshold is to settle on the Sliding Windows score for each mode independently that will identify key corridors where safety risk is highest based on crash density and injury severity to help agencies prioritize where safety improvements should be made first. A segment that meets or exceeds the Sliding Windows scores for each mode that included in the HIN for the NWA region are listed below: ■ Pedestrian:4 ■ Bicycle:4 ■ Motorcycle: 7 ■ Motor Vehicle: 15 The weighted crash score thresholds for areas included in the HIN do not exactly follow the weighted crash score ranges from the Sliding Windows, as the HIN is a compilation of the highest weighted crash scores. Manual Refinements The HIN development process relies on historical crash data, which is imperfect and incomplete because not every crash is reported. As such, this process is both and art and a science. Key areas to manually review in the HIN revision process include areas where a street name or functional road classification changes, but the crash density or injury severity risk seem higher or lower. Manual refinements to the HIN maps should be minimized and really account for key context changes that cannot be captured in a data driven process. For example, an area where the Sliding Window continues but the road context changes drastically. The following corridor extents were manually adjusted based on review by the project team to account for unique street contexts the automated Sliding Windows Analysis did not account for. The following corridors were manually adjusted based on the following reasons: 1. Segment along West Huntsville Avenue originally terminated at the end of the curve. This segment was manually extended through the White Road curve to fill a small gap between high crash areas. 2. Segment along West Don Tyson Parkway has been manually extended through the curve to account for the existing divided roadway. 3. Segment along East Wagon Wheel Road was manually extended through the ramp entrance to 1-49. This extension increased the overall motor vehicle Sliding Window score above the threshold of 15. 4. Segment along South 26th Street was manually shortened to remove the portion of the segment north of West Laurel Avenue where few crashes have occurred and no KSI crashes. 5. Segment along West Hudson Road was manually added to the HIN due to the number of crashes and contiguity with segments of Highway 62 that are on the HIN. 16 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 172 of 524 Figure 11: All Modes High Injury Network All Modes High Injury Network i Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista ^� t Gravette.�` Rontonville Centerton 1 Rogers r Siloam Springs Springdale, 412 Tontitown Ozark National Forest Fayetteville 7 Prairie Grove 62 Lincoln—/ Ozark National Forest T71? \ -�rx 12 1 Hobbs State 1 Goshen . Lake Sequoyah Elkin . fl Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m Ozark National Fores A� High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 17 Page 173 of 524 Figure 12: Pedestrian High Injury Network 71 Gravette Pedestrian High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista ^ ~ T Centeno -'` Beritonville/ l i Rogers ; Hobbs State 71� r Siloam Springs Springdale, 412 Tontitown Ozark National Forest tr Goshen Fayetteville _� Ltke Sequoyah Elkin t Prairie Grove i 62 71 Lincoln Ozark National Forest ) j Ozark National Fores Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data ■ and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi qlag crashes between 2017-2021. m h 18 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN o High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries Page 174 of 524 Figure 13: Bicycle High Injury Network Pineville 71 1 Bicycle High Injury Network Jane Northwest Arkansas Gateway Bella Vista ^ ~ T Devl ebro Gravette l Centerton 1 Bentonville \ _ -- A I Rogers'- Hobbs State Pa _ 71 Siloam Springs , ' Springdale• 412'-- Tontitown Ozark National Forest tr — � Goshen Fayetteville Lake Sequoyah Par 7 Prairie Grove �1�l 62 71 i Lncoln Ozark National Forest J Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data 0 2.5 5 mi and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021. m o High Injur Network Parks & Open Space Ozark National Fores City Boundaries A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 19 Page 175 of 524 Figure 14: Motorcycle High Injury Network '71 Motorcycle High Injury Network Jane Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista Gravette �) _ Centerton '%- _ ',.,Bentonville 1 Rogers�� � Hobbs State 711 Siloam Springs , Ito Springdale, 412 Tontitown Ozark National Forest Goshen Fayetteville L1ke Sequoyah Par i Elkin . Prairie Grove01* j 62 71 Lincoln o High Injury Network Parks & Winslow Open Space Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT dataNOW and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi A crashes between 2017-2021. m : - • ��.�� 1 • 20 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 176 of 524 Figure 15: Motor Vehicle High Injury Network ■ Pineville 71 Motor Vehicle High Injury Network Jane Northwest Arkansas Gateway Bella Vista 0 ebro Gravette Centerton� / Bentonville ' o :ao � Rogers 4 Hobbs State Pa 0 71} Siloam Springs `l Springdale 412 0 Ozark National Forest ' - Goshen Fayetteville Lake Sequoyah Par 7 Prairie Grove �1� 62 71 i Lncoln Ozark National Forest J Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m o High Injury Network Parks & Open Space Ozark National Fores City Boundaries TV. - -. . . A MR, • � lis ' • A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 21 Page 177 of 524 Safer Streets Priority Finder (SSPF) Tool SSPF Tool Background Toole Design, in collaboration with the City of New Orleans, University of New Orleans Transportation Institute, and New Orleans Regional Transit Authority, developed the SSPF tool I The SSPF Tool is a free, interactive, open -source resource available at the national scale that can help transportation practitioners identify a street network that is similar to a HIN for bicyclists and pedestrians. The network goes further than a typical HIN by not only taking into consideration areas where a disproportionate share of fatal and serious injury crashes have already occurred, but also areas that have factors present that are likely to contribute to future risk. Figure 16: Safer Streets Priority Finder Tool Methodology. Source: Toole Design Group. 2 3 https://www.saferstreetspriorityfinder.com/tool/ 22 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 178 of 524 The SSPF produces two main outputs: • Sliding Windows Analysis: How the HIN maps were developed for this report in the previous section. • Safer Street Model: Estimated future societal costs forbicycle and pedestrian crashes only. The following sections will provide high level summaries for each analytical methodology and the results from each analysis. For more detailed information on the methodologies for each analysis, please see SSPF Technical Report. Safer Streets Model The Safer Streets Model brings the segmented road network window segments, produced in the Sliding Windows Analysis, into a Bayesian statistical framework to estimate crash risk throughout the system. This framework incorporates external information about how many crashes might be expected, called a Bayesian prior, alongside the crash history. The model estimates crash risk rates per mile for each road segment for pedestrian and bicyclists based on injury severity. These values are then converted to societal crash cost estimates based on the costs assigned to each crash severity.' The Safer Streets Model is only available to model bicycle and pedestrian crashes. The model cannot estimate or model future motor vehicle or motorcycle crashes at this time. 4 https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/docs/fhwasa17071.pdf Key Output Corridors with highest potential risk for bicycle and pedestrian crashes to occur in the future using both historical crash data and a statistical crash cost model based on functional road classification. The values used to assign corridors were: ■ One-year costs for pedestrians: $100,000 ■ One-year costs for bicyclists: $25,000 ■ Pedestrian Safer Streets Model Rankings o High: $600,000 + o Moderate -High: $20,0000 - $60,0000 o Moderate: $50,000 - $20,0000 o Moderate -Low: $25,000 - $50,000 o Low: $0 - $25,000 • Bicycle Safer Streets Model Rankings o High: $30,000 + o Moderate -High: $15,000 - $30,000 o Moderate: $5,000 - $15,000 o Moderate -Low: $2,500 - $5,000 o Low: $0 - $2,500 A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 23 Page 179 of 524 Figure 17: Pedestrian Safer Streets Model Pedestrian Safer Streets Model Map Nli Northwest Arkansas Bella ista Gravette Centertor T Siloam Springs Devils Rogers' . t Hobbs State 71' ' Springdale• 41D- Tontitown 711' Ozark National Forest I r ,_----,Goshen �—_- Safer Streets Model Rankings Fayetteville, Lake Sequoyah Par High Y Moderate-High Moderate 7 � t Prairie Grove r Moderate -LOW ,. 62 - ` ? 71 Lincoln ' Low --- Parks & J, Open Space City Boundaries f Note: Safer Streets Model uses a Bayesian Priors Network Models to show future potential crash risk using societal crash costs per FHWA Crash Costs for Winslow Highway Safety Analysis Ozark National Forest Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m Ozark National Fores and natwnalcrash rates per mile for the functional class. 24 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 180 of 524 Figure 18: Bicycle Safer Streets Model Bicycle Safer Streets Model Map Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista_�l Gravette T� t � Centertan BentonVIII r � � . Rogers Siloam Springs _I „ 1 Springdale• kk— t 412 Tontitown za Natiolfar4est Fayetteville Prairie Grove t E �._. ►+ 62 71 _--l-incoln7-' Ozark National Forest Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m t — ay_1U A Devils Eye iAe v I S-1 Hobbs State GoshenA Safer Streets kr Model Rankings M'b o — High — Moderate -High Elkins Moderate Moderate -Low Low Parks & Open Space City Boundaries Note: Safer Streets Model uses a Bayesian Priors Network Models to show future potential crash risk using societal crash costs per FHWA Crash Costs for Highway Safety Analysis Ozark National Fores and national crash rates per mile for the functional class. q., ft M-N, . * - . . .. W A: CRASH MAPS REPORT 1 25 Page 181 of 524 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 182 of 524 Appendix B: Descriptive Crash Analysis This document summarizes the results of the descriptive crash analysis conducted for the Northwest Arkansas Region Planning Commission (NWARPC) as part of the Vision Zero Plan development process. The focus of Vision Zero and the Safe System Approach is on eliminating deaths and serious injury crashes on roadways. Thus, this descriptive crash analysis aims to systematically analyze killed and serious injury (KSI) crashes —using the injury classification codes KA—as well as all reported crashes that have occurred throughout the region. The descriptive analysis uses pivot tables to provide an overview of factors and contexts that contribute to reported crashes on all roads in Northwest Arkansas from January 1st, 2017 through December 31st, 2021. During this period, the United States experienced a variety of changes due to the global COVID-19 pandemic. While traffic volumes reduced during this time, fatal and serious crashes on roadways across the country and in Northwest Arkansas were sustained and, in many places, increased. This analysis does not specifically call out crashes during this pandemic era, rather, it focuses on a variety of characteristics of the region's roadways that may impact fatal and severe injury crashes. The descriptive crash analysis methodology consisted of data collection, consolidation, processing, and contextualization based on available crash and roadway attribute data in Arkansas and Missouri to develop the results shown. A series of high-level descriptive summary tables capture relationships between region -wide crash data, infrastructure data, and contextual variables. These tables explore overall crash trends and patterns that can be used to guide the selection of variables warranting deeper analysis, new roadway behavior programs, policy changes, or the selection of safety countermeasures for project development. The Descriptive Crash Analysis Report information provides engineers and decision makers with more information to design roads that respond to historical crashes and determine where similar crash conditions exist across the system. This Report also provides information on education, engagement, and enforcement initiatives that can improve road user behaviors as well as policy changes that increase safety. The Descriptive Crash Analysis Report relates to both the Crash Maps Report and the Equity Analysis Framework. These reports should be used to inform actions and project prioritization in the Vision Zero Plan. Overview of State Crash Report Forms and Guidance Police officers complete the Arkansas or Missouri Vehicle Accident Report Forms (Report Forms) when investigating a roadway crash"The Report Forms allow responding officers to document information about the involved parties, location, crash factors, as well as the vehicle types involved in the crash. The Arkansas Motor Vehicle Crash Report Instructions Guide and the Missouri Uniform Crash Report Preparation Manual (the Guides) provide police officers with guidance on completing the Report Forms.1A Aside from providing instructions, these Guides stress the importance of accurate crash data reporting and usually note the time in which injury severity needs to be tracked and updated following a crash. The Report Forms and Guides outline how crash details are collected and guide accuracy of information collected that informs changes to projects, programs, and policies that can improve roadway safety. 1 https://www.dfa.arkansas.gov/images/uploads/driverServicesOffice/SRl21.odf 2 httos://dor.mo.gov/forms/1140.pdf 3 https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/arcrash report instruction manual 1 2007.pdf 4 httos://www.mshp.dos.missouri.gov/MSHPWeb/PatroLDivisions/PRD/documents/SHP-2%2OSTARS%2OStatewide%20ManuaL.odf APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 27 Page 183 of 524 Overview of Data Resources Descriptive Crash Analysis The Arkansas Crash Analytics Tool (ACAT) and the Missouri Methodology & Data Sources Statewide Traffic Accident Records System (STARS) are online interactive mapping tools and data portals that This section describes the steps taken to assemble the allow users to access, query, and summarize crash data working datasets (see Table 1), as well as the analytical in the States of Arkansas and Missouri.',' Users can use framework used to develop pivot table results for all filters, such as geography or crash severity, to refine reported crashes using the same study period as the Crash their queries and summarize the data through a variety Maps Report, from 2017 through 2021. The memo presents of report types and chart types. descriptive statistics of historical crashes stratified by various attributes, such as injury severity, environmental conditions, behaviors, and movement types. Table 1: Data Sources �. ' AR ACAT Crashes_FC Crash Data • rpc_crashes_2017_2021 MO STARS • sequence —of —events • contributing —circumstances • Driver AR ACAT DriverAction Crash Driver Data • DriverCondition MO STARS driver_passenger_nwarpc_2017_2021 AR ACAT Passenger Crash Passenger Data MO STARS driver_passenger_nwarpc_2017_2021 AR ACAT Vehicle Crash Vehicle Data MO STARS vehicle_nwarpc_2017_2021 • NonMotorist AR ACAT Crash Non -Motorist Data • NonMotoristActionAtTimeOf Crash MO STARS N/A — part of drive r_passenger_nwarpc_2017_2021 Centerline Both OSM ways Intersection Both OSM N/A - derived from OSM ways AR ARDOT SIR_TIS/Road_Inventory_Vector_Tiles/Functional Class Functional Class MO MOOT SS_PAVEMENT_2021 SIR_TIS/Road_Inventory_OnSystem/Roadlnventory SemiLive AR Lane Count ARDOT - OnSystem MO MODOT SS_PAVEMENT_2021 AR ARDOT SIR_TIS/Combined_Traffic_Data/Average Daily Traffic Stations AADT MO MODOT SS—PAVEMENT-2021 Speed Traffic Control Transit Stops AR ARDOT TPP_GISMapping/Linear_Speed_Zones/Linear Speed Zones MO MODOT SS—PAVEMENT-2021 MO MODOT SS_INTERSECTION_2021 Both OSM nodes Ozark Regional Transit Both and Razorback Transit General Transit Feed Specification (GYPS) data feed Population by Age Both US Census Bureau 2021 ACS 5-year estimates, Table B01001 Urban/Rural Both US Census Bureau 2020 Decennial Census Urbanized Areas and Urban Clusters 5 https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/191lf992cabc484a98f64e7c36c2b262/ 6 https://www.mshp.dps.missouri.gov/TR15Map/index.*sp 28 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 184 of 524 Geocoding Crash Data Geocoded crash data is critical to understanding crash patterns. Crash Report Forms completed by the police are the primary source for crash data. While this data only captures crashes reported to authorities, it is often the most complete data source and provides necessary details for informing engineering treatments, such as the location of the crash and dynamics between the primary parties involved in the crash. Crash data used in this analysis were collected using the Arkansas and Missouri ACAT and STARS portals and processed by the consultant team. Crash data were filtered to include all crashes that occurred within the NWARPC boundary from 2017 through 2021 for all modes. The crash data used in this analysis was reviewed and assessed by the consultant team for accuracy and consistency. It is important to note for this analysis, vulnerable road users include pedestrians, bicyclists, or motorcyclists. The consultant team coded crashes based on the most vulnerable road user involved, using the following order: pedestrian, bicycle, motorcycle, and motor vehicle. For example, a crash between a motor vehicle and pedestrian involves both of those modes, but since the pedestrian is the more vulnerable road user, the overall crash would be coded as pedestrian. When a crash occurred between users of the same mode, or if there was only mode type involved in a crash, the crash was coded to that mode. For example, a crash between two motor vehicles, or a crash of just a single motor vehicle would both be coded as a motor vehicle crash. Crashes that occurred on the Interstate Highway System are sometimes excluded from crash analysis. Some of these reasons include different crash dynamics and safety countermeasures that are applicable for Interstate highways and less so with local roads, complex jurisdictional coordination required for addressing crash risk along the Interstate, and often enforcement efforts are used as a primary safety countermeasure. This crash analysis includes all crashes on all road types regardless of roadway ownership within the NWARPC to look at all roads as one system through the Safe System Approach.' However, coordination for improvements may need to be coordinated with the entity that owns and maintains the right-of-way. Spatial Data Consolidation A full centerline dataset that covered both the Arkansas (AR) and Missouri (MO) portions of the NWA region was not available. There were centerline datasets available from Arkansas Department of Transportation (ARDOT) and Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT), however their geometries did not align at the border, nor did they use consistent conventions for street names, both of which would cause issues in the HIN analysis. Instead of attempting to rectify these differences, it was decided to use OpenStreetMap (OSM) data and conflate other attributes onto that. This was because the OSM dataset was consistent across the NWA region, and spatially aligned well with the other ARDOT and MoDOT datasets, giving the conflation process a higher degree of accuracy. Like centerlines, a full intersection dataset for both the AR and MO portions of NWA region was not available. There was an intersection dataset from MoDOT, but not one from ARDOT. However, since the analysis used a topologically valid centerline network from OSM, it was decided to create a new intersection dataset based on this road network, and then assign the relevant information from other datasets to this new intersection layer. Intersection points were created at all segments start/end points. Then to filter out non -intersections (i.e., dead ends and breaks along a single segment due to an attribute change), only points with three or more legs were considered to be valid intersections. Functional Classification Functional classification data from ARDOT and MoDOT was available for a subset of the road network for both the AR and MO portions of the NWARPC region. Values between the two datasets were not the same in terms of spelling and grouping', so they were first consolidated into a single list. Then, these known values were conflated onto the OSM network using spatial matching. After known values were conflated, gaps were filled using known data by matching the known 7 https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/zerodeaths/docs/FHWA SafeSystem Brochure V9 508 200717.pdf 8 For example, "Interstate Highway" might be used in one dataset while "IH" is used in another dataset. They mean the same thing but will be treated as different things when we use programming scripts to perform the analysis. Make them consistent is necessary to make sure our analysis results are accurate. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 29 Page 185 of 524 and unknown segments based on the OSM name, and the OSM highway tags (the OSM version of functional classification). Finally, for anything that remained unknown, functional classification was determined based on the most common functional classification type per OSM highway tag. Lane Count Lane count data from ARDOT and MoDOT was available for a subset of the MPO road network. The MoDOT lane data was provided as directional linework with values for each direction, which were first combined into a single dataset. These two datasets were then conflated onto the OSM network. Since lane count was an attribute within the crash datasets, road network segments with missing values were assigned the median lane count value of the crashes that occurred on them. Finally, remaining gaps were filled by matching segments with known values to those with unknown values based on matching name and functional classification. Finally, any remaining unknown segments were assigned a value based on an average known value for their functional classification. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) AADT data was available from ARDOT and MoDOT, but not for all roads within the NWARPC region. The ARDOT AADT data was provided in point form, but with some linear referencing system (LRS) information about the segments of roadway that it encompassed. In order to transform it into segment data to conflate onto the OSM network, statewide LRS information was acquired, and using the LRS information in the points, extents along the LRS network were created. The MoDOT AADT data was provided in segment form, so it was not necessary to do a similar transformation. However, it was part of the same bidirectional dataset that contained lane data, so it was first pre-processed to create a combined AADT value. With known values in segment form created, these were then conflated onto the OSM network. These known values were then used to fill in gaps based on name and functional classification matches. For remaining gaps, a value was assigned based on the average value by functional classification. Speed Limit Speed limit was available from both ARDOT and MoDOT, although not with full coverage for the MPO. These known values were then spatially conflated to the OSM network. Like lane count, speed limit was an attribute of the crash data, so where these values were reported in the crashes, the median recorded value was assigned to the road network. Gaps in the data were then filled in by matching segments with known values to those with unknown values based on matching name and functional classification. Remaining gaps were then assigned a value based on the average value for their functional classification. Intersection Control Intersection control data was only available from MoDOT for the MO area of the NWA region, but were not available in the AR portion of the NWA region. The MoDOT intersection data was limited to signalization and those were assigned to the intersection dataset. Then for the rest of the intersections, signalization and stop control data were assigned from information available in OSM, including traffic lights in the AR portion of the NWA region. Any intersection with stops was assigned as stop controlled (i.e., both two-way and all -way stops). In lieu of any other data sources, the lack of any known control at an intersection was assumed to be uncontrolled. 30 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 186 of 524 Study Limitations Multiple State Crash Data Standards Since the NWARPC covers both Arkansas and Missouri, crash data from both states were used for this analysis. While both state's crash data generally tracked the same type of information, the nuances of how specific details were tracked varied between the two. Given that each state uses different forms and consolidates crash data differently, there were a few datasets that could only be analyzed in either Arkansas or Missouri that were not included in this report for the entire region. For the purpose of this report for NWARPC, only common datasets between both states were analyzed to understand crashes at a regional level. This provides consistency in analysis and methodology for the entire region. As a result of this, the analysis preformed was limited to categories that were present in both datasets. For example, if one dataset listed the primary cause of a crash, and the other dataset listed multiple contributing causes, it would not be possible to create either a primary crash cause or a list of crash causes, because each of those datasets is not available in the other state. Additionally, in circumstances where there were matching overall categories but the values for each category differed, the lowest common denominator of coding was used. For example, if one dataset listed crashes with specific types of fixed objects (tree, guardrail, traffic signal, etc.), but the other data just listed all crashes with fixed objects the same, both datasets would be simplified to only list the crash as with a fixed object. Possible additional analysis of datasets unique to each state may be suggested to further understand crashes based on individual state data availability. Temporal Consistency Limitations The consultant team studied crashes that occurred over a period of five years, from 2017 through 2021. The compiled roadway data reflect current conditions according to the data made available at the time of this analysis. It can be assumed that some changes in roadway design and operations have occurred over the previous five years that cannot be accounted for. For example, if a crash occurred in 2016 and the posted speed limit changed from 35 mph down to 30 mph in 2018, this analysis would link the 2016 crash with the present day 30 mph configuration. Roadway Improvements during Study Period Results are based on crash data and current attribute data from 2017-2021 and do not account for any roadway improvements made during the study period. It is recommended that the NWA Region conduct a further before and after comparison analysis at any location with major safety improvements to determine if the roadway improvements had any effect on crash severity, crash frequency, crash causes, and/or crash types. This type of analysis would also inform the effectiveness of roadway safety improvements within the region. Exposure data Region -wide volumes via average annual daily traffic (AADT) for motor vehicles were available, however pedestrian and bicyclist volumes were not readily available. The analyses reported here do not adjust for exposure rates based on volumes by modes. Therefore, results show crash density but not frequency of crashes based on how many people are walking, which is also called exposure. For example, in many communities, pedestrian crashes are more common during daylight conditions than dark conditions. This does not mean that daylight conditions are more dangerous than dark conditions. Rather, it reflects the fact that people are more likely to travel, and especially more likely to travel by walking, in light conditions than in dark conditions. Having volume by mode would allow for understanding exposure and frequency for those two modes. Some proxies for exposure are noted in this analysis, such as land use, transit facilities and functional classification. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 31 Page 187 of 524 Transportation Data for Future Study As the Safe System Approach is used throughout the region, additional data can assist communities to understand crash risk and take a more proactive approach to safety. Regionwide bicycle and pedestrian volume data were not available to more accurately measure crash risk for bicyclists and pedestrians. • Several datasets listed below would help identify or refine risk factors but were either not available in GIS format, or were available, but with limited coverage: Roadway ownership and jurisdiction Vehicle operating speeds Crosswalk style Street width Traffic signal phasing Transit frequency and boarding/alighting counts Location of fixed objects (raised medians, barriers, utility poles, etc.) Marked crosswalks and crosswalk enhancements Sidewalks Statistical Test Methodology To test if a certain category of crashes has a significantly higher KA crash rate (defined as the number of KA crashes out of all crashes) than the average KA crash rate, a two -proportion Z-test was performed. When this test is applied to overall crash categories, the KA crash rate for each category is compared with the overall average KA crash rate (i.e., 1,369 out of 58,896 as shown in Table 2). When this test is applied to VRU crash categories, the KA crash rate for each category is compared with the VRU average KA rate (447 out of 1,644 as can be referred from Table 4) instead of the overall average KA rate to identify factors that are associated with significantly high KA rate for VRU crashes. The confidence level used for this test is 95%. Categories that have either less than 10 KA crashes or less than 10 non-KA crashes are excluded from the analysis because they don't meet the sample size requirement of the test. Throughout the report, statistically significant results are highlighted in red. 32 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 188 of 524 Summary of Key Findings Year of crash data: 2017-2021 Total crashes: 58,896 Total fatal (K) crashes: 220 Total serious injury (A) crashes: 1,149 Crashes by Year: While 2020 had the smallest share of all crashes across the five years (17.71%), it had the second highest percentage of KA crashes (20.45%) and the highest percentage of crashes resulting in KAs (2.68%). Injury Severity: While the majority of crashes result in less severe injuries in NWA, an average of 44 crashes resulted in death and 230 crashes resulted in serious injury in the NWA region. Crashes by Mode: • Pedestrians: Pedestrian cashes (320) made up 0.6% of all crashes with a known mode (57,087) and 9% of KA crashes with a known mode (1,345) • Bicycles: Bicycle crashes (245) made up 0.4% of all crashes with a known mode (57,087) and 3% of KA crashes with a known mode (1,345) • Motorcycles: Motorcycle crashes (1,079) made up 2% of all crashes with a known mode (57,087) and 21% of KA crashes with a known mode (1,345) • Motor Vehicles: Motor vehicle crashes (55,443) made up 97% of all crashes with a known mode (57,087) and 67% of KA crashes with a known mode (1,345) First Harmful Event: Collision with vehicle in transport is a subset of the total crashes (37,499 crashes at 73.98% of all crashes and 572 KA crashes with 45.61% of all KA crashes) was the most common crash type, however, collision with a pedestrian was the collision type with the greatest risk of resulting in a KA (203 all crashes and 106 KA crashes with 34.30% resulting in a KA). See Table 6. Bicycle Crashes: Motorist traveling straight with bicyclist crossing road (36% crashes, 31% KA crashes) was the highest bicycle KA crash type (14 KA crashes) Pedestrian Crashes: Motorist traveling straight with pedestrian crossing road (39% crashes, 48% KA crashes) was the highest pedestrian KA crash type (56 KA crashes) Motorcycle Crashes: Motorist turning left with motorcycle traveling straight (30% crashes, 35% KA crashes) was the highest motorcycle KA crash type (52 KA crashes) Motor Vehicle Crashes: Vehicle 1 traveling straight with vehicle 2 straight (24% crashes, 42% KA crashes) was the highest motor vehicle KA crash type (224 KA crashes) Speeding: 43% of speeding crashes resulted in a KA when a vulnerable roadway user was involved compared to just 6% for all modes. Intersections vs. Segments: Crashes occurred most often at intersections (65% of crashes, 54% of KA crashes). While segment crashes had a lower share of both overall crashes and KA crashes, segment crashes had a slightly higher rate of resulting in a KA outcome (3%). Urban vs. Rural: There are more crashes in urban areas (all, KA, and vulnerable road users) than rural areas in NWA. However, more rural crashes are likely to result in a KA outcome for all modes (4.46%) and vulnerable road users (35.75%). APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 33 Page 189 of 524 Traffic Volume: Streets with an AADT less than 5,000 had the largest share of both overall crashes (31%) and KA crashes (35%). Functional Classification: Most crashes (all, KA, and vulnerable road user) occurred on major and minor arterials in NWA. Posted Speed Limit: KA crashes occurred most often on streets with a 55mph posted speed limit (21% of KA crashes) and the highest percentage of crashes resulting in a KA (6.27%) also occurred on streets with a 55 mph posted speed limit. The majority of crashes and KA crashes involving a vulnerable road user occurred on streets with a posted speed limit of 45mph. Number of Lanes: Crashes occurred most often on four -lane roads (40% crashes, 38% KA crashes). For vulnerable road users, the most crashes (760, 46.63%) and the most KA crashes (194, 43.79%) occurred on two-lane roads. One -Way vs. Two -Way Streets: For all modes, crashes occurred most often on two-way streets (82% crashes, 85% KA crashes). Crashes on two-way roads were slightly more severe for all modes. Vulnerable modes followed a similar trend with the most crashes occurring on two-way roads (90% crashes, 87% KA crashes). However, the severity of crashes for vulnerable road users significantly increased on one-way streets, with 35% of crashes for vulnerable road users on one-way streets resulted in a KA. Intersection Control: For all modes, crashes occurred most often at intersections with no traffic control (58% crashes, 68% KA crashes). Crashes at stop sign controlled intersections were slightly more severe with 2.45% of crashes resulting in a KA outcome. Historically Disadvantaged Communities and Areas of Persistent Poverty: Areas where historically disadvantaged communities and persistent poverty overlap has 14% (8,174) of regional total crashes and 12% (165) KA crashes, despite having only 6% of the regional roadway centerline miles. For vulnerable road user involved crashes, areas where historically disadvantaged communities and persistent poverty overlap have 15% (246) of regional total crashes and 16% (71) KA crashes, despite only 6% of the regional roadway centerline miles. Time of Day: For all modes, crashes were fairly evenly distributed across the day but occurred most often between 3:00pm and 6:00pm (20% crashes, 16% KA crashes). Night crashes between 9:00pm and midnight were slightly more severe than other times of day with 4% of crashes resulting in a KA outcome. Roadway Surface Condition: For all modes, crashes occurred most often in dry conditions (80% crashes, 82% KA crashes). For all modes, crashes occurred most often in dry conditions (80% crashes, 82% KA crashes). This is true for vulnerable road users involved crashes as well as over 90% of overall crashes and KSI crashes happening in dry conditions. Lighting Conditions: For all modes, crashes occurred most often in daylight (74% crashes, 61% KA crashes). Dark crashes without lighting were the most severe with just under 5% of crashes resulting in a KA outcome. Proximity to Transit, Schools, or Parks: Most crashes do not happen within 500 feet of a transit stop, school, or park in the NWA region. 34 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 190 of 524 Crash Trends The following sections summarize crash data from Injury Severity10 2017 through 2021 to provide statistical trends into temporal patterns, actions leading up to a crash, and Table 3 summarizes crashes by injury severity based environmental characteristics. on the highest level of injury reported to be sustained in the crash. Based on this data, an average of 44 crashes Crashes by Year9 resulted in death and 230 crashes resulted in serious injury in the NWA region. Less severe crashes account Table 2 summarizes the number of crashes and crashes for the largest share of crashes, whereas the most that resulted in KA crashes from 2017 through 2021. severe crashes account for the lowest share of crashes. The Percent KA Crashes by Year column shows the More details about the location of the crashes and share of KA crashes in each year compared to the other the dynamics related to the crashes will be described years. The Percent Crashes resulting in a KA column throughout this analysis. show of all the crashes that occurred in that year, what percent resulted in a fatality or series injury. Table 3: Crashes by Injury Severity, 2017-2021 While 2020 had the smallest share of all crashes Injury Severity across the five years (17.71 %), it had the second highest Fatal injury (K) 220 0.37% percentage of KA crashes (20.45%) and the highest Suspected serious injury (A) 1,149 1.95% percentage of crashes resulting in KAs (2.68%). In Suspected minor injury (B) 4,705 7.99% 2021, the number of KA crashes and the percentage of Possible injury (C) 7,186 12.20% crashes resulting in a KAs decreased, but the overall No apparent injury (0) 45,636 77.49% number of crashes rose to a record high of 12,336. Total 58,896 100.00% Table 2: Crashes by Year, 2017-2021 2017 12,154 20.64% 284 20.75% 2.34% 2018 11,664 19.80% 266 19.43% 2.28% 2019 12,309 20.90% 264 19.28% 2.14% 2020 10,433 17.71% 280 20.45% 2.68% 2021 12,336 20.95% 275 20.09% 2.23% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% 9 Crash year was derived from the provided crash reports. For AR, that was the column 'crash date in the table 'crashes_fc , and for MO that was the column 'date_0' in the table 'rpc_crashes_2017_2021' 10 Crash level injury severity was obtained directly from the crash reports. For AR, that was the column 'crashseverity' in the table 'crashes_fc', and for MO that was the column 'acc_svrty_rtng_nm' in the table 'rpc_crashes_2017_2021' APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 35 Page 191 of 524 Crashes by Mode" Table 4 summarizes crashes by injury severity and mode. Motor vehicle crashes accounted for most of the crashes with 97% of total crashes. This is expected as most trips in the United States are typically made by motor vehicle. Motorcycles followed with roughly 2% of crashes. Pedestrian crashes ranked third highest with roughly 1% of the total crashes, while bicycle crashes had the lowest crash share at slightly less than 0.5%. While motor vehicle crashes accounted for the largest share of both overall crashes and KA crashes, when vulnerable road users were involved in a crash, the risk of death or serious injury increased disproportionately (see Table 5 and Figure 1). • Pedestrians: Pedestrian cashes made up 0.6% of all crashes but 9% of KA crashes • Bicycles: Bicycle crashes made up 0.4% of all crashes but 3% of KA crashes • Motorcycles: Motorcycle crashes made up 2% of all crashes but 21 % of KA crashes • Motor Vehicles: Motor vehicle crashes made up 97% of all crashes but only 67% of KA crashes Table 4: Crashes by Injury Severity and Mode, 2017-2021 Fatal injury (K) 4 37 38 138 3 Suspected serious injury (A) 41 79 248 760 21 Suspected minor injury (B) 112 125 399 3,950 119 Possible injury (C) 51 59 167 6,743 166 No apparent injury (0) 37 20 227 43,852 1,500 Total 245 320 1,079 55,443 1,809 Table 5: Share of crashes compared to the % of crashes that resulted in a KA, 2017-2021 Bicycle 245 0.4% 45 3.3% 18.4% Pedestrian 320 0.5% 116 8.5% 36.3% Motorcycle 1,079 1.8% 286 20.9% 26.5% Motor Vehicle 55,443 94.1% 898 65.6% 1.6% Unknown 1,809 3.1% 24 1.8% 1.3% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.3% Figure 19: Share of crashes compared to the % of crashes that resulted in a KA, 2017-2021 0.4% 0.6%1 _,_r2% 70 Jlldl C VI Crashes ■ Bicycle ■ Motorcycle ■ Motor Vehicle Pedestrian 3% % Crashes resulting L in KA A 11 Crash mode was determined by the most vulnerable road user involved in the overall crash. Person mode was derived from various elements within the crash reports. For AR, pedestrians and bicycles were identified using the column 'non —motorist —type' in the table 'non_motorist'. Pedestrians were those with values 1 ('Pedestrian') and 2 ('Other pedestrian (wheelchair)'). Bicycles were those with values 5 ('Bicyclist') and 6 ('Other cyclist (tricycle, etc.)'). Motorcycles and motor vehicles were identified using the column 'vehicle —type' in the table 'vehicle'. Motorcycles were the values 30 ('Motorcycle'), 31 ('Motor scooter'), and 30 ('Moped'). Motor vehicles were all other values for 'vehicle type' For MO, pedestrian, bicycle, and motor vehicle were from the column 'hp_person_invl_cd' of the table 'driver passenger'. Motor vehicles were the value 01 ('DRIVER'), pedestrians were the value 02 ('PEDESTRIAN'), and bicycles were the value 03 ('PEDALCYCLIST'). Motorcycles were identified as a subset of motor vehicles, using the column 'vehicle —body —type' in the table 'vehicle', with the values 10 ('MOTORCYCLE') and 12 ('MOTORIZED BICYCLE'). 36 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 192 of 524 Crash Causation First Harmful Event12 with the highest injury severity, with 34% of crashes resulting in KAs. Collisions with bicyclists were also Table 6 summarizes the crash causes based the significantly severe with 18% resulting in KAs. The recorded first harmful event for all crashes where following crash causes also lead to significantly higher first harmful event is known. The most common rates of crashes resulting in KAs compared to the crashes were motor vehicle crashes, collisions with average rate: Fell or jumped from vehicle (29.17%), other vehicles, fixed objects, with parked vehicles or collision with a fixed object, collision with anon - an animal. However, these types of crashes were less fixed object, and overturn or rollover. Seven percent likely to result in KAs. of crashes resulting in a KA were also caused by on Collisions with pedestrians were the crash cause unknown first harmful event. Table 6: First Harmful Event by All Modes, 2017- 2021 Cause of Crash # of % of % of Crashes that Crashes Crashes Resulted in KA Collision with vehicle in transport 37,499 73.98% 572 45.61% 1.50% Collision with fixed object 7,798 15.39% 356 28.39% 4.37% Collision with parked vehicle 1,782 3.52% 17 1.36% 0.94% Collision with animal 1,364 2.69% 9 0.72% 0.66% Over turn or rollover 831 1.64% 109 8.69% 11.60% Collision with pedestrian 203 0.40% 106 8.45% 34.30% Collision with non -fixed object 242 0.48% 14 1.12% 5.47% Other non -collision 219 0.43% 8 0.64% 3.52% Cargo shift or loss 186 0.37% 0.00% 0.00% Collision with bicycle 135 0.27% 30 2.39% 18.18% Unknown 151 0.30% 11 0.88% 6.79% Ran off road - right 80 0.16% 5 0.40% 5.88% Fell orjumped from vehicle 34 0.07% 14 1.12% 29.17% Ran off road - left 43 0.08% 1 0.08% 2.27% Crossed centerline 42 0.08% 1 0.08% 2.33% Jackknife 34 0.07% 1 0.08% 2.86% Equipment failure 12 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% Collision with railway vehicle 10 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% Immersion 9 0.02% 0.00% 0.00% Ran off road - other 5 0.01 % 0.00% 0.00% Fire or explosion 3 0.01 % 0.00% 0.00% Separation of units 2 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Crossed median 1 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Total 50,6851 100.00% 1,254 100.00% 2.41% 1 This number is different from the total number of crashes (58,896) because 6,842 crashes have no First Harmful Event identified and are excluded from this table. 12 Crash level first harmful event was derived from various elements of the crash reports. For AR, this was simply the column 'first_harmful_event' in the table 'crashes_fc'. For MO, it was derived from the column 'event code' in the table 'sequence -of -events'. This table contained multiple events per person per crash. To get the first harmful event, the first harmful 'event_code' value ('event_code' >=16) was selected per person, using the order provided in ' hp_seq_evnt_seq_no'. In crashes where there were multiple persons with a first harmful event, the event that happened to the person who sustained the highest injury level was used. For how the values between the AR and MO crash reports were recorded for consistency see Appendix A. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 37 Page 193 of 524 Bicycle Crashes Overall, motorists traveling straight led to the most Table 7 summarizes bicycle crashes by the primary crashes and the most severe crashes across all bicycle motorist's pre -crash movement and the bicyclist's movements (70% of crashes and 71% of KA crashes). pre -crash action to form bicycle "crash types".'1,14,11 Crashes with a motorist traveling straight and bicyclist While this data is limited it provides a glimpse into what crossing the road resulted in a significantly higher - actions were at play leading up to the crash. then -average percentage of KAs. The most common bicycle crash types in order of total KA crashes include: • Motorist traveling straight - bicyclist crossing road (36% crashes, 31 % KA crashes) • Motorist traveling straight - bicyclist in roadway (12% crashes, 13% KA crashes) Table 7: Bicycle Crash Types with One or More KA Crashes, 2017-2021 Other Other Total Unknown 1 1 0.59% 0.59% 1 1 2.22% 2.22% 100.00% 100.00% Crossing road 6 3.55% 1 2.22% 16.67% Parked Parked Total In roadway 1 7 0.59% 4.14% 1 2 2.22% 4.44% 100.00% 28.57% Adjacent to roadway 13 7.69% 3 6.67% 23.08% Along roadway - with traffic 13 7.69% 5 11.11% 38.46% Crossing road 61 36.09% 14 31.11% Straight In roadway 20 11.83% 6 13.33% 30.00% Other 3 1.78% 1 2.22% 33.33% Straight Total Unknown 8 118 4.73% 69.82% 3 32 6.67% 71.11% 37.50% 27.12% Along roadway - with traffic 8 4.73% 2 4.44% 25.00% Turn - left Crossing road 12 7.10% 2 4.44% 16.67% Turn - left Total In roadway 3 23 1.78% 13.61% 1 5 2.22% 11.11% 33.33% 21.74% Along roadway - with traffic 3 1.78% 1 2.22% 33.33% In roadway 12 7.10% 1 2.22% 8.33% Turn -right Other 2 1.18% 1 2.22% 50.00% Turn - right Total Unknown 3 20 1.78% 11.83% 2 5 4.44% 11.11% 66.67% 25.00% Total 169 100.00% 45 100.00% 26.63% 13 Bicycle pre -crash movement was derived from data within the crash reports. For AR, the column 'action -prior -to -crash' from the table 'non -motorist' was used. See <APPENDIX> for how these values were recoded. For MO, since there were no bicycle crashes in the study area, this step was skipped. 14 Motor vehicle pre -crash movement was derived from the crash reports. For AR, the column vehicle -maneuver' from the table vehicle was used. For MO, the column event -code from the table 'sequence -of -events was used. The first value for 'event -code' as ordered by 'hp-seq- evnt-seq-no was assigned to the vehicle. See <APPENDIX> for how different values between these two datasets were consolidated. 15 To determine bicycle crash types, only crashes that involved one or more bicycle and one or more motor vehicle were used. In cases where there were multiples of the same mode, the pre -crash movement of the highest severity injury level of each mode was selected as that mode's pre -crash movement. 38 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 194 of 524 Pedestrian Crashes Table 8 summarizes pedestrian crashes by derived crash types." The same approach was used to develop the pedestrian crash types by combining the primary motorist pre -crash movement and the pre -crash pedestrian action" The most common pedestrian crash types in order of KA crashes include: • Motorist traveling straight — pedestrian crossing road (39% crashes, 48% KA crashes) • Motorist turning left — pedestrian crossing roadway 0 1 % crashes, 3% KA crashes) • Motorist traveling straight — pedestrian adjacent to roadway (9% crashes, 7% KA crashes) • The combination of vehicles traveling straight and pedestrians either crossing the road or in the roadway resulted in a significantly higher KA crash rate than the average KA crash rate. Motorcycle Crashes'$ Table 9 summarizes motorcycle crashes by crash types. The same approach was used to develop the motorcycle crash types by combining the primary motorist pre - crash movement and the motorcycle pre -crash action.19 The most common motorcycle crash types in order of KA crashes include: • Motorist turning left — motorcycle traveling straight (30% crashes, 35% KA crashes) • Motorist traveling straight — motorcycle traveling straight (27% crashes, 28% KA crashes • These two crash combinations also resulted in KAs at a significantly higher rate than the average KA crash rate. 16 To determine pedestrian crash types, only crashes that involved one or more pedestrian and one or more motor vehicle were used. In cases where there were multiples of the same mode, the pre -crash movement of the highest severity injury level of each mode was selected as that mode's pre -crash movement. 17 Pedestrian pre -crash movement was derived from data within the crash reports. For AR, the column 'action_prior_to_crash' from the table 'non_ motorist' was used. See <APPENDIX> for how these values were recoded. For MO, there was only one pedestrian involved crash, so the pre -crash movement was manually coded to match the AR coding. 18 To determine motorcycle crash types, only crashes that involved one or more motorcycle and one or more motor vehicle were used. In cases where there were multiples of the same mode, the pre -crash movement of the highest severity injury level of each mode was selected as that mode's pre -crash movement. 19 Motorcycle pre -crash movement was derived from data within the crash reports. For AR, the column 'vehicle —maneuver' from the table ' vehicle was used. For MO, the column 'event_code' from the table 'sequence —of —events' was used. The first value for 'event code' as ordered by 'hp seq_evnt_seq_no' was assigned to the vehicle. See <APPENDIX> for how different values between these two datasets were consolidated. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 39 Page 195 of 524 Table 8: Pedestrian Crash Types with One or More KA Crashes, 2017-2021 Motorist Pre -Crash Pedestrian Pre -Crash # of % of % of Crashes Movement Action Crashes Crashes that Resulted MmlinKA Other 2 0.68% 1 0.86% 50.00% Backing Unknown 3 1.02% 2 1.72% 66.67% Backing Total 5 1.69% 3 2.59% 60.00% Adjacent to roadway 1 0.34% 1 0.86% 100.00% Changing lanes Crossing road 3 1.02% 2 1.72% 66.67% Changing Lanes Total 4 1.36% 3 2.59% 75.00% On sidewalk 1 0.34% 1 0.86% 100.00% Other Other 2 0.68% 1 0.86% 50.00% Other Total 3 1.02% 2 1.72% 66.67% Parked Adjacent to roadway 2 0.68% 1 0.86% 50.00% Parked Total 2 0.68% 1 0.86% 50.00% In Roadway 1 0.34% 1 0.86% 100.00% Stopped in traffic Stopped in traffic Total Other 1 2 0.34% 0.68% 1 2 0.86% 1.72% 100.00% 100.00% Adjacent to roadway 26 8.81% 8 6.90% 30.77% Along roadway - against traffic 7 2.37% 3 2.59% 42.86% Alongroadway- withtraffic 14 4.75% 5 4.31% 35.71% Crossing road 116 39.32% 56 48.28% 48.28% Straight In roadway 24 8.14% 10 8.62% 41.67% None 4 1.36% 1 0.86% 25.00% On sidewalk 5 1.69% 2 1.72% 40.00% Other 16 5.42% 4 3.45% 25.00% Straight Total Unknown 5 217 1.69% 73.56% 3 92 2.59% 79.31% 60.00% 42.40% Adjacent to roadway 6 2.03% 1 0.86% 16.67% Turn - left Crossing Road 31 10.51% 3 2.59% 9.68% Unknown 3 1.02% 1 0.86% 33.33% Turn - left Total 40 13.56% 5 4.31% 12.50% Crossing road 14 4.75% 3 2.59% 21.43% Turn -Right Turn - right Total On sidewalk 2 16 0.68% 5.42% 1 4 0.86% 3.45% 50.00% 25.00% Crossing road 3 1.02% 2 1.72% 66.67% Unknown Unknown 3 1.02% 2 1.72% 66.67% Unknown Total Total 6 295 2.03% 100.00% 4 116 3.45% 100.00% 66.67% 39.32% 40 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 196 of 524 Table 9: Pre -Crash Movements for Non -Solo Motorcycle Crashes with One or More KA, 2017-2021 Backing Straight 3 0.54% 1 0.68% 33.33% Backing total 3 0.54% 1 0.68% 33.33% Parked 1 0.18% 1 0.68% 100.00% Changing lanes Straight 13 2.34% 3 2.03% 23.08% Changing lanes total 14 2.52% 2.70% 28.57% 2.70% Other Straight 4 0.72% 2 1.35% 50.00% Other total 4 0.72% 2 1.35% 50.00% Overtaking 1 0.18% 1 0.68% 100.00% Overtaking Turn - left 1 0.18% 1 0.68% 100.00% Overtaking total 2 0.36% 2 1.35% 100.00% Parked 12 2.16% 1 0.68% 8.33% Parked Stopped in traffic 6 1.08% 2 1.35% 33.33% Straight 21 3.78% 2 1.35% 9.52% Parked total 39 7.03% 5 3.38% 12.82% Slowing Straight 11 1.98% 6 4.05% 54.55% Slowing total 11 1.98% 6 4.05% 54.55% Stopped in traffic Straight 45 8.11% 4 2.70% 8.89% Stopped in traffic total 45 8.11% 4 2.70% 8.89% Changing lanes 13 2.34% 5 3.38% 38.46% Overtaking 4 0.72% 2 1.35% 50.00% Slowing 7 1.26% 2 1.35% 28.57% Straight Stopped in traffic 23 4.14% 3 2.03% 13.04% Straight 148 26.67% 42 28.38% 28.38% Turn - left 23 4.14% 5 3.38% 21.74% Turn - right 9 1.62% 2 1.35% 22.22% Straight total 227 40.90% 61 41.22% 26.87% Overtaking 5 0.90% 3 2.03% 60.00% Straight 164 29.55% 52 35.14% 31.71% Turn -left Turn - left 6 1.08% 1 0.68% 16.67% Turn - right 2 0.36% 1 0.68% 50.00% Turn - left total 177 31.89% 57 38.51% 32.20% Straight 21 3.78% 3 2.03% 14.29% Turn -right Turn - right 4 0.72% 1 0.68% 25.00% Turn - right total 25 4.50% 4 2.70% 16.00% Unknown Straight 8 1.44% 2 1.35% 25.00% Unknown - total 8 1.44% 2 1.35% 25.00% Total 555 100.00% 148 100.00% 26.67% APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 41 Page 197 of 524 Motor Vehicle Crashes20 Table 10 summarizes motor vehicle crashes by crash types." A similar approach was used to develop the motor vehicle crash types by combining the primary motorist pre -crash movement (motorist 1) and the motorist 2 pre -crash action. Motor vehicle crash types were determined based on crashes involving one or more motor vehicles. Crashes involving only one motor vehicle were considered solo crashes, and therefore the only had one pre -crash action assigned. For crashes involving two or more motor vehicles, the pre -crash actions of the first two motor vehicles were selected by order of injury severity, which the most severely injured assigned as the first movement and the second most severely injured assigned as the second. In cases where the injury levels were the same, the first two motor vehicles were selected based on their vehicle ID values within the crash report. The most common motor vehicle crash types in order of KA crashes include: • Vehicle 1 traveling straight - vehicle 2 straight (24% crashes, 42% KA crashes) • Vehicle 1 turning left - vehicle 2 traveling straight (12% crashes, 15% KA crashes) • Vehicle 1 traveling straight - vehicle 2 turning left (9% crashes, 12% KA crashes) Vehicles traveling straight accounted for the greatest percent of KA crashes (65%), however no pre -crash movement or crash combination had a statistically significant percent of crashes resulting in a KA compared to the average KA crash rate. Table 10: Pre -Crash Movements for Multi -Motor Vehicle Crashes with One or More KA Crashes, 2017-2021 Backing Backing total Overtaking Solo 6 120 126 0.01% 0.30% 0.31% 1 1 2 0.19% 0.19% 0.38% 16.67% 0.83% 1.59% Changing lanes 86 0.21% 1 0.19% 1.16% Other 4 0.01% 1 0.19% 25.00% Straight 1,501 3.74% 8 1.51% 0.53% Changing lanes Turn - left 43 0.11% 1 0.19% 2.33% Turn - right 34 0.08% 1 0.19% 2.94% Solo 273 0.68% 11 2.08% 4.03% Changing lates total 1,941 4.84% 23 4.35% 1.18% Straight 145 0.36% 5 0.95% 3.45% Other Solo 172 0.43% 4 0.76% 2.33% Other total 317 0.79% 9 1.70% 2.84% Other 3 0.01% 1 0.19% 33.33% Overtaking Straight 102 0.25% 3 0.57% 2.94% Turn - left 56 0.14% 2 0.38% 3.57% Overtaking total 161 0.40% 6 1.13% 3.73% 20 Motor vehicle pre -crash movement was derived from the crash reports. For AR, the column 'vehicle maneuver' from the table 'vehicle' was used. For MO, the column 'event code' from the table 'sequence_of_events' was used. The first value for 'event code' as ordered by 'hp_seq_ evnt_seq_no' was assigned to the vehicle. See <APPENDIX> for how different values between these two datasets were consolidated. 21 Motor vehicle pre -crash movement was derived from the crash reports. For AR, the column 'vehicle maneuver' from the table 'vehicle' was used. For MO, the column 'event code' from the table 'sequence_of_events' was used. The first value for 'event code' as ordered by 'hp_seq_ evnt_seq_no' was assigned to the vehicle. See <APPENDIX> for how different values between these two datasets were consolidated. 42 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 198 of 524 Motorist 1 Pre -Crash I Motorist 2 Pre -Crash I # of I % of I Resulted at I Movement Action Crashes Crashes # of KA % KA that Parked 637 1.59% 3 0.57% 0.47% Stopped in traffic 533 1.33% 1 0.19% 0.19% Parked Straight 905 2.26% 3 0.57% 0.33% Turn - right 23 0.06% 1 0.19% 4.35% Solo 53 0.13% 1 0.19% 1.89% Parked total 2,151 5.37% 9 1.70% 0.42% Slowing Straight 791 1.97% 9 1.70% 1.14% Slowing total 791 1.97% 9 1.70% 1.14% Parked 468 1.17% 3 0.57% 0.64% Stopped in traffic Stopped in traffic 628 1.57% 5 0.95% 0.80% Straight 3,676 9.17% 18 3.40% 0.49% Stopped in traffic total 4,772 11.90% 26 4.91% 0.54% Changing lanes 1197 2.99% 4 0.76% 0.33% Other 145 0.36% 3 0.57% 2.07% Overtaking 53 0.13% 2 0.38% 3.77% Parked 1257 3.14% 8 1.51% 0.64% Slowing 358 0.89% 7 1.32% 1.96% Straight Stopped in traffic 4675 11.66% 25 4.73% 0.53% Straight 9,650 24.07% 224 42.34% 2.32% Turn - left 3584 8.94% 61 11.53% 1.70% Turn - right 839 2.09% 6 1.13% 0.72% Unknown 99 0.25% 2 0.38% 2.02% Straight total 21,857 54.52% 342 64.65% 1.56% Overtaking 55 0.14% 1 0.19% 1.82% Straight 4775 11.91% 81 15.31% 1.70% Turn - left Turn - left 598 1.49% 1 0.19% 0.17% Turn - right 136 0.34% 2 0.38% 1.47% Solo 328 0.82% 7 1.32% 2.13% Turn - left total 5,892 14.70% 92 17.39% 1.56% Straight 1161 2.90% 3 0.57% 0.26% Turn - right Turn - left 203 0.51% 1 0.19% 0.49% Solo 320 0.80% 2 0.38% 0.63% Turn - right total 1,684 4.20% 6 1.13% 0.36% U-Turn Straight 101 0.25% 1 0.19% 0.99% U-turn total 101 0.25% 1 0.19% 0.99% Straight 70 0.17% 2 0.38% 2.86% Unknown Solo 227 0.57% 2 0.38% 0.88% Unknown - total 297 0.74% 4 0.76% 1.35% Total 40,090 100.00% 529 100.00% 1.32% APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 43 Page 199 of 524 Parties Involved In addition to identifying the conditions under which crashes occurred and the specifics of crashes, it is also critical to understand who was most affected by unsafe roadway conditions in the Northwest Arkansas region. In the following section, the distribution of parties (people) involved in a crash is compared overall and for fatal or serious injury outcomes for age groups. These comparisons are based on the number of parties, not the number of crashes, therefore the total numbers at the bottom of Table 11 are different than the totals in tables that are based on number of crashes. Any given crash may injure multiple parties, at different levels of severity. Arkansas Region. To compare these distributions, the percentage of crash victims and of KA crash victims within a given age range is divided by the percentage share in the population overall. Values greater than 1 (red cells) indicate that a given age group is overrepresented in the crash data. Values less than 1 (blue cells) indicate that age group is underrepresented in the crash data. The percent of parties resulting from a KA field was calculated by dividing the number of KA parties by the total number of parties. This field is similar to the percent of crashes resulting in a KA field in previous tables that were based on number of crashes rather than number of parties. The age percent of population field is the total age Parties by Age22 brackets percentage of the region's total population. For Table 11 compares the crash party age breakdown example, 20-24-year-old people make up 8.16% of the against the age breakdown of residents in the Northwest total population in the region. Table 11: Parties by Age', 2017-2021 0-4 4,672 3.46% 20 1.24% 0.43% 6.88% 0.5 0.18 5-9 4,385 3.25% 20 1.24% 0.46% 7.62% , 0.43 0.16 10-14 4,170 3.09% 29 1.80% 0.70% 6.91% 0.45 0.26 15-19 17,803 13.18% 140 8.67% 0.79% 7.96% 1.66 1.09 20-24 19,145 14.17% 192 11.90% 1.00% 8.16% 1.74 1.46 25-29 14,341 10.62% 170 10.53% 1.19% 7.74% 1.37 1.36 30-34 12,223 9.05% 153 9.48% 1.25% 7.72% 1.17 1.23 35-39 10,995 8.14% 155 9.60% 1.41% 7.19% 1.13 1.34 40-44 9,097 6.73% 119 7.37% 1.31% 6.83% 0.99 1.08 45-49 8,084 5.98% 120 7.43% 1.48% 6.15% 0.97 1.21 50-54 7,142 5.29% 106 6.57% 1.48% 5.41% 0.98 1.21 55-59 6,658 4.93% 112 6.94% 1.68% 5.53% 0.89 1.26 60-64 5,225 3.87% 97 6.01% 1.86% 4.46% 0.87 1.35 65-69 4,025 2.98% 66 4.09% 1.64% 3.98% 0.75 1.03 70-74 3,042 2.25% 58 3.59% 1.91% 3.02% 0.75 1.19 75-79 1,873 1.39% 27 1.67% 1.44% 2.04% 0.68 0.82 80-84 1,093 0.81% 17 1.05% 1.56% 1.23% 0.66 0.86 85-over 1,117 0.83% 13 0.81% 1.16% 1.17% 0.71 0.69 Total 135,090 100.00% 1,614 100.00% 1.19% 100.00% 1 1 1 Where age is known. 22 Age was derived from the crash reports. For AR, this was the column 'age' from the table 'person -index'. For MO, it was determined from comparing the column 'date -of -birth' from the table 'driver passenger' to the column 'date_0' from the table 'rpc_crashes_2017_2021' to determine the persons age at the time of the crash. 44 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 200 of 524 In general, younger travelers were involved in a larger share of total crashes and KA outcomes. People aged 20-24 were the most overrepresented for all crashes and for KA outcomes. Older age brackets were less represented in both crashes and KA outcomes. Interestingly, people in their 50s and 60s were slightly under -represented in overall crashes but overrepresented in KA outcomes. This may point to drivers becoming more experienced with age but also becoming increasingly frail and more likely to be killed or seriously injured if involved in a crash. Behaviors Alcohol Impairment23 Table 12 summarizes crashes by alcohol impairment. These crashes include both when the alcohol level was reported as over the legal limit as well as when alcohol use was listed as a contributing crash factor in the collision report. Most crashes (96%) did not include an alcohol impairment party. Despite there being only 4% of crashes that involved alcohol impaired, these crashes accounted for 8% of KAs. The impact of alcohol on KA outcomes was even more pronounced when analyzed for vulnerable road users. Table 13 shows when a vulnerable roadway user was involved in an alcohol related crash, the outcomes were more severe with 48% of crashes resulting in a KA outcome. Table 12: Crashes by Reported DUI, All Modes, 2017-2021 Yes 2,132 3.62% 173 12.64% 8.11% No 56,764 96.38% 1196 87.36% 2.11% Total 58,896 100.00% 1369 100.00% 2.32% Table 13: Crashes by Reported DUI, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Yes No Total 71 1,573 1,644 4.32% 95.68% 100.00% 34 7.61% 47.89% 413 447 92.39% 100.00% 26.26% 27.19% 23 Alcohol impairment was derived from the crash reports. For AR, alcohol was determined from multiple sources: the column 'condition' with the value of 7 ('Under the influence of alcohol') from the table 'driver condition'; the column 'driver action' with the value 28 ('Under the influence of alcohol') in the table 'driver action'; the column 'blood_alcohol_content' with a value >= 0.08 from theta ble 'driver'; and the column 'blood_alcohol_content' with a value >= 0.08 from the table 'non_ motorist'. For MO, alcohol was determined using the column 'code' in the table contributing —circumstances', using the value 18 CALCHOL'). If any one of these conditions for any one person involved was true, then the crash was considered alcohol involved. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 45 Page 201 of 524 Speeding24 Table 14 summarizes crashes where either exceeding the speed limit or driving too fast for the conditions was noted in the collision report. The 4,339 crashes that involved speeding made up only 7% of all crashes but 18% of KAs. While the percentages of crashes involving speeding for vulnerable road users are similar to those for all modes, there is a significant jump in severity. Table 15 shows that 43% of speeding crashes resulted in a KA when a vulnerable roadway user was involved compared to just 6% in the previous table. Nationally, speeding remains the largest contributing factor influencing fatal and sever injury crashes.2I The data below shows that in Northwest Arkansas, even though vehicle crashes make up a large portion of the total crashes, the impact of speed remains significant. Pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorcyclists are referred to as vulnerable modes specially because of their exposure to high impacts and their lack of additional protection such as air bags or bumpers in in a high-speed crash. Table 14: Crashes by Reported Speeding, All Modes, 2017-2021 Yes 4,339 7.37% 249 18.19% 5.74% No 54,557 92.63% 1,120 81.81% 2.05% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% Table 15: Crashes by Reported Speeding, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Yes 137 8.33% 59 13.20% 43.07% No 1,507 91.67% 388 86.80% 25.75% Total 1,644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% 24 Speeding was determined based on the data in the crash reports. For AR, this was the column 'speeding relation' in the table 'driver', where the value any of: 2 ( Racing'), 3 ('Exceeded Speed Limit), or 4 CToo fast for conditions'). For MO, the column was code in the table contributing_ circumstances where the value was any of: 04 ( SPEED EXCEEDED LIMIT), 05 CT00 FAST FOR CONDITIONS), or 42 CEXCESSSIVE SPEED). If any one of these conditions for any one vehicle involved was true, then the crash was considered speeding. 25 https://www.nhtsa.gov/campaign/speeding-catches-up-with-you 46 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 202 of 524 Roadway Characteristics Crash Location (intersection Vs. Segment) 26,27 Table 16 below summarizes crash frequencies by location type for all modes. Crashes were identified as an intersection crash if the crash data point was located within 250 ft of an intersection, and if the closest segment was a part of that intersection (i.e., preventing a crash along a highway to be assigned to intersection of a nearby frontage road). Crashes not assigned as intersection crashes were assumed as segment crashes. Crashes occurred most often at intersections (65% of crashes, 54% of KA crashes) with roughly 2% of crashes resulting in a KA. For more details on the traffic control present at intersections see Table 32 and Table 33. Table 16: Crashes by Location, All Modes, 2017-2021 Intersection 37,870 64.68% Segment 20,682 35.32% Total 58,552 100.00% While segment crashes had a lower share of both overall crashes and KA crashes, segment crashes had a slightly higher rate of resulting in a KA outcome (3%). Table 17 summarizes crashes by location for vulnerable road users. Like above, most crashes occurred at intersections (67% crashes, 62% KA crashes) compared to segment locations (32% crashes, 38% KA crashes). Segment crashes were not the most frequent crash location for vulnerable road users, but they tended to be more severe than intersection crashes with 32% of crashes resulting in a KA (compared to 25% at intersections). 732 54.02% 1.93% 623 45.98% 3.01% 1,355 100.00% 2.31% Table 17: Crashes by Location, Vulnearble Road Users 2017-2021 Intersection 1,102 67.61% 275 62.08% 24.95% Segment 528 32.39% 168 37.92% 31.82% Total 1,630 100.00% 443 100.00% 27.18% 26 Segment crashes were all non -intersection crashes that occurred within 50 ft of a roadway segment. 27 Intersection involved crashes were determined spatially rather than by crash report. They were within 250 ft of an intersection that connects to the segment which they occurred (as defined by street name). APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 47 Page 203 of 524 Urban vs. Rura128 Table 18 and Table 21 summarize crashes that occurred in urban versus rural areas. Urban crashes were identified as any crashes that occurred within 2020 Census defined urban areas. All crashes outside of these areas were designed as rural crashes. There are more crashes in urban areas (all, KA, and vulnerable road users) than rural areas in NWA. However, more rural crashes are likely to result in a KA outcome for all modes (4.46%) and vulnerable road users (35.75%). For all modes, there were slightly more KA crashes in urban areas (57% of KA crashes in urban versus 43% of KA crashes in rural). This difference was more pronounced for vulnerable road users where 66% of KA crashes occurred in urban areas and 34% in rural areas. Table 18: Crashes in urban vs. rural areas, All Modes 2017-2021 Urban 45,806 77.77% 785 57.34% 1.71% Rural 13,090 22.23% 584 42.66% 4.46% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% Table 19: Crashes in urban vs. rural areas, Vulnerable Road Users 2017-2021 Urban 1,216 73.97% 294 65.77% 24.18% Rural 428 26.03% 153 34.23% 35.75% Total 1,644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% 28 48 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 204 of 524 Traffic Volume29 Table 21 summarizes crashes by traffic volume on a roadway where vulnerable road users were involved. Table 20 summarizes crashes by AADT for all modes. Like Table 20, most crashes occurred on streets Streets with an AADT less than 5,000 had the largest with lower AADT which is due to the overall network share of both overall crashes (31%) and KA crashes coverage of those streets. Crashes along lower volume (35%). However, the majority of the street network street also tended to be less severe on average with throughout the region has an AADT less than 5,000 (i.e., o roughly 24/0 of crashes resulting in a KA compared to local and residential streets), resulting in relatively low o 32/0 of crashes resulting in a KA along streets with an crashes per mile and KA crashes per mile. Streets that AADT of at least 25,000. had an AADT between 5,000 and 9,999 and over 30,000 had the second highest shares of KA crashes (16% and While the above two tables provide insight into the 15% respectively). relationship between AADT and crashes they do not capture the distribution of those crashes along roadway It's important to keep in mind that streets with higher miles across the region. Table 22 highlights the mileage traffic volumes often have higher crash frequencies. and percentage of the entire roadway network for each While AADT estimates are available, it is not available AADT category as well as the ratio of the percent of citywide for motorcycles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. crashes to percent of overall mileage. While, low AADT Having detailed citywide volumes estimates would roadways had a high number of crashes, they also allow for the estimation of crash risk for each mode. accounted for 88% of all the roadways in the region. Table 20: Crashes by AADT, All Modes, 2017-2021 # of Crashes % of Crashes 11 % of Crashes that Resulted in KA 0 — 4,999 18,000 30.82% 476 35.16% 2.64% 5,000 — 9,999 7,984 13.67% 214 15.81 % 2.68% 10,000 — 14,999 6,243 10.69% 159 11.74% 2.55% 15,000 — 19,999 4,017 6.88% 79 5.83% 1.97% 20,000 — 24,999 4,720 8.08% 109 8.05% 2.31 % 25,000 — 29,999 6,098 10.44% 113 8.35% 1.85% 30,000 - over 11,351 19.43% 204 15.07% 1.80% Grand Total 58,413 100.00% 1,354 100.00% 2.32% Table 21: AADT on Roadways where Crashes involved Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 # of Crashes % of Crashes % of Crashes that Resulted in KA 0 — 4,999 635 38.98% 153 34.54% 24.09% 5,000 — 9,999 234 14.36% 59 13.32% 25.21% 10,000 — 14,999 171 10.50% 46 10.38% 26.90% 15,000 — 19,999 85 5.22% 27 6.09% 31.76% 20,000 — 24,999 136 8.35% 41 9.26% 30.15% 25,000 — 29,999 140 8.59% 45 10.16% 32.14% 30,000 - over 228 14.00% 72 16.25% 31.58% Grand Total 1629 100.00% 443 100.00% 27.19% 29 Includes both known and assumed traffic volumes. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 49 Page 205 of 524 Conversely, roads with over 30,000 AADT made up only 1% of total roadway mileage but the highest percentage of crashes. The crash ratios below were calculated by the percent of total crashes, KAs and non-KA that occurred within each AADT category divided by the category's percent of mileage in the overall roadway network. Values above 1 (shown in red) indicate that there was a higher percent of crashes relative to mileage, while values below 1 (in blue) have a lower percent of crashes relative to mileage. Table 22: AADT Ratios 0 — 4,999 5,000 — 9,999 5,996 319 88% 5% 0.35 2.91 0.40 3.37 10,000 — 14,999 162 2% 4.48 4.93 15,000 — 19,999 78 1% 5.99 5.08 20,000 — 24,999 75 1% 7.31 7.28 25,000 — 29,999 71 1% 10.05 8.03 30,000 - over Total 88 6,788 1% 100% 15.02 1.00 11.65 1.00 50 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 206 of 524 Functional Classification30 Table 25 highlights the mileage of each functional class category as a percent of the overall roadway mileage Table 23 below outlines crashes by roadway and compares it to the percent of crashes occurring classification for all modes. Major arterials had within each category. The crash ratio fields were the most crashes of with 17,216 crashes (29% of all calculated by the percent of total crashes, KAs and non - crashes). However, minor arterials had a higher number KA that occurred within each Functional Class category of KA crashes (406, 29% of KAs). Minor collectors had divided by that category's percent of mileage in the the greatest risk for a crash resulting in a KA outcome, overall roadway network. Values above 1 (shown in where 5.44% of all crashes resulted in KA outcomes. red) indicate that there was a higher percent of crashes Table 24 summarizes crashes by functional relative to mileage, while values below 1 (in blue) have a classification for crashes involving vulnerable road lower percent of crashes relative to mileage. users. As in the previous table, major and minor This analysis highlights the disproportionate share of arterials had a higher number of crashes and KA ° crashes that occur on Arterials. The combined 10 /o of outcomes. The greatest risk of a crash resulting in a KA Major and Minor Arterial roadway mileage accounts for outcome was on interstates (39.47%) 56% of KA crashes. Meanwhile local roads which make up 62% of all road miles carry less than 10% of KA crashes. Table 23: Crashes by Functional Classification, All Modes, 2017-2021 Functional % of Crashes that # of Crashes % of Crashes Classification Interstate 6,067 10.36% Resulted in KA 126 9.30% 2.08% Freeway 584 1.00% 17 1.25% 2.91 % Major Arterial 17,216 29.40% 352 25.98% 2.04% Minor Arterial 15,560 26.57% 406 29.96% 2.61 % Major Collector 11,813 20.18% 294 21.70% 2.49% Minor Collector 478 0.82% 26 1.92% 5.44% Local 6,834 11.67% 134 9.89% 1.96% Grand Total 58552 100.00% 1355 100.00% 2.31% Table 24: Crashes by Functional Classification, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Functional % of Crashes that # of Crashes % of Crashes Classification Interstate 76 4.66% Resulted in KA 30 6.77% 39.47% Freeway 11 0.67% 7 1.58% 63.64% Major Arterial 434 26.63% 132 29.80% 30.41% Minor Arterial 438 26.87% 126 28.44% 28.77% Major Collector 431 26.44% 94 21.22% 21.81% Minor Collector 18 1.10% 6 1.35% 33.33% Local 222 13.62% 48 10.84% 21.62% Grand Total 1630 100.00% 443 100.00% 27.18% 30 Includes both known and assumed functional classifications. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS Page 207 of 524 Table 25: Functional Classification Ratios Interstate 184 2.71% 3.82 3.43 Freeway 20 0.30% 3.34 4.20 Major Arterial 180 2.66% 11.07 Minor Arterial 499 7.34% 3.62 4.08 Major Collector 1,436 21.14% 0.95 1.03 Minor Collector 292 4.30% 0.19 0.45 Local Grand Total 4,181 6,793 61.55% 100.00% 0.19 1.00 0.16 1.00 Posted Speed UMit31 crashes). KA crashes occurred most often on streets Table 26 summarizes crashes and by posted speed limit with a 55mph posted speed limit (21% of KA crashes) for all roadway users. Crashes occurred most often and the highest percentage of crashes resulting in a KA o on roadways with a posted speed limit of 45mph (23% (6.27/0) also occurred on streets with a 55 mph posted crashes, 20% KA crashes) followed by streets with a speed limit. posted speed limit of 40mph (18% crashes, 14% KA Table 26: Crashes by Posted Speed Limit, All Modes, 2017-2021 SpeedPosted # of Crashes % of Crashes % of Crashes that Limit (MPH) Resulted in KA 10 16 0.03% 1 0.07% 6.25% 15 98 0.17% 1 0.07% 1.02% 20 554 0.95% 8 0.59% 1.44% 25 6,918 11.82% 101 7.45% 1.46% 30 4,707 8.04% 96 7.08% 2.04% 35 9,691 16.55% 172 12.69% 1.77% 40 10,725 18.32% 195 14.39% 1.82% 45 13,528 23.10% 274 20.22% 2.03% 50 1,752 2.99% 55 4.06% 3.14% 55 4,565 7.80% 286 21.11% 6.27% 60 401 0.68% 21 1.55% 5.24% 65 1,380 2.36% 40 2.95% 2.90% 70 2,978 5.09% 75 5.54% 2.52% 75 Grand Total 1,238 58,5511 2.11% 100.00% 30 1355 2.21% 100.00% 2.42% 2.31% 1 This number is less than the total number of crashes (58,896) because crashes are joined to the nearby roadway to extract the speed limit information from the roadway segment. Crashes that are located too far away from a roadway will not be assigned to a roadway segment, hence no speed limit information. 31 Includes both known and assumed posted speed limits 52 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 208 of 524 Summaries for crashes involving a vulnerable roadway percent of total crashes, KAs and non-KA that occurred user by posted speed limit are shown in Table 27 and within each Speed category divided by that category's follows a similar trend as the table above with the percent of mileage in the overall roadway network. majority crashes and KA crashes involving a vulnerable Values above 1 (shown in red) indicate that there was road user occurred on streets with a posted speed limit a higher percent of crashes relative to mileage, while of 45mph. However, the highest risk of a crash resulting values below 1 (in blue) have a lower percent of crashes in a KA outcome was on streets with a posted speed of relative to mileage. 70mph when a vulnerable road user was involved. While 25mph streets make up over half of all roadway Table 28 below takes the information from the two miles, they account for only a small percentage of previous tables and highlights the ratio of crashes to crashes. Higher speed roadways make up smaller each speed category's percentage of the total mileage. shares of the overall roadway network but had The crash ratio fields were calculated by taking the increasing numbers of fatal and severe injury crashes. Table 27: Crashes by Posted Speed Limit, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Posted Speed % of Crashes that # of Crashes % of Crashes Limit (MPH) 10 1 0.06% Resulted in KA 0 0.00% 0.00% 15 5 0.31% 1 0.23% 20.00% 20 20 1.23% 3 0.68% 15.00% 25 273 16.75% 48 10.84% 17.58% 30 155 9.51% 34 7.67% 21.94% 35 238 14.60% 58 13.09% 24.37% 40 274 16.81% 71 16.03% 25.91% 45 317 19.45% 94 21.22% 29.65% 50 46 2.82% 18 4.06% 39.13% 55 201 12.33% 71 16.03% 35.32% 60 18 1.10% 10 2.26% 55.56% 65 29 1.78% 10 2.26% 34.48% 70 39 2.39% 17 3.84% 43.59% 75 Grand Total 14 1,630 0.86% 100.00% 8 443 1.81% 100.00% 57.14% 27.18% % of Crashes by Posted Speed % of Vulnerable User Crashes Limit by Posted Speed Limit 10-35 mph • 40+ mph a -'_ "irh ■ -)- ,-10 APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 53 Page 209 of 524 .• S I •--• Crash Speed (MPH) Mileal 10-14 3 15-19 9 20 - 24 77 25 - 29 3724 30 - 34 441 35 - 39 654 40 - 44 45-49 50 - 54 55-59 60 - 64 65-69 70-74 75 - over Grand Total 551 376 155 557 20 93 71 61 6.792 e % of Mileage 0' 55% 6% 10% 8% 6% 2% 8% 0% 1% 1% 1% 100% 0.62 1.33 0.84 0.22 1.24 1.72 2.26 4.17 1.31 0.95 2.31 1.72 4.88 2.37 1.00 1.68 0.59 0.52 0.14 1.09 1.32 1.77 3.65 1.78 2.58 5.23 2.15 5.31 2.48 1.00 Number of Lanes32 Table 31 below takes the information from the two previous tables and highlights the ratio of crashes to Table 29 summarizes crashes by number of lanes for all each lane category's percentage of the total mileage. roadway users. Crashes occurred most often on four- While the two previous tables showed the most crashes lane roads (40% crashes, 38% KA crashes) followed occurring on two-lane roads, these roads also make up by two-lane roads (36% crashes, 46% KA crashes). KA almost 90% of the roadways in Northwest Arkansas. crashes occurred most often on two-lane roads and While fewer crashes occur on six and eight -lane roads these crashes also tended to be the most severe, with the roads they account for a proportionally much higher 3% of all crashes on 2 lane roads resulted in KAs. rate of crashes per mile. Table 30 summarizes crashes by number of lanes for vulnerable road users only. Data for these modes follows a similar trend as the table above, but the impact of two-lane road crashes is more pronounced. For vulnerable road users, the most crashes (760, 46.63%) and the most KA crashes (194, 43.79%) occurred on two-lane roads. However, crashes with the greatest risk of resulting in a KA involving a vulnerable road users occurred on six -lane roads as these are corridors with higher -speed free -flowing vehicle traffic. 32 Through lanes only. Includes both known lane count and assumed lane count. 54 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 210 of 524 Table 29: Crashes by Number of Lanes, All Modes, 2017-2021 1 1,709 2.92% 20 1.48% 1.17% 2 20,858 35.62% 627 46.27% 3.01% 3 3,390 5.79% 54 3.99% 1.59% 4 23,466 40.08% 511 37.71% 2.18% 5 5,231 8.93% 66 4.87% 1.26% 6 3,442 5.88% 71 5.24% 2.06% 7 114 0.19% 0 0.00% 0.00% 8 Grand Total 342 58,552 0.58% 100.00% 6 1.355 0.44% 100.00% 1.75% 2.31% Table 30: Crashes by Number of Lanes, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Number of Lanes 1 2 # of Crashes 20 760 % of Crashes 1.23% 46.63% 6 194 1.35% 43.79% % of Crashes that Resulted in KA 30.00% 25.53% 3 96 5.89% 18 4.06% 18.75% 4 584 35.83% 185 41.76% 31.68% 5 116 7.12% 22 4.97% 18.97% 6 46 2.82% 16 3.61 % 34.78% 7 1 8 7 Grand Total 1630 0.06% 0 0.43% 2 100.00% 443 0.00% 0.45% 100.00% 0.00% 28.57% 27.18% Table 31: Number of Lanes Ratios Crash Ratio: All Crash Ratio: KA Number of Lanes I 1 119 % of Mileage 2% Crashes 1.69 Crashes 0.84 2 6,007 88° 0- 0.52 3 151 2 % 2.62 1.79 4 379 6% 7.19 6.76 5 82 1 % 7.49 4.04 6 50 1% 8.00 7.11 7 0.1 0% 109.59 0.00 8 and over 4 0% 10.48 7.90 Total 6,792 100% 1.00 1.00 APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 55 Page 211 of 524 One-way vs. Two -Way Streets33 Table 32 and Table 33 summarize crashes by street direction for all modes and for vulnerable road users. For all modes, crashes occurred most often on two- way streets (82% crashes, 85% KA crashes). Crashes on two-way roads were slightly more severe for all modes. Vulnerable modes followed a similar trend with the most crashes occurring on two-way roads (90% crashes, 87% KA crashes). However, the severity of crashes for vulnerable road users significantly increased on one-way streets, with 35% of crashes for vulnerable road users on one-way streets resulted in a KA compared to just under 2% for all modes. Table 32: Street Direction, All Modes, 2017-2021 Intersection Contro134 Table 34 and Table 35 summarize crashes by intersection control for all modes and for vulnerable road users. For all modes, crashes occurred most often at intersections with no traffic control (58% crashes, 68% KA crashes). Crashes at stop sign controlled intersections were slightly more severe with 2.45% of crashes resulting in KAs. These trends were even more pronounced for vulnerable road users. Again, the most crashes occurred at intersections with no signal control (66% crashes, 71% KA crashes). Stop controlled intersection crashes were also the most severe for vulnerable modes with 29% resulting in a KA outcome. Two-way 47,987 81.96% 1147 84.65% 2.39% One-way 10,565 18.04% 208 15.35% 1.97% Total 58,552 100% 1,355 100.00% 2.31% Table 33: Street Direction, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Two-way 1,460 89.57% 384 86.68% 26.30% One-way 170 10.43% 59 13.32% 34.71% Total 1,630 100.00% 443 100.00% 27.18% Table 34: Intersection Control, All Modes, 2017-2021 Signal 14,016 37.01% 190 25.96% 1.36% Stop Sign 1,918 5.06% 47 6.42% 2.45% None 21,936 57.92% 495 67.62% 2.26% Total 37,870 100.00% 732 100.00% 1.93% Table 35: Intersection Control, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Signal 310 28.13% 61 22.18% 19.68% Stop Sign 70 6.35% 20 7.27% 28.57% None 722 65.52% 194 70.55% 26.87% Total 1,102 100.00% 275 100.00% 24.95% 33 All streets were assumed two-way unless otherwise noted. 34 Only applies to intersection crashes. Where no data is present, intersection is assumed uncontrolled. 56 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 212 of 524 Environmental Characteristics Historically Disadvantaged Communities and Areas of Persistent Poverty Table 36 to Table 39 summarize crashes by historically disadvantaged communities and areas of persistent poverty for all modes and for vulnerable road users. Despite having only about 14% of the regional roadway centerline miles, historically disadvantaged communities have about 23% of all crashes and the same share of KA crashes for all modes. Similarly, about 22% of all crashes and 18% of KA crashes happened within areas of persistent poverty, though only about 8% of regional roadway centerline miles fall in these areas. This indicates historically disadvantaged communities and areas of persistent poverty may have disproportionately higher crash risks. Areas where historically disadvantaged communities and persistent poverty overlap has 14% and 12% of regional total crashes and KA crashes respectively, despite having only 6% of the regional roadway centerline miles (see Table 38). The vulnerable road users involved crashes tell a very similar story, with about 25% of both all crashes and KA crashes happen in historically disadvantaged communities and the percentage of crashes that resulted in KA in these communities is about the same as the regional level. A slightly lower percentage of KA crashes happened in areas of persistent poverty compared to all crashes. The percentage of crashes that resulted in KA in these areas is about 3% lower than the regional value. However, they are still much higher than the share of roadway centerline miles in these areas. Similarly, for vulnerable road user involved crashes, areas where historically disadvantaged communities and persistent poverty overlap have 15% of regional total crashes and 16% KA crashes, respectively, despite only 6% of the regional roadway centerline miles (see Table 41). Table 36: Crashes by Historically Disadvantaged Communities, All Modes, 2017-2021 Yes 13,900 23.6% 305 22.3% 2.19% 14% No 44,996 76.4% 1,064 77.7% 2.36% 86% Total 58,896 100% 1,369 100% 2.32% 100% Table 37: Crashes by Areas of Persistent Poverty, All Modes, 2017-2021 Yes 12,682 21.5% 239 17.5% 1.88% 8% No 46,214 78.5% 1,130 82.5% 2.45% 92% Total 58,896 100% 1,369 100% 2.32% 100% Table 38: Crashes in Areas where Historically Disadvantaged Communities and Areas of Persistent Poverty Overlap, All Modes, 2017-2021 Yes 8,174 13.9% 165 12.1% 2.02% No 50,722 86.1% 1,204 87.9% 2.37% Total 58,896 100% 1,369 100% 2.32% 6% 94% 100% APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 57 Page 213 of 524 Table 39: Crashes by Historically Disadvantaged Communities, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Resulted Yes 422 25.7% 110 24.6% 26.07% No 1,222 74.3% 337 75.4% 27.58% Total 1,644 100% 447 100% 27.19% Table 40: Crashes by Areas of Persistent Poverty, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Areas of % of Crashes that Waal" # of Crashes % of Crashes Resulted in KA Yes 422 25.7% 102 22.8% 24.17% No 1,222 74.3% 345 77.2% 28.23% Total 1,644 100% 447 100% 27.19% Table 41: Crashes in Areas where Historically Disadvantaged Communities and Areas of Persistent Poverty Overlap, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Yes 246 15.0% 71 15.9% 28.9% 6% No 1398 85.0% 376 84.1% 26.9% 94% Total 1,644 100% 447 100% 27.2% 100% 58 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 214 of 524 Time of Day35 Like many of the tables above, these trends were even more pronounced for vulnerable road users. Table 42 and Table 43 summarize crashes by time of Again, crashes for vulnerable modes were fairly day for all modes and for vulnerable road users. For all evenly distributed across the day but occurred most modes, crashes were fairly evenly distributed across often between 3:00pm and 6:00pm (21%crashes, the day but occurred most often between 3:00pm and 17% KA crashes). The severity of nighttime crashes 6:00pm (20% crashes, 16% KA crashes). Night crashes between 9pma and midnight increased significantly for between 9:OOpm and midnight were slightly more vulnerable modes with 37% of crashes during this time severe than other times of day with 4% of crashes period resulting in KAs. resulting in a KA outcome. Table 42: Crashes by Time of Day, All Modes, 2017-2021 �- , % of Crashes that Resulted in KA 12:00-2:59 AM 3,866 6.56% 140 10.23% 3.62% 3:00-5:59 AM 5,428 9.22% 129 9.42% 2.38% 6:00-8:59 AM 10,338 17.56% 210 15.34% 2.03% 9:00-11:59 AM 8,965 15.22% 192 14.02% 2.14% 12:00-2:59 PM 99,48 16.89% 191 13.95% 1.92% 3:00-5:59 PM 12,044 20.45% 225 16.44% 1.87% 6:00-8:59 PM 5,964 10.13% 187 13.66% 3.14% 9:00-11:59 PM 2,336 3.97% 95 6.94% 4.07% Total 58,889 100.00% 1369 100.00% 2.32% Table 43: Crashes by Time of Day, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 . of Crashes % of Crashes % of Crashes that R# esulted in KA 12:00-2:59 AM 103 6.27% 24 5.37% 23.30% 3:00-5:59 AM 124 7.54% 33 7.38% 26.61 % 6:00-8:59 AM 230 13.99% 65 14.54% 28.26% 9:00-11:59 AM 229 13.93% 68 15.21% 29.69% 12:00-2:59 PM 248 15.09% 68 15.21% 27.42% 3:00-5:59 PM 353 21.47% 78 17.45% 22.10% 6:00-8:59 PM 264 16.06% 77 17.23% 29.17% 9:00-11:59 PM 93 5.66% 34 7.61% 36.56% Total 1644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% 35 Time of day was obtained from the crash reports. For AR, the time was extracted from the column 'crash date' from theta ble 'crashes_fc', and for MO, the time was from the column 'time' in the table 'rpc_crashes_2017_2021'. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS Page 215 of 524 Roadway Surface Condition36 Crashes involving vulnerable road users were similar with the most crashes again occurring on dry roads Table 44 and Table 45 summarize crashes by reported (92% crashes, 91% KA crashes). Despite a higher roadway condition for all modes and for vulnerable number of vulnerable mode crashes on dry roads, road users. For all modes, crashes occurred most the severity of crashes for vulnerable modes shifted often in dry conditions (80%crashes, 82% KA crashes). significantly for wet and icy roads. 33% of crashes on Crashes with 'other" roadway conditions were the most severe with just under b% resulting in a KA outcome. ° icy roads and 32/0 of crashes on wet roads resulted in a KA outcome. Table 44: Table 44: Crashes by Reported Roadway Condition, All Modes, 2017-2021 Dry 47,180 80.11% 1128 82.40% 2.39% Ice 914 1.55% 25 1.83% 2.74% Other 286 0.49% 17 1.24% 5.94% Snow 252 0.43% 3 0.22% 1.19% Unknown 293 0.50% - 0.00% 0.00% Wet Grand Total 9,969 58,894 16.93% 100.00% 196 1369 14.32% 100.00% 1.97% 2.32% Table 45: Table 45: Crashes by Reported Roadway Condition, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 .. Condition Dry 1,511 91.97% 406 90.83% 26.87% Ice 9 0.55% 3 0.67% 33.33% Other 12 0.73% 4 0.89% 33.33% Snow 2 0.12% 0 0.00% 0.00% Unknown 4 Wet 105 Grand Total 1,643 0.24% 0 6.39% 34 100.00% 447 0.00% 0.00% 7.61 % 32.38% 100.00% 27.21% 36 Road surface condition was derived from data within the crash reports. For AR, the column 'roadway_surface_condition' from the table 'crashes_ fc' was used. For MO, the column 'rd_surf_cond_type' from the table 'rpc_crashes_2017_2021' was used. See <APPENDIX> for how values between these two datasets were consolidated. 60 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 216 of 524 Lighting Condition37 Crashes for vulnerable modes were similar with the most crashes again occurring in daylight conditions Table 46 and Table 47 summarize crashes by reported (71% crashes, 62% KA crashes). For vulnerable lighting condition for all modes and for vulnerable road modes the most severe crashes also occurred in dark users. For all modes, crashes occurred most often in conditions without lighting. The severity however daylight (74% crashes, 61 % KA crashes). Dark crashes increased significantly over that of all crashes with 42% without lighting were the most severe with just under of "dark -without lighting" crashes for vulnerable modes 5% of crashes resulting in a KA outcome. resulting in a KA. Table 46: Crashes by Reported Lighting Condition, All Modes, 2017-2021 Reported Condition Dark - unknown Resulted in KA 1,027 1.74% 34 ° 2.48 /0 ° 3.31 /o lighting Dark - with lighting 5.309 9.01% 150 10.96% 2.83% Dark - without 6.435 10.93% 295 21.55% 4.58% lighting Daylight 43,439 73.76% 836 61.07% 1.92% Dusk/dawn 2354 4.00% 51 3.73% 2.17% Other 57 0.10% 1 0.07% 1.75% Unknown 273 0.46% 2 0.15% 0.73% Grand total 58,894 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% Table 47: Crashes by Reported Lighting Condition, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Reported Lighting % of Crashes that Condition Dark - unknown # of Crashes % of Crashes Resulted in KA 45 2.74% 15 3.36% 33.33% lighting Dark - with lighting 167 10.16% 56 12.53% 33.53% Dark - without 202 12.29% 84 18.79% 41.58% lighting Daylight 1,165 70.86% 278 62.19% 23.86% Dusk/dawn 62 3.77% 12 2.68% 19.35% Other 2 0.12% 1 0.22% 50.00% Unknown 1 0.06% 1 0.22% 100.00% Grand total 1,644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% 37 Lighitng condition was derived from data within the crash reports. For AR, the column 'lighting_condition' from the table 'crashes_fc' was used. For MO, the column 'light_cond_name' from the table 'rpc_crashes_2017_2021' was used. See <APPENDIX> for how values between these two datasets were consolidated. APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 61 Page 217 of 524 Proximity to Transit Table 48 and Table 49 summarize crashes by proximity to transit stops for all modes and for vulnerable road users. For all modes, crashes occurred most often beyond 500 ft of a transit stop (90% crashes, 93% KA crashes). It should be noted that a robust transit system does not currently exist throughout the entirety of the region. For Vulnerable Road Users, slightly more crashes occurred within 500 ft of a transit stop but crashes still occurred most often beyond 500 ft (87% crashes, 89% KA crashes). These figures may point to the fact that transit users are often reliant on a vulnerable mode (walking or biking) to travel to or from a transit stop. Pedestrians and bicyclists may have higher crash exposure near transit stops as well as they are more likely to include public transit in their trip compared to motorists. The location of transit stops however are often tightly correlated with other factors such as density, land use, roadway functional class which make it difficult to draw transit - specific conclusions based on this data. Table 48: Crashes by Proximity to Transit Stops, All Modes, 2017-2021 Within 500 feet 5,743 9.75% 91 6.65% 1.58% Greater than 500 feet 53,153 90.25% 1,278 93.35% 2.40% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% Table 49: Crashes by Proximity to Transit Stops, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Within 500 feet 223 13.56% 48 10.74% 21.52% Greater than 500 feet 1,421 86.44% 399 89.26% 28.08% Total 1,644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% 62 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 218 of 524 Proximity to Schools Table 50 and Table 51 summarize crashes by proximity to schools for all modes and for vulnerable road users. For all modes, KA crashes occurred most often beyond 500 ft of a school (95% crashes, 97% KA crashes). Proximity to Parks Table 52 and Table 53 summarize crashes by proximity to parks for all modes and for vulnerable road users. For all modes, crashes occurred most often beyond 500 ft of a park (94% crashes, 95% KA crashes). Vulnerable modes saw a similar trend with 92% of total crashes and 93% of KA crashes occurring beyond 500ft of a park. Table 50: Crashes by Proximity to Schools, All Modes, 2017-2021 Within 500 feet 2752 4.67% 40 2.92% 1.45% Greater than 500 feet 56,144 95.33% 1,329 97.08% 2.37% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% Table 51: Crashes by Proximity to Schools, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Within 500 feet 83 5.05% 14 3.13% 16.87% Greater than 500 feet 1,561 94.95% 433 96.87% 27.74% Total 1,644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% Table 52: Crashes by Proximity to Parks, All Modes, 2017-2021 Within 500 feet 3,823 6.49% 71 5.19% 1.86% Greater than 500 feet 55,073 93.51% 1,298 94.81% 2.36% Total 58,896 100.00% 1,369 100.00% 2.32% Table 53: Crashes by Proximity to Parks, Vulnerable Road Users, 2017-2021 Within 500 feet 124 7.54% 32 7.16% 25.81% Greater than 500 feet 1520 92.46% 415 92.84% 27.30% Total 1644 100.00% 447 100.00% 27.19% APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 63 Page 219 of 524 Appendix A - Crash Code Value Consolidations First harmful event = Decoded Value rM ff". 4 Jackknife jackknife 5 6 Cargo/equipment loss or shift Equipment failure (blown tire, brake failure, etc.) cargo shift or loss equipment failure 7 Separation of units separation of units 8 Ran off roadway right ran off road - right 9 Ran off roadway left ran off road - left 10 Deliberately crossed median crossed median 11 Unintentionally crossed median crossed median 12 Crossed centerline crossed centerline 13 Downhill runaway downhill runaway 14 Fell/jumped from motor vehicle fell or jumped from vehicle 15 Reentering roadway reentering road 16 Object thrown or fallen on or near motor vehicle cargo shift or loss 17 Other non -collision other non -collision 18 Collision with pedestrian collision with pedestrian 19 Collision with pedalcycle collision with bicycle 20 Collision with other non -motorist collision with non -fixed object 21 Collision with railway vehicle (train, engine) collision with railway vehicle 22 Collision with animal (live) collision with animal 23 Collision with motor vehicle in transport collision with vehicle in transport 24 Collision with parked motor vehicle collision with parked vehicle 25 Collision with falling/shifting cargo or anything set in motion by motor vehicle cargo shift or loss 26 Collision with work zone/maintenance equipment collision with non -fixed object 27 Collision with other non -fixed object collision with non -fixed object 28 Collision with impact attenuator/crash cushion collision with fixed object 29 Collision with bridge overhead structure collision with fixed object 30 Collision with bridge pier or support collision with fixed object 31 Collision with bridge rail collision with fixed object 32 Collision with cable barrier collision with fixed object 33 Collision with culvert collision with fixed object 34 Collision with curb collision with fixed object 35 Collision with ditch collision with fixed object 36 Collision with embankment collision with fixed object 37 Collision with guardrail face collision with fixed object 38 Collision with guardrail end collision with fixed object 39 Collision with concrete traffic barrier collision with fixed object 40 Collision with other traffic barrier collision with fixed object 41 Collision with tree (standing) collision with fixed object 42 Collision with utility pole/light support collision with fixed object 43 Collision with traffic sign support collision with fixed object 44 Collision with traffic signal support collision with fixed object 45 Collision with other post, pole, or support collision with fixed object 64 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 220 of 524 Value rDe 46 Collision with fence collision with fixed object 47 Collision with mailbox collision with fixed object 48 Collision with other fixed object collision with fixed object 49 Unknown unknown 50 Collision with building collision with fixed object = Decoded Value 16 CROSS MEDIAN Consolidated Value crossed median 17 CROSS CENTER OF ROAD crossed centerline 18 CROSS ROAD crossed centerline 19 AIRBORNE airborne 20 RAN OFF ROAD - RIGHT ran off road - right 21 RAN OFF ROAD - LEFT ran off road - left 22 OVERTURN / ROLLOVER over turn or rollover 23 FIRE / EXPLOSION fire or explosion 24 IMMERSION immersion 25 JACKKNIFE jackknife 26 CARGO LOSS / SHIFT equipment failure 27 EQUIPMENT FAILURE equipment failure 28 SEPARATION OF UNITS separation of units 29 RETURNED TO ROAD reentering road 30 COLLISION INV PEDESTRIAN collision with pedestrian 31 COLLISION INV. BICYCLE / PEDALCYCLE collision with bicycle 32 COLLISION INV. RAILWAY VEH. collision with railway vehicle 33 COLLISION INV ANIMAL collision with animal 34 COLLISION INV MV IN TRANSPORT collision with vehicle in transport 35 COLLISION INV PARKED MV collision with parked vehicle 36 COLLISION INV FIXED OBJECT collision with fixed object 37 COLLISION INV OTHER OBJECT collision with non -fixed object 38 OTHER NON COLLISION other non -collision 39 COLLISION INV. BICYCLE / PEDALCYCEL IN BICYCLE LANE collision with bicycle 40 COLLISION INV ANIMAL DRAWN VEH / ANIMAL RIDDEN FOR TRANSPORTATION collision with animal 41 COLLISION INV. WORKING MV collision with non -fixed object 42 DOWNHILL RUNAWAY downhill runaway 43 FELL / JUMPED FROM MV fell or jumped from vehicle 44 THROWN / FALLNG OBJECT collision with non -fixed object 45 STRUCK BY FALLING, SHIFTING CARGO, OBJECT SET IN MOTION BY OWN MV cargo shift or loss 46 RAN OFF ROADWAY - OTHER ran off road - other 47 CROSS SEPARATOR crossed median U UNKNOWN unknown Maneuvers = Decoded Value 1 Movement essentially straioht ahead straight APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 65 Page 221 of 524 Value rDe 2 3 Negotiating a curve Backing straight backing 4 Changing lanes chafing lanes 5 Overtaking/passing overtaking 6 Turning right turn - right 7 Turning left turn - left 8 Making U-turn turn - U 9 Leaving traffic lane chaing lanes 10 Entering traffic lane slowing 11 Slowing parked 12 Parked parked 13 Stopped in traffic stopped in traffic 14 Other other 15 Unknown unknown = Decoded Value 1 None Consolidated Value none 2 Crossing roadway crossing road 3 Waiting to cross roadway adjacent to roadway 4 Walking/cycling along roadway with traffic (in or adjacent to travel lane) along roadway - with traffic 5 Walking/cycling along roadway against traffic (in or adjacent to travel lane) along roadway - against traffic 6 Walking/cycling on sidewalk on sidewalk 7 In roadway - other in roadway 8 Adjacent to roadway (e.g., shoulder, median) adjacent to roadway 9 Working in trafficway (incident response) in roadway 10 Other other 11 Unknown unknown Decodedd. 01 GOING STRAIGHT straight 02 OVERTAKING overtaking 03 MAKING RIGHT TURN turn - right 04 RIGHT TURN ON RED turn - right 05 MAKING LEFT TURN turn - left 06 MAKING U-TURN turn - U 07 SKIDDING / SLIDING other 08 SLOWING OR STOPPING slowing 09 START IN TRAFFIC other 10 START FROM PARKED parked 11 BACKING backing 12 STOPPED IN TRAFFIC stopped in traffic 13 PARKED parked 14 CHANGING LANES chaing lanes 15 AVOIDING other 66 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 222 of 524 Value Decoded Value 1 Dry dry 2 Wet wet 3 Snow snow 4 Slush snow 5 Ice/Frost ice 6 Water wet 7 Sand other 8 Mud, Dirt, or Gravel other 9 Oil other 10 Other other The column 'rd_surf_cond_type' was not listed in the received data dictionary. Therefore, the table below does only contain the full list of possible values, and instead only that were present in the received crash data. Additionally, the decode values were determined based on professional judgement. Decoded DRY Dry dry WET Wet wet SNOW Snow snow ICE Ice ice SWTR unsure of value unknown Lighting Condition = Decoded 1 Daylight daylight 2 Dawn dusk/dawn 3 Dusk dusk/dawn 4 Dark - Lighted dark - with lighting 5 Dark - Not Lighted dark - without lighting 6 Dark - Unk. Lighting dark - unknown lighting 7 Other other 8 Unknown unknown The column ' light_cond_name' was not listed in the received data dictionary. Therefore, the table below does only contain the full list of possible values, and instead only that were present in the received crash data. Additionally, the decode values were determined based on professional judgement. Decoded DRY Dry dry WET Wet wet SNOW Snow snow ICE Ice ice SWTR unsure of value unknown APPENDIX B: DESCRIPTIVE CRASH ANALYSIS 1 67 Page 223 of 524 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 224 of 524 Appendix C: Equity Analysis Framework Methodology and Findings May 2, 2023 Introduction As a part of the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission's (NWARPC) process of developing a Vision Zero Plan, the project team developed a methodology for identifying communities that have disproportionate safety impacts. The focus was placed on communities that have experienced historic marginalization, disenfranchisement, and disinvestment to examine how past harms may continue to disadvantage them, specifically in terms of traffic violence. The goal of the analysis is to present NWARPC with a process for distinguishing populations that are underserved and under-resourced and an approach to assessing how they are impacted by outcomes of the transportation system like safety risk. The results of the analysis reveal demographic patterns in safety outcomes and provide valuable information for adopting an equity lens to prioritizing safety investments. Taken with crash analysis, development of the High Injury Network (HIN), and community engagement findings, the results can provide an understanding of the implications of safety risk disparities on various communities. This document begins with background information to describe our approach to equity analysis. Next, it details the methods of identifying populations and analyzing safety impact in relation to them. It then presents the results, spatially and graphically, and concludes with recommendations for applying the findings of this analysis. Definitions Community and population are often used interchangeably to describe groups of people sharing similar characteristics or experiences. In this document, we use community to mean a collection of persons that share experiences or cultures. Population is used to describe a group defined by shared demographic attributes, typically identified through Census data. Racial minority and "non -white" are not terms used in this analysis. When referring to people that have been racialized, we will reference their specific identity (African -American, Asian -American, Pacific Islands, Hispanic, and Native American) or use the term Black, Indigenous, or Person of Color (BIPOC). Distinguishing Black and Indigenous people calls attention to the grave injustices that these communities have faced in this country. Low-income refers to people or households that have financial constraints that impact their daily lives. There is no one threshold for what is considered low income. It can be described using poverty guidelines, median household income, housing burden, or transportation burden. Equity is a pluralistic concept that centers on the concept of fairness and justice. We recognize the need for any equity construction to redress historical marginalization, disenfranchisement, and disinvestment. An equity analysis should examine disproportionate impacts and disparate outcomes for those who have been harmed. Area of Persistent Poverty is defined by the USDOT as any County or Census Tract that has consistently had greater than or equal to 20 percent of the population living in poverty over a defined period. Historically Disadvantaged Communities refers to populations sharing a particular characteristic, as well as geographic communities, that have been systematically denied a full opportunity to participate in aspects of economic, social, and civic life. Equity Analyses An equity analysis is one component of unraveling inequities and advancing transportation equity. It provides information that must be used in concert with knowledge learned through engagement to determine actions that improve the lived experiences of people that have been systemically burdened or have had benefits withheld. This quantitative analysis does not answer the question, "is this plan/project equitable?" APPENDIX C: EQUITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK 1 69 Page 225 of 524 and instead should be used to inform investment and prioritization decisions to advance equitable outcomes A first step in equity analysis is often demographic mapping. Populations are distinguished based on demographic factors that reflect communities who have been systemically oppressed and marginalized. Then they are categorized using available data (typically Census/American Community Survey data) and geographically located. The resulting maps help understand demographic patterns across a region or city. The demographic patterns can then be spatially compared to various transportation system outcomes, such as safety risk. This can be used to compare outcomes experienced by various populations, revealing disparities and establishing a baseline to improve upon. This improvement comes as the analysis is used in a framework that systematically makes decisions and investments to eliminate socio-demographic disparities and redresses past harms. Defining Populations How are populations defined? NWARPC conducted an environmental justice analysis during their long-range planning process for the 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. Through geospatial analysis, NWARPC identified underrepresented populations required by regulations) — racial and ethnic communities and low-income households. They also name additional demographic factors of age, sex, ability, car ownership/access, and population and employment density that are relevant and could be evaluated as needed. To create a broad characterization of communities that have sociodemographic vulnerabilities and to define the populations that we consider in this analysis, we used criteria for Areas of Persistent Poverty, Historically Disadvantaged Communities as identified by the USDOT RAISE Mapping Tool, and the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). Areas of Persistent Poverty An Area of Persistent Poverty is defined by the USDOT as any County that has consistently had greater than or equal to 20 percent of the population living in poverty during the last 30-year period, as measured by the 1990 and 2000 decennial census and the most recent (2021) annual Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates as estimated by the Bureau of the Census or a Census Tract that has a poverty rate of at least 20 percent as measured by the 2014-2018 5-year data series available from the American Community Survey of the Bureau of the Census. Historically Disadvantaged Communities The USDOT considers certain qualifying census tracts to be historically disadvantaged based on 22 indicators collected at the census tract level and grouped into six (6) categories of transportation disadvantage: • Transportation access disadvantage identifies communities and places that spend more, and take longer, to get where they need to go. (4 indicators) • Health disadvantage identifies communities based on variables associated with adverse health outcomes, disability, as well as environmental exposures. (3 indicators) • Environmental disadvantage identifies communities with disproportionately high levels of certain air pollutants and high potential presence of lead -based paint in housing units. (6 indicators) • Economic disadvantage identifies areas and populations with high poverty, low wealth, lack of local jobs, low homeownership, low educational attainment, and high inequality. (7 indicators) • Resilience disadvantage identifies communities vulnerable to hazards caused by climate change. (1 indicator) • Equity disadvantage identifies communities with a with a high percentile of persons (age 5+) who speak English "less than well." (1 indicator) The comprehensive list of underlying indicators is presented on USDOT's Justice40 Initiative. 1 Executive Order 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low -Income Populations was signed in 1994 and required all recipients of federal funds to "identify and address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations." This executive order and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act for the basis for the industry's approach to transportation equity. 70 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 226 of 524 Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) The CDC and ATSDR define social vulnerability as the ability of a community to survive and thrive when confronted by external stressors on human health. We can consider transportation disadvantage (lack of or restricted mobility) among these stressors. They rank each Census Tract along 16 factors categorized into four themes (Figure 1). Figure 1: Social Vulnerability Index developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). L Socioeconomic Status Household Characteristics Racial & Ethnic Minority Status ^L W O� Housing Type & Transportation How is this definition of populations used? The CDC/ATSDR SVI categorizes vulnerability along four themes, each of which also impacts mobility and can affect transportation disadvantage. Socioeconomic status: Factors categorized in this theme relate to the economic vulnerability of individuals and households. These factors link to transportation disadvantage; they identify populations whose current economic situation may limit their mobility or for whom disruptions in mobility could negatively impact their financial situation. Below 150% Poverty Unemployed Housing Cost Burden No High School Diploma No Health Insurance Aged 65 & Older Aged 17 & Younger Civilian with a Disability Single -Parent Households English Language Proficiency Hhpw k or Latino (of am rem) Black or African American, Not Hispanic or Latino Asian, Not Hispanic or Latino American Indian or Alaska Native, Not Hispanic or Latino Native Hawaiian or pacific Islander, Not Hispanic or Latino Two or More Races, Not Hispanic or Latino Other Races, Not Hispanic or Latino Multi -Unit Structures Mobile Homes Crowding No Vehicle Group Quarters Race and ethnicity: The racial and ethnic groups in this theme reflect populations that have experienced historic discrimination. As we know, historic discrimination excluded and denied services, investments and funding, power in decision making, and other areas critical to having agency over one's lived experience to racialized populations. The effect of this discrimination continues to impact Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC). Disinvestment in and disenfranchisement of BIPOC communities has led to inadequate mobility including longer travel times, missing and deteriorating infrastructure, and greater safety risk. APPENDIX C: EQUITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK 1 7' Page 227 of 524 Household characteristics: As NWARPC stated in their environmental justice analysis, age, ability, and English proficiency can restrict mobility options. The other factor in this theme is single -parent households Households with children (and dependents) with a single parent can face mobility challenges based on limited travel choices for household members (e.g., children need supervision on transit or a driver) and constrained income. Housing and transportation: The factors categorized in this theme have important impacts to vulnerability, but have less of a direct impact to mobility, aside from zero - car households. Therefore, this theme is not included in the equity analysis and zero -car household is included as a factor in the household characteristics theme. Given the populations defined above, we created an index score for each Census block group in the MPO. We used this index score to rank all block groups in the MPO and delineated the block groups in the top quantile as "high social vulnerability areas." Understanding Disparities What impacts are evaluated? As a part of the Safety Action Plan, this analysis will focus on safety risk. However, there are other transportation impacts that have real and substantial effects on equity and a person's lived experiences. Impacts such as elevated safety risk, limited access to transportation options and desired destinations, and low quality of transportation can signify transportation disadvantage. When transportation disadvantage is paired with sociodemographic vulnerability, it creates a state of transportation poverty, where a person lacks resources to meet their mobility needs. Transportation poverty may limit to access to work, health care, education, or social networks, and leads to social exclusion and diminished quality of life. Figure 2: Transportation poverty is the confluence of sociodemographic vulnerability and transportation disadvantage. This transportation poverty framework shows how these two components can be characterized and the factors this analysis uses to quantify them. 72 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 228 of 524 Safety Risk: This equity analysis focuses on safety outcomes given its application for the Safety Action Plan. Safety impacts and risks were evaluated through the safety analysis for the NWA Vision Zero Plan. We all three equity analysis methods —Areas of Persistent Poverty (Figure 3), Historically Disadvantaged Communities (Figure 4), and Social Vulnerability Index (Figure 5)—to identify segments of the HIN that are in use the results of the safety analysis with the results of areas with high equity scores. Figure 3: High Injury Network in areas of persistent poverty Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021. APPENDIX C: EQUITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK 1 73 Page 229 of 524 Figure 4: High Injury Network in historically disadvantaged communities. Historically Disadvantaged Communities 714il",--.Jane& High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Gateway Bella Vista" evils Eyebro Gravette �`W l Bentonville Centerton 1 I Rogers-, i iloam Springs Springdale 412 J Tontitown Ozark National Forest Fayetteville 7 Prairie Grove r. 62 f Ozark National Forest Hobbs State Lake Sequoyah 71 r� I Winslov,` 7 Ozark National Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 ml crashes between 2017-2021. m Historically Disadvantaged Tract All Modes High Injury Network Parks & Open Space City Boundaries 74 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 230 of 524 Figure 5: High Injury Network in areas with high SVI Pineville 71 High SVI & High Injury Network --,Jane Northwest Arkansas Gateway Belle Vlsta evils Eyebro Gravette Centerton i% Bentonville Rogers i Hobbs State Pa 71' Siloam Springs ' Springdale 412 1- J Tontitown Ozark National Forest Goshen Fayetteville L,tke Sequoyah Par Elkins Prairie Grove P% 62 71 Lincoln Hlgh Social Vulnerablity All Modes High Injury Network Parks & winsloA Open Space Ozark National Forest Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 ml :1 crashes between 2017-2021. • APPENDIX C: EQUITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK 1 75 Page 231 of 524 The scope of this analysis does not include a robust evaluation of accessibility disparities, however, as this project progresses, exploring the impacts and contributing factors of transportation disadvantage will enrich the results and recommendations of the work. Although the focus of this project is safety, accessibility is inherently related; accessibility assumes safety and safe transportation is in service of accessibility to destinations. Regardless of demographic factors that can limit one's mobility, such as age, ability, and income, expanding quality mobility options can remove some of the restrictions and enable more freedom of movement. Qualitative Data: The quantitative equity analysis provides only part of the puzzle. To understand transportation disparities, we need to understand the lived experience. The best data for this assessment is from community engagement. This data helps define transportation disadvantage, identify areas of safety risk, highlight barriers to access and mobility, and establish the existing conditions and context. Advancing Equity As stated before, an equity analysis is one part of advancing transportation equity. How the information from the analysis is used is key to moving an equity analysis from a mapping exercise to an effective tool. The information from this analysis can be used in equitable distribution of safety investments, storytelling at the regional and local levels, and monitoring how outcomes change over time. Equitable Distribution of Safety Investments The equity analyses are a component of the Safety Action Plan with the express purpose of influencing the decision making related to the results of this project. Recognizing that traffic violence (and other negative outcomes of the transportation system) has disproportionate impacts on BIPOC, low-income households, and other communities that have been marginalized, focusing interventions and improvements to serve these communities advances equity. Using these analyses, investments on HIN in areas with high equity scores may be prioritized or engagement efforts might focus on communities that have more high -risk roadways and higher equity scores. The results of each of the analysis along with the places and communities where they overlap (Figure 6) will be used to understand where projects may be prioritized and implemented to achieve safe and equitable outcomes. Storytelling NWARPC allocates funding but is not an implementing agency. Additionally, many safety interventions must happen at the local level, although NWARPC has a regional focus. Still, NWARPC can influence equity outcomes through storytelling using the high-level issues and patterns identified in the regional analyses. The regional mapping can be used by smaller towns and rural communities with fewer resources to conduct their own analyses. In this way, NWARPC can help these jurisdictions tell the story of their transportation needs and who is vulnerable to mobility limitations. The story crafted by this analysis can and should be modified based on the results of regional engagement. An equity analysis groups people into broad demographic -based populations, but there are nuances in how people within a population experience the same impact. Furthermore, populations based on demographic data are different than communities that are considered a group based on shared experiences and interests. Demographic data also has geographic bounds (defined by the US Census) that may not align with neighborhood boundaries. As a result, equity analyses present rough estimations of communities and impacts they may experience. These broad analyses also will not capture the lived experience of individuals or how overlapping and intersecting identities that compound mobility impacts. To facilitate storytelling and examine more individualized outcomes, we can employ the concept of personas. Using the results of the equity and safety risk analyses and engagement, we can distill mobility challenges and contributing factors along with how an individual's identities interact with these challenges. We can use this to craft personalized examples of how individuals throughout the region experience the transportation system. These personas can help make disparate impacts more tangible and also communicate with local jurisdictions. 76 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 232 of 524 Figure 6: High Injury Network and Equity Analysis Overlap Gravette _III 1 Equity Analysis Overlap & High Injury Network Northwest Arkansas Bella Vista ® y .� Bentonville Centerton l •~ Springy Rogers Hobbs State Tontitown Ozark National Forest CGoshen Fa Ale Lake Sequoyah y . t 7 Prairie Grc re 62 Ozark National Forest 71 Degrees of Disadvantage High Moderate Low All Modes High Injury Network Parks & Winslow Open Space ' Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded 0 2.5 5 mi crashes between 2017-2021. m ■ • I APPENDIX C: EQUITY ANALYSIS FRAMEWORK 1 77 Page 233 of 524 Continued Assessment As NWARPC evaluates their progress on safety (and other) targets, they can examine progress in addressing disparities. By assessing the distribution of impacts across high SVI areas and demographic groups over time, NWARCP can monitor the impact investment decision are having. In this way, investments can be prioritized to address performance while targeting disproportionate impacts and underinvestment among marginalized communities. Recommendations Equity has largely been considered in the environmental justice and Title VI context, which often creates analyses to address a requirement and mark a checkbox. For example, the long-range plan was developed and the selected projects were overlaid on demographic maps to visualize impacts on racialized and low-income populations. The analysis, however, did not influence which projects were selected or where and how they would be implemented. The equity analysis for the Safety Action Plan considers equity in the initial phases to identify and prioritize locations for interventions and determine types of interventions informed by the analysis and guided by the community. Starting with the Safety Action Plan, NWARCP can continue to integrate equity analysis into decision making by using the equity analysis to assess potential outcomes like accessibility and use the results to influence which projects are selected and prioritized. This lays the foundation for a more systemic equity framework that uses equity to make decisions throughout the agency. Additionally, iterating on an equity analysis can fine tune the process over time by adjusting demographic factors and indicators as needed and focusing on various relevant impacts. Repeating the analysis at regular intervals can also help evaluate outcomes over time to monitor improvement and direct ongoing efforts towards equity. Finally, it is important to remember that inequities are a result of past discrimination, disinvestment, and disenfranchisement. Understanding the history of Northwest Arkansas relative to racialized communities and other key communities can highlight what harms should be redressed. These may not be limited to transportation although they will affect one's mobility. Advancing equity is a continual process; the equity analysis is one step in a multidisciplinary, multi-sectoral endeavor. 78 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 234 of 524 Appendix D: Project Prioritization The Northwest Arkansas region is committed to Vision Zero to eliminate roadway fatalities and serious injuries by 2038. The NWA Vision Zero Plan establishes the goals and actions that need to be taken by the state, regional, and local agencies along with supporting partners to achieve Vision Zero. This report serves to provide direction on project prioritization and safety countermeasure selection for traffic safety projects across Northwest Arkansas. The actions, Prioritization Frameworks, and the proven safety countermeasures in the NWA Vision Zero Plan should be used congruently to guide the implementation of the strategies that specifically relate to roadway safety infrastructure improvements. The information in this report is a guide for the Region and member agencies to prioritize and implement traffic safety projects using the Safe Systems Approach. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission (NWARPC) will be able to use the Project Prioritization Frameworks to further prioritize and implement projects as funding is allocated for safety projects. This report has two sections. In the first section, the Project Prioritization Framework outlines the criteria for prioritization and select location -specific and systemic safety projects. The second section lists the projects along the high -injury network and the outputs from the Safer Streets Priority Finder model along with their scoring based on these criteria. Project Prioritization Framework The Project Prioritization Framework will support the Northwest Arkansas region in the decision -making process to target its Vision Zero strategies and ultimately eliminate roadway fatalities and serious injuries. The Frameworks will allow the region to: identify the locations to focus its limited resources and the projects to prioritize at those priority locations, and 2. prioritize systemic improvements that member agencies can do across their roadway networks to increase safety without needing to do further analysis. This section outlines the prioritization process for location -specific projects and systematic proactive projects. Location -Specific Project Prioritization and Monitoring Frameworks Location -specific project prioritization ranks roadway segments by safety need through a data - driven process. In this framework, five metrics that incorporate roadway crash history, crash severity, community input, and equity are used to prioritize roadway segments. The metrics are weighted to help ensure that projects deployed at the prioritized locations will have the best likelihood to help the region and member agencies achieve Vision Zero. Total scores were developed for each location -specific projects on the HIN. Note that since all of the corridors are on the HIN, the corridors are ranked equally under that metric. Projects were categorized into three projects tiers — Tier 1 being the highest priority and Tier 3 being the lowest —with approximately equal number of projects in each tier. Adjustments were made to ensure projects with the same total scores were always in the same tier. APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 79 Page 235 of 524 The table below summarizes the five metrics and outlines the weighting for each. Table 1: Metrics for the Location -Specific Project Prioritization Framework The total number of KSI crashes per mile on the roadway segment in the most recent five years Number of Killed of crash data. This is the top -weighted metric or Seriously to prioritize the goal of Vision Zero —eliminate 30% Injured (KSI) fatalities and serious injuries on roadways across Crashes Northwest Arkansas. Crash data is sourced from both the Arkansas and Missouri Departments of Transportation. Roadway segments that are on the Overall HIN should be prioritized in the region's overall roadway project prioritization process. While On the Overall project prioritization would score all projects, High Injury using the overall HIN metric ensures safety is Network (HIN) paramount in ranking all roadway projects. This metric weights where crashes are occurring at the greatest injury severity and density through a sliding windows analysis. The highest Degree of Disadvantage area that the Equity and roadway segment travels through. Equity analysis Degrees of identifies the areas of the region where a higher Disadvantage proportion of historically disadvantaged people lives along with areas of persistent poverty that can result in social vulnerability. 20% Rank by Tiers 3 — Highest 2 — Middle 1 - Lowest Part of HIN 3—Yes 0-No Rank by Tiers 3 — Highest degree of disadvantage, persistent poverty, and social vulnerability 25% 2 — Some degree of disadvantage, persistent poverty, or social vulnerability 1 - Minimal degree of disadvantage, persistent poverty, or social vulnerability The total number of crashes per mile of all severity Rank by Tiers types that occurred on the roadway segment in the 3 —Highest tier of total crashes Total Crashes most recent five years of crash data. Crash data 10% 2 is sourced from both the Arkansas and Missouri — Middle tier of total crashes Departments of Transportation. 1 —Lowest tier of total crashes The total number of comments received from Number of the public about the roadway segment being Rank by Tiers Unsafe Location unsafe. Road users' perception of safety can help 3 — Highest density of comments Comments from proactively identify unsafe locations that may not 15% 2 — Medium density of comments Public have a significant crash history. Data is sourced 1 — Lowest density of comments from the mapping activity conducted as part of the 0 — no comments NWA Vision Zero Plan process. 100% 80 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 236 of 524 Once the region and its member agencies have prioritized locations for projects, an additional framework will be used to identify and rank the countermeasures to implement at the priority locations. The Location -Specific Prioritized Project Monitoring Framework will allow the region to move location -specific projects through the process to select countermeasures and tracking of outcomes through these seven steps outlined in the table below. Some projects along the HIN have already been identified by member agencies for safety projects and the countermeasures may have already been identified based on understanding of crashes. This framework should be used to track and evaluate projects consistently and objectively for accountability and flexibility. Table 2: Steps in the Location -Specific Prioritized Project Monitoring Framework Identify individual countermeasures for each of the priority corridors by evaluating the crash causation in the most recent five years of crash data. Evaluate the crash types, contributing factors, and roadway context that may have contributed to crashes, with particular attention to KSI crashes. When evaluating corridors that are on the Overall HIN, identify which of the modal HIN the corridor is on to identify which mode has been most at risk for KSI crashes. As needed, look further into crash causes, by reviewing the full crash reports that occurred on 1 Understanding Crash Causation the prioritized corridor. Longer road corridors from the Location -Specific Prioritization Framework can be further segmented. This segmentation can be done for several reasons a.) to match a change in context or configuration of the road (e.g. the road goes from six lanes to four), b.) to select a more management segment length because of limited resources, c.) to match the limits of another corresponding project (e.g. pavement restoration), or d.) to match changes in the prevailing crash risk factors along the corridor. Conduct a review of the corridor to select safety countermeasures and key design features 2 Initial Safety Countermeasures that would increase traffic safety on the priority corridor. Use the information on crash Selection causation from Step 1 to develop an initial countermeasures list from the proven safety countermeasures and associated toolkit. Final Safety Countermeasures Fine-tune the countermeasures list from Step 2 based on feasibility, funding, and context. 3 Selection The Crash Modification Factors (CMF)- information about each countermeasure (Step 4) should provide insight into the final selection of countermeasures. Model CMFs to estimate if the safety countermeasures selected will eliminate KSI 4 CMF Modeling crashes. Values for CMFs are used to identify safety countermeasures with the greatest possible safety benefit for a particular location, with the goal of layering multiple safety countermeasures to get a CMF of zero. After the set of countermeasures is determined for the location from Steps 3 and 4, begin design and engineering with the goal to provide safe and comfortable places for all road 5 Design and Engineering users, especially vulnerable users. Ensure the countermeasures are designed in a layered approach to complement each other and work together to reduce crash severity and eliminate KSI crashes. Implement the countermeasures. Ensure the construction process follows work zone safety b Construction best practices to allow the safe movement of all road users. Monitor the safety outcomes and performance of projects by conducting field observations, conducting surveys of road users' perception of safety, and reviewing crash data to 7 Safety Outcome Performance determine if desired behaviors changed and if crash frequency and severity are reduced. Perform systemic evaluation across the region and within member agency jurisdictions to see how projects constructed are working toward eliminating KSI crashes by 2038. 1 USDOT Crash Modification Factors Clearinghouse provides a database of factors that estimates the possible effect countermeasures could have on reducing crashes. https://www.cmfcLearinghouse.org/ APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 81 Page 237 of 524 Systemic Proactive Project Prioritization Framework Systemic treatment implementation is a common Vision Zero approach that identifies many locations for the rapid application of proven safety countermeasures designed to reduce the number of KSI crashes. Systemic treatments can be proactively implemented throughout the regional and in member agency jurisdictions and are generally considered well -suited for widespread implementation because of their safety effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and feasibility for implementation at multiple locations. These traffic safety infrastructure improvements can usually be made where common safety risk factors exist and often do not require any further analysis implement at specific locations. The table below lists the safety countermeasures that are recommended for proactive, systemic implementation in Northwest Arkansas, and the ultimate locations where each countermeasure should be implemented. Table 3: Systemic Proactive Safety Countermeasures Northwest Arkansas Regional Priority Location - Specific Projects Location -specific projects across Northwest Arkansas have been identified though the development of the HIN along with using the Safer Streets Priority Finder model to identify a variety of corridors and roadway segments where safety risks could be addressed proactively. The following tables show the prioritized lists of corridors along the HIN. The maps and tables include all projects in the NWA region along with sorted tables and corresponding maps for projects in the following communities: • Bella Vista • Bentonville • Centerton • Fayetteville • Rogers • Siloam Springs • Springdale Each table lists the following information related to the location -specific project: 1. Corridor Name 2. To/From Extents 3. Municipality 4. Length (miles) 5. Project Tier b. Total Score 7. KSI Score 8. KSI Crashes/Mile 9. All Crash Score 10.All Crashes/Mile 11. Equity Score 12.HIN Score 13.Public Comment Score 14.HIN Modes • p: pedestrian • b: bicycle • mc: motorcycle • mv: motor vehicle 82 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 238 of 524 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 239 of 524 Corridor To Extent From Extent Municipality Length (mi) TiProject Total Score KSI Score KSI West Robinson Avenue South Thompson Street Turner Street Springdale 0.4 1 2.85 3 5.4 Curchill Avenue/West South Thompson Street West Emma Avenue Springdale 3.2 1 2.85 3 8.8 Lakeview Drive North Garland Avenue West Lawson Street West Berry Street Fayetteville 0.4 1 2.75 3 5.0 Old Wire Road/Dick Trammel North Old Missouri Road East Emma Avenue Springdale 1.3 1 2.75 3 5.4 Highway West Hudson Road/Water Bentonville, Southeast 14th Street Phyllis Street 0.6 1 2.6 3 6.4 Tower Road/Bekaert Drive Rogers West Martin Luther King Jr. West Ozark Trail/East Main South School Avenue Fayetteville 3.5 1 2.6 3 7.8 Boulevard Street North College Avenue East Center Street East Township Street Fayetteville 2.1 1 2.6 3 5.2 Westside Village Street/East West Sunset Avenue South Thompson Street Springdale 4.1 1 2.6 3 8.8 Henri de Tonti Boulevard All Crash All Crashes/ Equity HIN Score N Score Mile Score C 3 311.9 3 3 2 2 153.8 3 3 2 2 131.5 3 3 2 3 1002.3 2 3 2 3 439.4 2 3 2 3 372.9 2 3 2 3 438.1 2 3 2 a my mc, mv, p b mv, p my b, mc, mv, p mv, p mc, mv, p West North Street/North West Wed ington Drive MP 16.40 Fayetteville 3.5 1 2.5 3 6.6 2 245.1 2 3 2 b, mc, mv, p Garland Avenue West Oak Street/South 5th South Mountie Boulevard West Olrich Street Rogers 0.5 1 2.5 3 6.0 2 11.9 2 3 2 p Street US 412;AR 59 W extent of US 412;AR 59 Arkotex Road Siloam Springs 2.1 1 2.5 3 5.6 2 202.0 2 3 2 my US 412 MP 11.65 Arkotex Road/US 412;AR 59 Siloam Springs 1.1 1 2.5 3 8.2 2 178.2 2 3 2 mc, my South Archibald Yell South School Avenue West Nonnamaker Drive Fayetteville 1.1 1 2.45 2 0.9 2 54.5 3 3 2 my Boulevard North Thompson Street West County Line Road West Emma Avenue Springdale 1.7 1 2.45 3 5.2 2 225.2 3 3 0 mv, p West Olive Street Kingswood Drive 150 ft W of North 16th Street Rogers 1.3 1 2.45 2 0.8 2 89.2 3 3 2 mv, p East Emma Avenue/ East Huntsville Avenue Mill Street Springdale 2.0 1 2.45 2 4.5 2 97.7 3 3 2 mv, p Butterfield Coach Road 525 ft S of South Razorback South Treat Street/Dowell South Razorback Road Fayetteville 1.0 1 2.45 2 1.0 2 29.9 3 3 2 b Road Drive North 2nd Street/Northeast West Hudson Road/Water West Hudson Road Hudson Road/West Hudson Tower Road/Bekaert Drive/ Rogers 3.0 1 2.45 2 3.3 2 168.7 3 3 2 mc, my Road Southeast 14th Street West Sycamore Street North Garland Avenue North Woodland Avenue Fayetteville 0.9 1 2.45 2 1.1 2 90.9 3 3 2 my Powell Street Caudle Avenue/Park Street Southland Drive Springdale 2.0 1 2.45 2 2.0 2 32.2 3 3 2 b, p East 15th Street South Happy Hollow Road South College Avenue Fayetteville 1.3 1 2.45 2 1.5 2 90.6 3 3 2 North Crossover Road 305 ft NE of Hillside Terrace MP 9.80 Fayetteville, 1.2 1 2.35 3 8.3 3 363.3 1 3 2 Springdale West Walnut Street 115 ft E of West Walnut Street South 8th Street/North 8th Rogers 3.2 1 2.3 2 4.4 Street Southeast 14th Street Phyllis Street Southeast East Street Bentonville 1.3 1 2.3 2 3.1 Elm Springs Road Elm Springs Road White Road Springdale 1.1 1 2.3 2 0.9 Ivey Lane/North Crossover Fayetteville, South Old Missouri Road Road South Old Missouri Road 1.3 1 2.2 3 6.4 Springdale 84 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN 3 309.3 2 3 2 3 495.0 2 3 2 3 333.1 2 3 2 2 151.9 2 3 0 my mc, my b, mc, mv, p my mc, my mc, mv, p Page 240 of 524 West Clinton Drive/North North East Avenue/South East West Center Street Fayetteville 0.7 1 2.2 2 1.4 2 69.1 2 3 2 Harmon Avenue Avenue 300 ft E of North Mclilroy West Dickson Street Avenue/North Ozark Avenue/ North Arkansas Avenue Fayetteville 0.4 1 2.2 2 2.6 2 36.0 2 3 2 West Dickson Street South Thompson Street/ 65 ft SW of East Sunbridge Fayetteville, North College Avenue Curchill Avenue/West 4.7 1 2.2 2 2.3 2 164.9 2 3 2 Drive Springdale Lakeview Drive West Maple Street North Highland Avenue North Garland Avenue Fayetteville 0.9 1 2.2 2 1.1 2 91.9 2 3 2 North College Avenue/East Fayetteville, Main Drive North Ball Street Johnson, 1.1 1 2.2 2 1.9 2 66.1 2 3 2 Lake Fayetteville Road Springdale 105 ft W of West Cleveland West Cleveland Street North Sang Avenue Fayetteville 1.2 1 2.2 2 3.5 2 51.2 2 3 2 Street/North Willis Avenue i p b mv, p p my p East Pleasant Grove Road/ South 8th Street West Walnut Street Rogers 3.5 1 2.2 2 4.3 2 153.3 2 3 2 mv, p North Bloomington Street 1960 ft S of West Van Asche North Gregg Avenue West North Street Fayetteville 3.2 1 2.2 2 2.5 2 108.8 2 3 2 b, mv, p Drive South 1st Street S 1st St/South 1st Street East Glendale Lane Rogers 1.2 1 2.2 2 0.9 2 63.8 2 3 2 me West Huntsville Avenue White Road Mill Street Springdale 1.9 1 2.2 2 1.6 2 161.0 2 3 2 my 80 ft S of North Crossover Fayetteville, North Crossover Road MP 7.15 2.1 1 2.2 2 4.8 2 207.6 2 3 2 mc, my Road/East Brandon Circle Springdale 385 ft W of South Washington Jonathan Barnett Highway/ US 412 Street South Carl Street Siloam Springs 0.9 1 2.2 3 10.5 2 228.9 2 3 0 mc, my White Road Elm Springs Road West Huntsville Avenue Springdale 0.2 1 2.2 2 4.2 2 97.7 2 3 2 my US 412 MP 8.85 MP 14.15 1.2 1 2.2 3 7.5 2 163.3 2 3 0 mc, my Dick Trammel Highway Remington Drive AR 264/Old Wire Road Springdale 1.0 1 2.2 3 4.9 2 61.2 2 3 0 me East Joyce Boulevard North Steele Boulevard North Crossover Road Fayetteville 2.2 1 2.2 2 2.7 2 220.7 2 3 2 my South Dixieland Road West Walnut Street Cunningham Avenue Rogers 2.6 1 2.2 2 3.5 2 75.4 2 3 2 mv, p N Exit 3900 N extent of N Exit 3900 S extent of N Exit 3900 Fayetteville 0.1 1 2.2 3 13.6 2 74.6 2 3 0 p 2735 ft N of South Futrall West Old Farmington Road/ South Futrall Drive Fayetteville 0.8 2 2.15 2 1.2 2 45.9 3 3 0 my Drive/West Best Way Street Futrall Drive Fulbright Expressway/I 49;US Fulbright Expressway MP 2.50 Fayetteville 1.6 2 2.15 2 2.5 2 56.3 3 3 0 me 62;US 71 West Olive Street North 2nd Street 95 ft E of North 14th Place Rogers 1.2 2 2.15 2 0.8 2 97.8 3 3 0 mv, p West Don Tyson Parkway Turner Street 530 ft E of Johnson Road Springdale 1.6 2 2.15 2 0.6 2 105.8 3 3 0 my Fulbright Expressway 149;US 62;US 71 MP 123.20 Fayetteville 1.8 2 2.15 2 3.4 2 171.7 3 3 0 mc, my West Persimmon Street North 22nd Street 70 ft W of West Persimmon Rogers 1.4 2 2.15 2 1.4 2 20.3 3 3 0 p Street/North 7th Street South Hollywood Avenue/ South Sang Avenue West Martin Luther King Jr. West Stone Street Fayetteville 0.3 2 2.15 2 3.7 2 77.4 3 3 0 b Boulevard APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION Page 241 of 524 Project KSI Crashes/ All Crash All Crashes/ E uit Public Municipality Length (mi) Tier Total Score KSI Score Mile Score Mile Score HIN Score Comment Score HIN Modes South Pleasant Street Watson Avenue South Thompson Street Springdale 0.9 2 2.15 2 2.2 2 148.2 3 3 0 my 525 ft W of East Don Tyson East Don Tyson Parkway Turner Street Springdale 1.3 2 2.15 2 0.8 2 68.9 3 3 0 my Parkway North 8th Street West Hudson Road West Walnut Street Rogers 1.5 2 2.15 2 4.0 2 156.5 3 3 0 mc, my Southwest 14th Street MP 5.05 South Main Street Bentonville 1.3 2 2.05 2 4.6 3 261.5 1 3 2 mv, p 215 ft W of Southeast Walton W extent of Southeast Walton Southeast Walton Boulevard Boulevard/Moberly Lane Boulevard Bentonville 1.3 2 2.05 2 2.3 3 544.9 1 3 2 mc, my 60 ft N of Pleasant Crossing West Pleasant Grove Road/ Pleasant Crossing Boulevard Boulevard/Pleasant Crossing Rogers 0.1 2 2.05 3 14.0 3 322.8 1 3 0 my South 26th Street Drive E extent of East Wagon Wheel East Wagon Wheel Road Puppy Creek Road Springdale 0.1 2 2.05 3 8.4 3 395.2 1 3 0 my Road East Monroe Avenue/West North Bloomington Street MP 7.40 Lowell 1.6 2 1.95 2 3.8 2 93.8 1 3 2 my Monroe Avenue 355 ft NW of AR 12/Hilltop AR 12 MP 24.65 3.2 2 1.95 2 2.8 2 19.1 1 3 2 me Drive 275 ft W of Western Heights West Centerton Boulevard North Main Street/Ginn Road Centerton 1.1 2 1.95 2 1.8 2 118.2 1 3 2 my Circle South Shiloh Drive MP 1.15 N extent of South Shiloh Drive Fayetteville 1.1 2 1.95 2 1.8 2 148.2 1 3 2 my North Barrington Road/South 130 ft E of East Henri de Tonti East Henri de Tonti Boulevard Tontitown 1.1 2 1.95 2 0.9 2 202.7 1 3 2 my Barrington Road Boulevard/Towne Park Road West Centerton Boulevard/ North Main Street East Centerton Boulevard/ Seba Road/Town Vu Road Centerton 1.0 2 1.95 2 4.0 2 98.1 1 3 2 p Ginn Road West New Hope Road West New Hope Road South 1st Street Rogers 3.7 2 1.95 2 2.5 2 95.9 1 3 2 mv, p 65 ft NW of North Crossover 285 ft N of East Deerpath North Crossover Road Fayetteville 2.4 2 1.95 2 4.2 2 182.9 1 3 2 mc, my Road/East Shagbark Bend Drive Bella Vista, Bella Vista Bypass MP 0.40 MP 21.95 1.9 2 1.95 2 4.2 2 87.9 1 3 2 mv, p Bentonville Bentonville, East Centerton Boulevard MP 2.40 MP 1.25 1.3 2 1.95 2 3.1 2 223.1 1 3 2 mc, my Centerton West Apple Blossom Avenue/ East Monroe Avenue/West South Bloomington Street North Thompson Road/East Monroe Avenue Lowell 1.0 2 1.95 2 3.0 2 154.4 1 3 2 Apple Blossom Avenue US 412 MP 1.10 MP 21.70 1.2 2 1.95 3 7.2 2 157.6 1 3 0 225 ft NW of South Maestri South Maestri Road Road/Greathouse Springs Western Trails Drive Springdale, 1.2 2 1.95 2 2.5 2 35.8 1 3 2 Road Tontitown my mc, my me AR 12 Prairie Creek Drive/Phillips Road Mountain Lake Drive/Prairie Creek Drive Prairie Creek 0.5 2 1.95 3 24.0 2 181.2 1 3 0 my 80 ft E of CR 58/West Henri de 480 ft W of Klenc Road/West West Henri de Tonti Boulevard Tontitown 2.7 2 1.95 2 4.1 2 40.7 1 3 2 mc, my Tonti Boulevard Henri de Tonti Boulevard US 62 MP 21.90 MP 23.60 Garfield, Gateway 1.7 2 1.95 3 10.0 2 64.7 1 3 0 mc, my AR 12 Beaver Shores Road/AR 12 MP 9.25 Prairie Creek 1.6 2 1.95 3 6.9 2 51.9 1 3 0 my South Dixieland Road/W Pleasant Crossing Drive Pleasant Crossing Boulevard Rogers 0.3 2 1.95 3 6.5 2 71.5 1 3 0 b Pleasant Crossing Dr 86 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 242 of 524 From Extent Municipatity . ; . ® US 62 MP 8.25 MP 11.80 Avoca 3.0 2 1.95 3 5.7 2 36.7 1 3 0 mc, my North Bloomington Street/ West Monroe Avenue MP 4.00 Lowell 3.1 2 1.95 2 2.2 2 124.0 1 3 2 my South Bloomington Street 115 ft SE of East Huntsville East Huntsville Road South Crossover Road Fayetteville 1.1 2 1.95 2 0.9 2 90.9 1 3 2 my Road/Jarnigan Street 240 ft W of North Cris Hollow Fayetteville, AR 112 MP 6.05 1.9 2 1.95 2 1.6 2 33.2 1 3 2 me Road/AR112 Johnson Fayetteville, 149:US 62:US 71 MP 90.65 MP 114.75 Johnson, 7.6 2 1.95 2 3.3 2 111.8 1 3 2 mv, p Springdale 320 ft W of Sonora Acres East Robinson Avenue Turner Street Springdale 5.4 3 1.9 2 3.3 2 133.1 2 3 0 b, mc, mv, p Road/Sonora Acres Ramp MP 0.30 MP 0.20 Springdale 0.3 3 1.9 1 0.0 2 117.5 2 3 2 my East New Hope Road/Blue Hill Monte Northeast Road AR 94/AR 94S Rogers 1.6 3 1.9 2 3.7 2 26.3 2 3 0 my Road East Huntsville Avenue/East Butterfield Coach Road East Don Tyson Parkway Springdale 2.3 3 1.9 2 3.0 2 91.7 2 3 0 mc, my Emma Avenue Cheri Whitlock Drive 475 ft E of North Carl Street North Lincoln Street Siloam Springs 1.6 3 1.9 2 3.1 2 65.6 2 3 0 my Northeast Hudson Road MP 10.60 355 ft SW of Happy Trails Drive Avoca, Rogers 1.8 3 1.9 2 2.2 2 23.9 2 3 0 me AR 16 MP 13.30 MP 0.25 Fayetteville 0.2 3 1.9 1 0.0 2 56.0 2 3 2 p North Thompson Street/ 125 ft W of Backus Avenue/ Backus Avenue Springdale 1.1 3 1.9 2 1.8 2 87.3 2 3 0 p Sanders Avenue San Miguel Drive South Old Missouri Road East Emma Avenue East Robinson Avenue Springdale 1.2 3 1.9 2 4.0 2 148.0 2 3 0 mc, my 375 ft W of Electric Avenue/ Electric Avenue South Old Missouri Road Springdale 1.1 3 1.9 2 1.8 2 31.8 2 3 0 my Woodford Street 230 ft S of Progress Avenue/ Progress Avenue North Progress Avenue Siloam Springs 1.3 3 1.9 2 0.8 2 74.5 2 3 0 my Carousel Drive East Dickson Street/Highland West Dickson Street North Arkansas Avenue Fayetteville 0.5 3 1.9 2 1.8 2 174.2 2 3 0 b Avenue AR 59 MP 22.40 MP 27.85 1.7 3 1.9 2 3.5 2 20.0 2 3 0 me 225 ft S of South 40th Street/ South 40th Street 225 ft S of Haile Lane Springdale 1.6 3 1.9 2 1.2 2 75.6 2 3 0 my Holt Avenue North Dixieland Road 185 ft S of North Dixieland West Walnut Street Rogers 1.1 3 1.85 1 0.0 2 106.4 3 3 0 my Road/West Easy Street West Poplar Street North Gregg Avenue North Leverett Avenue Fayetteville 0.5 3 1.85 1 0.0 2 39.6 3 3 0 b AR 12 Van Winkle Place Road MP 19.70 2.1 3 1.65 2 4.3 2 29.0 1 3 0 me North Salem Road West Persimmon Street/North 130 ft S of North Salem Road/ Fayetteville 1.3 3 1.65 2 0.8 2 30.4 1 3 0 p Mountain Ranch Boulevard West Fairfax Street 149 MP 86.60 MP 79.50 1.4 3 1.65 2 4.3 2 120.7 1 3 0 my Spring Creek Road West Monroe Avenue/Bellview 125 ft S of Spring Creek Road Lowell, 1.1 3 1.65 2 0.9 2 4.5 1 3 0 my Street Springdale 149 MP 52.05 MP 85.60 Greenland 2.1 3 1.65 2 2.9 2 80.5 1 3 0 my APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 87 Page 243 of 524 150 ft S of State Highway 72/ State Highway 72 MP 1.30 Bentonville 2.7 3 1.65 2 3.7 2 48.1 1 3 0 East Plentywood Road Rock Road MP 0.40 MP 1.50 1.2 3 1.65 2 1.7 2 5.0 1 3 0 Pleasant Crossing Boulevard/ 85 ft S of Everest Avenue/ South 26th Street Rogers 1.1 3 1.65 2 2.7 2 27.4 1 3 0 West Pleasant Grove Road South 26th Street 475 ft NW of Jenny Lynn Lane/ US 71 365 ft NE of US 71/Pine Drive Winslow 1.3 3 1.65 2 0.8 2 9.2 1 3 0 US 71 US 62 MP 35.85 MP 26.10 I my me my me 2.0 3 1.65 2 4.1 2 14.4 1 3 0 me AR 16 MP 12.25 360 ft E of AR 16/Osgood Lane 1.2 3 1.65 2 4.2 2 20.0 1 3 0 my Bellview Street 155 ft S of Willowbend Drive/ Spring Creek Road/West Lowell 0.8 3 1.65 2 2.7 2 15.9 1 3 0 my Ridgewood Avenue Monroe Avenue West State Highway 72 Southwest 2nd Street/ Main Street Bentonville, 1.9 3 1.65 2 1.6 2 33.9 1 3 0 me Southwest Black Hawk Road Centerton Bella Vista Way MP 2.35 MP 4.65 Bella Vista 2.2 3 1.65 2 1.8 2 106.8 1 3 0 Southwest Regional Airport Greenhouse Road Boulevard/Southwest East Centerton Boulevard Bentonville, 1.5 3 1.65 2 2.0 2 59.1 1 3 0 Cornerstone Road Centerton US 62 MP 31.70 mc, my my US 62/Orchid Road Farmington, 3.3 3 1.65 2 4.0 2 31.4 1 3 0 my Prairie Grove North Shiloh Drive West Wedington Drive N extent of North Shiloh Drive Fayetteville 0.3 3 1.65 1 0.0 2 19.0 1 3 2 my North Main Street Elm Springs Wagon Wheel Road/South S extent of North Main Street Springdale 0.9 3 1.65 2 3.3 2 42.7 1 3 0 my Main Street (Cave Springs) Elm Springs East Wagon Wheel Road Puppy Creek Road 270 ft N of East Wagon Wheel Springdale 1.0 3 1.65 2 2.1 2 43.2 1 3 0 my Road/South Zion Road 80 ft N of West Apple Blossom North Thompson Road Avenue/South Bloomington West County Line Road/North Springdale 2.0 3 1.65 2 1.5 2 110.5 1 3 0 mc, my Street/East Apple Blossom Thompson Street Avenue 149;US 62;US 71 MP 114.75 MP 169.30 Lowell, Rogers, 9.8 3 1.65 2 2.9 2 119.9 1 3 0 mc, my Springdale Bella Vista Bypass MP 13.70 MP 18.90 Gravette 2.0 3 1.65 2 4.0 2 83.5 1 3 0 mv, p North Shiloh Drive West Wedington Drive/North MP 1.80 Shiloh Drive Fayetteville 1.1 3 1.65 1 0.0 2 23.6 1 3 2 my Christian Avenue Elmdale Drive North Thompson Street Springdale 0.7 3 1.6 1 0.0 2 16.6 2 3 0 p East Kenwood Road 550 ft E of East Kenwood 380 ft W of East Kenwood Siloam Springs 1.4 3 1.6 1 0.0 2 22.9 2 3 0 my Road/South Hico Street Road/Lewis Circle East Cliffs Boulevard North Crossover Road North Happy Hollow Road Fayetteville 0.5 3 1.6 1 0.0 2 7.5 2 3 0 my 88 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 244 of 524 r High Injury Network Project Corridors Jane Northwest Arkansas v � Gateway 1 T Bella Vista _ Beritonvil Rogers-,. � J 1 7 Springs, Springdale, 41 Tontitown zark National Forest Hobbs State 71 I Fayetteville Like Sequoyah I ,, Elk ns 7 Prairie Grove r. 62 �71 i Lincoln' \ v Prioritization Tier High — Medium — Low Parks & Winslow Open Space Ozark National Forest•- Ozark National Fores City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all 0 2.5 5 mi _A a recorded crashes between 2017-2021. 1 ( ■ • APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION Page 245 of 524 n E > tU E E �t. 00 P 10 n O 0 Cl! OR N N LO LO OP Iq O� m d N '5; > C m O C N N m m LO C� N a 0 0 a m m m di Ln m a m m n H m m 90 I NWA VISION ; Cl) LO a 'ERO F 'LAN Page 246 of 524 71 - CountY'RoadSE713 j�� r 9� State Rols 9� K O"r vugo` n dip �d sf West State Highway 72 1, �72 J G! VO l Short Road 3 279 o North Mount Olive Road Seba Road Bliss Street 72 F::'-- Shipe Road ,,ghway 102 a N Bush Road Kimmel Road 7 BELLA VISTA Northwest Arkansas y/ 94 20 o )1 0 CU c 0 J m s� f0 J �O ^y c a N Prioritization Tier L 1 High a z o Medium Low Parks & Open Space City Boundaries ■ . . Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT 0 1 2 ml © � data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021. lfwA,04 ' APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 91 Page 247 of 524 v z � — O C N V � N a E Lo � o u a c� Ln N L Z O — v 2 t/1 T � �+ L �7 O a v W !/) N N L N y Q U f L Ql N L f0 O r L ti a U w \ N N s N N N L r Yt�f N L Y t!1 r d L .0, O O tJ LJ N 'O L L � a� L y+ Cf C N Q. v C 7 C K w E O LL i ■ C 1 K CD CD cm CD 0 CD cu w Ln cli u L 46 1 L L re, (7 C� •O n E > > U E E E N N N Cl) Cl) CM N — — O Ln O; LO T 10 �7 17 N LO M M cn O M cM N N CV N Ln Lo C9 O O N N N N N Ci (+7 rM QI d N C C C O O O C C C Q1 Ql N m m m N .0 O p rroi _` c roi (o L e0+ L C > _ _ O T 7 t!L 7 (D N 7 @ 7 Ln W Ln Ln Ln m a� Q' o \ c L � Ln M ro !) O d C > L Ln L O N y t d � 0 a c:Llnm� ro w N o w v r0 _L Q1 r0 QL 3 Q) c > L � L Ln 7� 7 L 7� 7 0 U) Ln � Ln � m PLAN L1 > E N M 0` W N N Ln 01 N O` O N vl > > C O O Ql N m m rT N a 2 O O d LN r0 rd n Ql T m m E L E N M M N N N M N Ln N ('M Q) C j O c L O N C C N N m U LO a 2 O a 2 C O L L > Q) N m C 7 ro Qu O W U m E O M rb N M N LO M Lll N N O Q) m T rd 3 0 0 o rn o Ln 2 N T LU +. QI w � 'O In wm N O �Lnr, CD N T O N � rd is in 2 Q/ C C L O QI C c Q) Q1 m U QL � Y 3 L 3 = L L Y U 0 o c 0 o ro0 c Ln N Ln m X O N t\ O T In 3 N t E O cn O� Lo N O N Ln Ln N C C L O Q1 C C N Q) m U C O L a� a L C N > U > 41 ro 0 r0 O w m 0 � n v n C p L L L O O N L C O 7 cm �- J 7 L rd LnmamLnmm Q) 0 L C a NCD M O U � Page 248 of 524 ' 340 c v \ 4 9epa Vista Bgpas 279 I M oya 0 � ShortQ' H V io 72 Seba Road 279 Bliss Street (West Centerton Boulevard I ct v Kimmel Road c o 0 to 0 V L � Z r z Anglin Road v� 0 E BENTONVILLE Northwest Arkansas a' n m � N 72 ■ \ ■ ■ do • o � C H h Street N OJ n ■ c a —Win mill Road � N cof' Scoggins Road �umir m `o 12 � t �N 99_ n d � G � a Shores Avenue o $ 3 z East Lowell Avenue Healing Springs Road c 1 264 / Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all 0 1 2 m recorded crashes between 2017-2021. t -94- t,#,e Flock Drlve v a a � c y _o J M T L 6/ West Oak Street' West Olrich Str t a 10 � o N m Y v r X_ 0 f— W_N — Prioritization Tier 3 � High N Medium 0 o Low Ga` Parks & n Open Space II City Boundaries , ®R ■ ::11! • APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 93 Page 249 of 524 E N M N Lb N 00 N Lo D` N C O L N C N U C C - C N L a% O O L o Z Lnn Lu Z _ � = O U > L _ O L +� N tm L LON N 2 C tL U c Oru L L > a) lU C 7 r U m 94 1 NWA VISION ZEF n O N Lo OP N O C O L (U C G1 U a t0 O O � > �p C a) 3 a) o c 0 c 'O (U U 'O O L c L f0 > CU O O L > v > Lv 2r n C j inj u m LU m U .c� G s o L 4% O L Z Ln 0 PLAN E L; E N cn CM N N N Cl) N Lo O� U E N Ln M 01: a C C L O lU C C N N m U N Ln � Y vl N V1 3 N y N LO L L u 7 O 7 LO m N Ln m W O N j jn L 2 E O M LOlfY N O N N Lo M Ln d C C L O N C C N N m U C O (U -O C L N > U > N U) m O w m Lu � n O N C O L L L O O N L C O 7 0) CL 7 7 L f0 Ln m Q m L U of N 0 L C � (U O U W- Page 250 of 524 North Mount Olive Road Seba 0 A 0 z Kin) Shipe Road r� _ Bethlehem Road., 102 Goodlett Road Daniels Road Wests� 1West Cen n Road Bush Road fes Road 0 3 0 0: 0 0 U T L O z Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021. a 0 0: Howla%, 9 CENTERTON Northwest Arkansas Short Road h Road 0 feet ia v = E M CD a v o I C C cn fv L o o c z aid a F s Kimmel Road 0 m 0 � N C (p � o M�J Northwest 3rd Street i �d Street Southwes�� Vu Road Southwest 14th ; Road 28th Street Anglin Road West Rainbow Farm Road M 0 0 v 0 0 Opal Road �E Prioritization Tier tl a High E Southwest Regional Airport Boulevard 12 Medium o Low 0 0 t0 0 Parks & 0 0 E Open Space I co = J o z City Boundaries 0 0.5 1 mi A_ APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 95 Page 251 of 524 u o_ n E > > a a E E N N N M M M Cl) N N C0 OT Cl) LT LV LO M L� � M N M M O CR N LO n LO Ln Cl) M LO N N N O M N a) a) a) LL LL LL a) a) a) a) a) a) C_ M O L i C L Ln 3 a) N to O m O W W �_ al a) �i m ma) m a m a 2i to H to W Ln C O 00 L N W U _ ft7 Ln a) a) J Ln CU L C U a) r�•� a) p N U) LJ in Ln Q LL L LL c '� a L 66 O a) f0 t t0 a) a) Z L!) Q J Y M Z U Q 96 I NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Li L1 E on E > E > E > E > E U E U > E E N N N N N N O M Cl) Cl) M Cl) Cl) M N LM Cl) M Cl) — N LO LO O M m LT 17 lY 04 O O 10 Ln N LO N LT CT M N N N N N Cl) N �O O: O LO CM �Y 10 O O Cl) N N N N Cl) M LO LO LO LO LO LO -Y cl N N N N N N N N LO O LT M N M M O N a) N a) a) Qi 41 a) N a) a) N a) a) a) C a) •C m m o m m L M L1 L M O. LL LL LL LL LL LL Ln LL W a) a) N O O a a) O O U CD �t E L O H � C T a) O U a) O z O > C a) L a) a) a p C L_ p C O O, L_ O CL N C> 3zo j CD > L O aJ z�Q> = Na. N 0 N Lnino` cna> Ln o a o a c o > Y G G wp \ LL' L O Q u N U t0 fa W F a) a) c z Z C Q Ln L s L9 aJ 2 Z al LO O a) L m = p p a L C L O N J L N >` N d L 7 LO (n N M L a) 7 LO _ L p ? In U N Y LO O LL' w Z Q N 2 (M 2 Z U c Y o L (1) O _O LT cu O 4 O E Lf') > O L O > C_ O L 7 O C L t O 'O m a) N L N "O L y O N a> p O 7 L a) 7 N fa N Ucu d to L p N O 7 y fa L �i O O U> In Ln Q O m O Ln d' d' >. N Ln La W In L O Z U W- O O Ln of pQ N M N 01 �O (14 N N N L� O a) N >. La LL 7 a) �n o c (0 al W a) > c O > m z Q W 0 C O L > CL O Q C U Z O UI > E � C3 aL� c a) U N Ln o Ln d N M N O 10 L'M N N N Cl! N O a) a) N T La LL UI LO LO Y L Q a) .L.. 7 c L > 0 Z Q z a� L 7 O C Z > L CL) o Q N 3: In W o O a, co L Y CD M z N Q O C O N N In CU Y a) U_ L O ZF) Page 252 of 0 > E E > E n > E CL s n u E N M N CM N cl) N CM N M N CM N D` N N N N 00 N �t D N O n O `0 O O N T N 10 N L[) N N N N (") p. L1 i Uf c0 N M N �t N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N L� T N N 'Y O M N a) a1 a) N d a) a) a) Q) > f0 0 O +O+ cm +O+ +O+ tT a0+ r0+ +O+ m C a) .0 L a) N C .0 L a) a) a) L (O O_ (O m O L1 (a O (O O- LL Ln LL LL 1 Ln LL LL LL Ln a) O N LT 'O .L -O c C O L_ ID 7 L to f0 O L c _ O Q O .0O Ln 73 L LD O m O > a) �L�ZQ' C w> N N a a) t t v � a) uL a) L0 .� > L a)L d LnU a") o 10 LU 0 z Q z In o� Ln (0, '� P3: Lj d o s > > t )n L c f0 a) > O u v O D� L a) N 20) rn ro °' Z o 3 UO O=a) LU (O Ln a)Z O OQ W\O >U) tD E ) LL r L D OO ND C> a) -O CL Y > L Oa) O O> OO NO O O O Q J Z Q ZQ-m.O d Z Q ODLnHn U LL' m d > U O L) N a) d +. O f.� d D >o L a) N O C a) a) N > CDC L w -0 N ZUQ 3Ln 2iULn ZQ ZULY E > U U n E E E a O O O O O M CM M M (+') N CM M C) (+') 10 01 M 4 L6 16 n n n 1* LO — n N O N N N LO N �Y N l- M � N f'M (M M N N N �2 N N t2 N N L2 N N t2 N N OR N .p N LD N C+') O O O a) N a) a) a) a) N a) N a) > T T T T L L N (LL L m LL O D e io y 0 0 c O L cm 7 O N a) C O > cmO Da) a o .c LL � ri in M O N a) a) X > m `o o 'L a a a) L N Ln W LL of O O r L Ln O L: Z _ _ O N(n N N D C M T _ O CD+. y Z D O T LL � (a � L N N 10 N 10 C1 -0O O\ O Y L M > C tT 1 = y M D L D 7 to L Ln d= J L D a) N a) 7 ."' D X 0 Z W M .> L- O C a) N Ln O m D X D1 LLW It T — L� 7 rL+ O> 7 O (n Q 2i J m O T T O D o N (6 3 c > L) La a o) w U) a) a) r+ L fO a) 'L N X W L > L n L X. C D 0 Z O 7 L Ln LL O 7 LLW D LL W O > Ln Q APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION Page 253 of 524 E > U E E N N M M N O. co N � O N N 0p N N N LO Lo U O� N N N N N d N N N >. T LLL � d L W L O p O L 0 L C In z CD L O Q W L 7 .> Ln a)O L 00 N z (n O N p L 0 a > O c N a m o 0 o in s LO Z U W a rn d w L 0 m Lo O O L 'O Z W Ln aJ � L L N p > O L 0 L_ ul a Nf0 O i O O L O Ln (n Z U lY 98 I NWA VISION ZERO PLAN > E N M 01 O OP N O� O N LO O� N 0) ru N >. L a (O O d' LU L_ Ln 7 W O OL In U w a � (o (0 W = o uJ in LyJ c to > m _ N , 21 a.+ C C 2 � a) N n C (O (0 7 O W 2 = U E N LM N LM M N N Lo O� N D` N > C O O w N � C > 0 L 0 10 a a �0 o �i U 3 N O O L 'T O O d N Z 2 Q Q Q > E N cn co N M M N Lo O� N n 0J N > C f0 O O a a� (T N c •C L CL LL 1 Ln Lo a �O O Ol a Ln N D ,zr N - Q N M N O -D Lo N O O P M N O N N N T U- Lo O a 2 O M a 2 10 Q d O CM N N N 00 N O� M L9 O d d N T W N m t6 Y Q d .r 7 L LU O > z a O a Y a \ @ � O c L m d > W Ln 2 Q O + V) 0J 1f) Y N O U L �i p In 01 O 0 t 7 C L O > Z Q Q O M O M N 00 O N Lo M M d N N T W E aJ N L N O M d U) Lo x a w O L L M O O f0 z = W u u L_ c N o L a E z .c L E ` (° N C N Vl L L0 7 =,L d N m a f0 O !L' t E L � O (O z Ln > E N M O O` N O O Ln �O M M O N N N T U- L O O �- L c N 2 = x L > O O L z z p c 0 tT a N N (D > � 0 L0 > •L p L 0 O L O L z Ln > E N Cl) 10 e'J N N O O Lo M N N N T LL O OO a c 0 M L > a O Lo O Z � t I O n > O cu N > L O L 0 O L O L z (n E O M N n N O O M LCl O N N N T L T a Q Q 0 m = 3 L O L O O z = Z U in a = t0 U > N n 7 t0 O W m Page: 0 66 612 fZ7 WhPPI Rnar4 N FAYETTEVILLE Northwest Arkansas n West Henri de Tonti Bouleva Ozark National Forest Arbor Acres Road Weir Road Goose" %"Opp 0 cr E vuesl Junset Avenue G a o 0 i C U t ``ems 6 M&W 1: t ■ Parsons Road go,,�\evard Oslo` 45 East Wyman Road A'Pm4 ,eoL, ..�0'poad h Park 16 ar 3 N 156 Prioritization Tier � High — Medium — Low Parks & Open Space Butler Road City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all 0 1 2 mi © A A ` recorded crashes between 2017-2021. ,t( ' ■ • APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION Page 255 of 524 C N LM N 0� N O 10 LM O N Lq CD L C CD O d ai U O IPLAN a C> C N co co N 01 00 N O O N O N Cli L C CD QL O Z _ O N O L O �O a� > 0 O O 3 m Y au O .. N N cucuL 3 Ln E UU O_ O_ O_ O_ E U E >> > U > > U E N � E N E N C C N E N E O d O E O LM LM L., O M N M 0T LM N M f7 M N O M N LM M OR M M M LM LM LO �O CDM O C, O N M M N O N L., N LT N N N N Ci 7 L") 0. LO CR �Y O LM IT O M C) �Y N O �Y N N M N N Ili N N Cl! N N N N N O N N O N N O N O N O N �O N N N �7 ('4 O Cl) m Cl) N 1n L CD N L cu N 0)CD U) L U) L U) L a) U)U) L cu L a)0) 0 O cm O 0) 0) O 0 O 01 O 0) O 01 O 0) O L 3 F f0 C L d cu a)O L L L n N L_ N CD m L N Ln to C '0 M1i Z N �_ O L C Y 7 -0 O (U O �) x� M U) L co ao ao 10 N C� tm CD O (m W a O E ZO E� fl1 N L N C C w L N N N �O f0 .> i 7 L O N N N N O� N w 0 d' — Ln Z Ln W J U Q U LZ Ln Ln Ln N 10n _ L O aL N 41 L -0 cua� c Z c Ln2 N 00 N -0 O O C N "C N N W- O (n m 0 0) - N jp C N j N N� C r r W d= •C a v E a� a7 a� N t N s a� = a t L L m "0 w cc > 0 0 N� v) CDL L cuN -0 Z Z a' 2 �i W U' m Ln to Ln Z Z Ln d' c L_ -0 > C O E L c O _ d co _ L U/ L N m L '0 O N E N co t N O In -O f6 N N j N j N N j N N a) N U N L N N 2 = L � Ln L Ln Ln L Ln Ln X Ln 0 = w L 3' In L � Ll in L z In C> C O co O N co co O co O O N N CD L cu cm d' CD C Uo c C N 0 O d •L L 01 c >o s N cuU CD y O a O m UL au j — Ln 0 L 7 O p d' N N L 7 O LD Ln ru LT L C > > 7 > O U m Page 2! n C> C N co O: Lo LT N O N N LO O: N n M L cu cm v N L O Ln N CL 2 3 d Z N � N 0 vve'■n sT a � N a ew F m Garrett Road ,d sd, d� 1 1 Bella pass iv 0 ��oci in 3 a tN a o` t z 0 z Northwest 3rd Street 72 t0'- s. 72 L\t!Ne Flock a v a N t J M T G r 102 d� y o � W � o � c 28th Street 3est Igional Airport Boulevard o cn t � �T- j 0 o N O o 3 � c � � N 0 c 0 rY � r� Windmill Road t C CP o� Scoggins Road N o 0 w 112 N 11 a, Zii c philpot Road r Shores Avenue SQ`j s Road z �¢a j % East Lowell Avenue W tadelle Ave ROGERS Northwest Arkansas �o U ad �a C2 as ` Qo v o0 c f0 _J `st Easy Street 94 ■ ,st Olive Street v k Street st Olrich Stet e�G o/ V l bi eD Prioritization Tier �~ High 765 Medium o Low Parks & e Open Space City Boundaries TTM Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all 0 1 2 mi recorded crashes between 2017-2021. lfwA, ' • m6q 1 04kk APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 101 Page 257 of 524 E > L E E N N M M N N O N N 00 O n N N I N �O N LO 00 Cl) M Ln Ln N N Ln E LT ro ,C O L = d Ln Ln a O X lU Z 0 Y Q Ln N 01 � � O Q Ln C L[) x Q E N N ro O (n LLO Q Cll N � N H 102 I NWA VISION Ln E � C O L O. Ln Ln a o• Lo Lo O d Q N N 0 s Ln a`:3 Lo 10 a f D ZERO E ( E O Cl) N O� 00 N N N Uf O Cl) N D` O Ln E rn M C O L d Ln Ln c L N U o o ro m = Ln in c O t O1 o L d Ln to N m L roi o3:N CN Ln D PLAN E O M N L6 10 N M N 0P Ln E LT LO C O L OQ Ln Ln C O J _ .L Lo L CD O z in O L W U Ln L 0 v Z in Y O L ' U 0 E O M N Ln r- n N 00 O N LT M M to E O L d Ln Ln LU .L 0 O N to tn y lU � 7 7 rn c o 0 o au L Naa>U V1 Ln N C r- O1 C LO O a)z a Q> Ln Ln U d > O C O j a Q E O Cl) N 01 N N N O O N E LT ro C O L C Ln Ln a O O Ln 0 3 3 O J O Ln fo 00 ro O L'o W tY U a O O L N W N O «Y�ln m Ou o w Lo Ln m 0 Ln w tr 2 a O 3 a Ln C ro w Y w Page 258 of 524 n N 12 SILOAM SPRINGS Cripps West Road Marion Lee Road Northwest Arkansas Van Fleet Road Garman Road 43 0 59 m o �+ v �; Shady Grove Road dawn Hill Road East Z 'a 0 0 E o a, Cr c Bill Young Road LL a Vi Ln 0 c A O N 6 43 Law is a � � .n � C7 L I O U a d North Mows _ "' /O O Cj Z� I Ch -rl r 1� East TahlequahSveet Y264I Keck Road Q 9 N 7 Z 0-- 0 �O Quo, as 9 6� ay 68 Y_ �9 U O O Ozark Nadal Forest Prioritization Tier High 16 Medium o Low Parks & Open Space City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT 0 0.5 1 ml data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all recorded crashes between 2017-2021. m A `( 'FA A ■ ■ , 4 • APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 103 Page 259 of 524 E E E E N N m M M M OO O. N _ �7 C0 M C0 OD LO 00 Cl) M Ln LO 00 00 N N �7 N O M a) a) f0 f0 a a m 0) C C .L Q Q a) a) N t ` a) a) () L 7 > C a) a) Y 7 > (0 u a J Z_ f0 m E 0. E ra -0Q W N E c cm 7 O LJ N L In F LnQ Q C C O O tn U) j Q cn 5 c E Q) 9 Q) 7 O 104 1 NWA VISION ZERO PLAN n m n E E n Q E E E E -d E E E E N O N N N N O M M M M M M M N M M M — N N N (i P 00 LO N M M N �O M LO �Y M N N 0` N M N M M Cl) M N 00 N lO O fM O� �Y 00 LO -7 N 00 O O M M N N M N M O N LO �t N LO -t N LO �t N LO Ci N f'M N Cl! N L- O O N ('M �Y N N a) N a) 41 N a) a) a) a a a a y a a y a 0) .Q cm .Q 0) .Q 0) .Q ++ � cm«+ .Q m O Q O G (n In N Ln W In Ln L.L Ln a m O ru O co E a c m a Q W a) a) L m C) O O 7 L E 7 O O O N L N 7> N + L O 7 L cn F L a) a> cn 0` a L N V) p a) a L 0) m a) a > f0 a a) 7 C u (0 00 N O N a f0 E\ N N a) Q O O O W H cm .L C > Q) O7 U O E a) a) z'D a m 0 m N 2_ 'co a' W 7 L w (n J L N f0 a) C 1n a) N C C .p+ u N a) f0 a Y 7 L to LO �_ a f0 In >' L O �_ f6 O m �i W H J O> 7 O W Q m U m m U a p m 2 O W a' a) p z U V) U) c C O L 7 cu Ln N J Cu > L L O7 C L E d �2 n p a0 C, a) O a) > d O m O O E m O O Ln �Q zF- i W=a an z u w wm Ln2 n E N M N 01: N Cl? N N N N n a) a1 m cn a) a � C L 0 CL LLL In () CD L O Q C V) U) LO m L .0 W 0 c O Q) V) 7 E i a o` 0 7 3 7 > +L O C a) N Ln Ln Q J a) a) L O) 7 d C L O O > z U Q f E N M N 10 10 N 0� N Cl! N a) a) > C D y O cm � C L m O Q LL M Ln m L N L a) O ` z in a) rn � Q) � U N p t 7 J c a O > @ O z Q W LL a cu L 'age 260 of 5 E > U > U > > > E E E E E E E N N N O O O O M M M M M M M N N N N M M M p O OD N n n N Ln m o: 7 CDL� O .4 O N N N O, N 10 N N N 10 N .p N N O� IO N O '7 I7 17 O N O N N N N N N N N N (`7 N N N t2 N N �2LO N N N c. N O N O N O N M N O O m f0 y a f6 a f a 70 a f6 a !O a 0 CD rn rn rn rn rn rn 4 c a c c c c c c O_ M d O_ O_ O_ O_ O_ Ln LL (n V) V) In Ln (n a) a in a 0 a) a) a � C a) lPl 7 d LL c N Ln E CD c:a O N L_ CD O O Q Q Ln 1 Ln L1 F wL O N 7 C O L O �_ U) cm N C N O C> Lc_ m nmW -0 Ln o pO 3 m E In n Y O m co a' m W Ln W a a L O N >O O a' T N f0 E O f0 c 0 m w L m C N a a� 3 L c 3 j; O Y L of0i y fp c 3 O Y N j w LO OL 3m _ L Y U f0 O) o�x y T 3�a O =O N L N N zUa main L. n U oc E E > E U > E E > a E > E U E n N N O N O rI M M M M M - C) W 0 N M N LO n N n T Lc) _ +) r) M N N N N U N ? LO M M O O O N M M O M 7 N N N N n N LO Ln V N N N .O M �t M ci M c•M D L- Ln O N O d d J N N d f0 o m C M a o a f0 a fd a f0 a 0) m 0 rn rn rn a n o m o o- n `L n n V) LL -n V) Ln V) cn c w 0 r m U) H Ln F C [� U) O C > O m L L N ca cu cu > L N ro a O H W a a a w �o (Dr 0 O C f0 N c0 O UI O N L C > N C M N > a' 7 ir LO U Q C W > > C z L .L O N `O j L O) C f0 In O M 7 Q 0 a O f0 .0 D O L U N p a y O = O N C E ru N LO Ln N L EL L O C M04 N N co > a' N O U' In M Ln a' Q W Q W a m a a f0 O d L C O N y O _ N L N -O U) C C O_ y U Ln 2 W' - 10 W W' Q it m U APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 105 Page 261 of 524 E E E U > > > > > U U Q E E E E E E E E Q O O O O O O O O O O M Cl) M M M M M M M LM N N N N — N O U1 M 00 m C,N 10 n LL) UP N C i .O Co m L, I7 '7 I7 N N N N N N N N N N pp O (p N O` ('M m O� O t — O M N N O N N N N N N N N N Ln Ln Ln Ln Ln U O� O� O, Cl) M Cl) Cl) Cl) CM Cl) Cl) M M N IO O� O O (p n O N O` O (U N G1 N N N N d d d (o ro Lo rU rU rU rU ro p ro a -O a a - -O a -O -O a -O O cn cm m 0) m CD CD O i O1 O1 C C C C (U C C C C (U N C c L L L L 3 L L L L 3 L L Q Q Q Q O Q Q Q Q 0 0 0 Q Q (n Ln Ln Ln J Ln Ln Ln Ln J w to Ln a y (U C N fU o C O Y C)T N U)N W N O> 7 C U a O O O '� E p L 7 -O j a c0 O c0 wa' o w ?i LO Ln Ln 0 c w z : Ln 0 O 0 C cl. Lf') U C .> tN N l2') W N O U LO C 117 L rU X L (U 'L O IT C N (U L p (U L p N (V ro Lo L M> n > O N ro N O_ O O O Q (- >ro p O_ (U C O L d O L m Ln O W Q M Ln N J Ln d' Ln Z Ln Ln CV > W' N J Z F Ln Z F Ln (n a (u n E s E (u L _ (U rU N d lU m Y (U O C O > Ln C C L '. O N L t N .0 Ln O O N In LfY O O ca E a p o p c 3 o �' n U p Ln rn m O (- n E (u o Ln = a, g i y c Ln Ln O m v c w m a) � (n aL.+ 7 W 7 L p t 7 7 In T z (U 7 N 7 ro E c c m °� c c> p a c °� Q a c c a L p O L > N> O N N Ow> O> N m O .@ L>° 7 0 O Q> O d n> - E Z H Ln Q W Q Ln N Ln In Q �i Q m � Q' V d w OO Q Q m Ln Q Q W L C c a a O m C Ln (U O j U (U O lr W X_ O. � L, r0 lU Y C - 0 a L c L N C (u L N C �_ N t E a O N C U (U 7 U) N N N 7 N L (U L (D t !n u L O r0 O. L N tO > O O > O Q L O Q ro O L O 1* N L> m Q Ln � wo W Q Ln In Ln U z in Ln W Z F w _'0 U Q 106 I NWA VISION ZERO PLAN Page 262 of 524 0 3 0 d n 0 0 a: 0 is c m a L 7 O N C r� Shores Avenue z East Lowell Avenue SPRINGDALE Northwest Arkansas Prioritization Tier High — Medium Qssway o Low }Q` t Parks & 2 Open Space Z ��` �st Township Street I City Boundaries Note: Maps based on Arkansas DOT ACAT data and Missouri DOT STARS data for all 0 1 2 miit, UZI recorded crashes between 2017-2021. ( ' • ' 94 APPENDIX D: PROJECT PRIORITIZATION 1 107 Page 263 of 524 NWA Regional VISION ZERO Safety Action Plan CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-823 FROM: Mike Reynolds, Police Chief DATE: June 5, 2023 SUBJECT: Recognize Donations to Fayetteville Police Department for Youth Citizen's Police Academy RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of a budget adjustment in the amount of $4,750 for the acceptance of various donations by the Fayetteville Police Department. BACKGROUND: Periodically, businesses, organizations and/or citizens will make monetary donations to the Police Department for various equipment items, programs, awards, etc. DISCUSSION: The Police Department has received donations totaling $4,750 in support of the Youth Citizen's Police Academy. Collier Drug Stores donated $1,250, Signature Bank donated $1,000 and the Fayetteville Fraternal Order of Police (FOP) Foundation donated $2,500. All donations were deposited into the City's General Fund and are tracked through the City's Project Accounting System. All purchases utilizing these funds must follow the City of Fayetteville Purchasing Policies. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: The budget impact will consist of an increase in expense budgets equal to the Police Department Donations received. There is no impact on staffing related to this agenda item. ATTACHMENTS: SRF, 2023-823 BA Police Donations, project transactions, Item A.4 Approvals Signatures Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 265 of 524 Mike Reynolds Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2023-0823 Item ID 7/6/2023 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 6/1/2023 POLICE (200) Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of a budget adjustment in the amount of $4,750 for the acceptance of various donations received by the Fayetteville Police Department for the Youth Citizen's Police Academy (YCPA). 1010.200.2920-4809.00 Account Number 33044.1 Project Number Budgeted Item? No Does item have a direct cost? No Is a Budget Adjustment attached? Yes Purchase Order Number: Change Order Number: Original Contract Number: Comments: Budget Impact: Total Amended Budget Expenses (Actual+Encum) Available Budget Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget General Fund Police Donations Project Title $ 4,750.00 4,750.00 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Approval Date: V20221130 Page 266 of 524 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment (Agenda) Budget Year Division POLICE (200) Adjustment Number /Org2 2023 Requestor: TTannehill BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION: Recognize and establish revenue and expense budgets for donations received by the Police Department for the Youth Citizen's Police Academy. COUNCIL DATE: 7/6/2023 ITEM ID#: 2023-823 Holly Black 61512023 3:70 Pln Budget Division Date TYPE: D - (City Council) JOURNAL#: GLDATE: RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE CHKD/POSTED: TOTAL 4,750 4,750 v.2023424 Increase / (Decrease) Project.Sub# Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub.Detl AT Account Name 1010.200.2920-4809.00 - 4,750 33044 1 RE Donations 1010.200.2920-5201.00 4,750 - 33044 1 EX Crime Prevent/Investigate I of 1 Page 267 of 524 -0 a Ln a ro au t E a 0 ILI .J J UJ U' ta F- QrA C O w O tQIx uLL4 i� 0 0 0 Ln N u C) O C:)ti O C O O 0 D LNfI N in rl N vi } w O LU N C U � )n O V1 a LD Q v) V1 O iL ❑ O C ce 1i ED v J U (� aci E v, O C O O 0 f0 C u O 0. *' C r, E CD a CD j ❑ M ❑ j cl, O �¢ z i p cLLI ¢ i c c 5 u m rl V O1 O ) O O O ❑ O O O N N C C) N CD Qo m N � C) M CD N C. O O N 0 O L1 0 L M C� CN C)r N M I O 0 0 0 LO N 0 0 o 0 0 0 Q O 0 IR Q O O O C)O O O O O O o o 0 Z F QM N UC N �00 m u_ En O Ln cu N C •U ¢ j a o m vi C c v) V) O � m O O CLI tJ N + p ❑ ro V c ❑ U rNpp CJ c Qc V1 LLL E f C C O (U UJ a=+ ❑ 10 N C U O O ❑ a c N . E J 0 O_ F- U1 M ❑ o a C 4 0 (o c w M CDm o O C. O N V N O CD cliL O M C) 1 �C OD C) C) o N � l M N N 0 a 0 Ln n 00 C 0 0 0 0 00 Q � � O O C O O O O CDC)0 0 Lrtz Ln L N Q N N ZQ Z D rn N c C O u_ O z (A N u MOM r C j no. ¢ ❑ m vl Z q C LL O 1, C O ❑ R d i CO ❑ } ��Vp, U CJ Qom' t¢L E tf u, M C O_ O ❑ r6 C U Q o +, d C -� E a O ❑ M ❑ C2 0 ¢ D z O w ¢ r, } On C7, Ln 00 �A CD 0 ao N N ON CV N a C N M N C) C) N q; M 7j N O C. p SIN O O C:,O O O n O n iA 4A Af� Page 268 of A.Lk FPD Donations for YCPA (Budget Adjustment) Item Approvals Name: Signature: Date: Tonyia Tannehill Mike Reynolds ox� 06l Holly Black G:vmc- e- �V- 06 Les McGaugh CG( ef�c�l�3 Paul Becker + Susan Norton (1 /U `� DO 177 Lioneld Jordan Page 269 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-792 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Jonathan Curth, Development Services Director FROM: Jessica Masters, Development Review Manager DATE: SUBJECT: RZN-2023-0014: Rezoning (SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD/RIVERWOOD HOMES, 606, 607, 645, 646): Submitted by HALL ESTILL LAW FIRM for property located at SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD in WARD 1. The property is split zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, and R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 205.2 acres. The request is to rezone a portion of the property to NC, NEIGHBORHOOOD CONSERVATION AND CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. RECOMMENDATION: City Planning staff recommend denial and the Planning Commission recommend approval of a request to rezone the subject property as described and shown in the attached Exhibits `A' and 'B'. BACKGROUND: The subject property is in south Fayetteville, southeast of the intersection of S. Dead Horse Mountain Road and E. Goff Farm Road. The overall site adds up to approximately 205.2 acres, is currently minimally developed with low -density residential structures and also incorporates the Stonebridge Meadows Golf Club. The property is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural and RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre. The RSF-4 section of the property has a Bill of Assurance that limits the property to a density of 2.5 units per acre. The property has a long development history, though multiple plans have failed to come to fruition. It was previously part of the Villas at Stonebridge Planned Zoning District, which expired in 2015. Upon the project's expiration, staff recommended the property revert back to its original zoning of R-A, Residential - Agricultural. The property was eventually rezoned to its current RSF-4 designation with an associated Bill of Assurance limiting the density to 2.5 units per acre (RZN 15-5194, Ordinance 5842). In February 2018, a preliminary plat for Meadows at Stonebridge Subdivision was approved on a portion of this property (PPL18- 6063), which was not built. After two additional failed rezoning attempts in 2021, one a Planned Zoning District that was denied by City Council in March, and the other a request to remove the Bill of Assurance which was denied by Council in December, another preliminary plat received approval on 51.32 acres of the site from Planning Commission in July 2022 (PPL-2022-0006). Proposal: The request is to rezone 95.17 acres to NC, Neighborhood Conservation, and 17.81 acres to CS, Community Services. The remainder of the site, as shown in the applicant's provided exhibit and totaling approximately 92.22 acres, is to remain R-A, Residential Agricultural. Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 270 of 524 Public Comment: Staff received public comment on the request, both ahead of the meeting and at Planning Commission. Limited primarily to inquiries, staff received comment in support as well as opposition to the request. Those members of the public who were in support mentioned the benefit of added commercial development and possibility for affordable housing; those against had concerns about existing drainage issues and traffic problems. Land Use Compatibility: Staff finds that the updated proposal is partially incompatible with surrounding land uses. There are some benefits to the proposal; the combination of R-A and NC will concentrate density to a smaller portion of the site, rather than would a request for a blanket rezoning to something like RSF-4. From a use perspective, adding additional single-family homes near single-family homes is inherently compatible. NC, Neighborhood Conservation, is a single-family zoning district that allows for a density of 10 units per acre with 40-foot lot widths. At such a large acreage, and from a density perspective, however, potentially 950 single- family lots could be created in the NC portion of the site. While this number does not account for necessary right-of-way dedication, tree preservation, or drainage requirements that would also accompany any subdivision of land, the large site would still allow for a large number of units (potentially within the 600-800 range). At this intensity, staff does not find that existing infrastructure could support this without significant investment. Most traffic would flow and concentrate to the north towards Huntsville Road, and water and sewer capacity are limited to two 6-inch mains in S. Dead Horse Mountain Road and E. Goff Farm Road, and a 3-inch sewer main on the south side of E. Goff Farm Road. The area to the west, though generally rural in nature, has seen recent development, and the inclusion of CS zoning in the northwestern portion of the site could help insert additional services in an area that is currently lacking in available amenities. However, while allowing for an insertion of non-residential uses, the CS zoning district does not require it. With no stated density maximum and minimal lot width and area sizes, the potential impact of additional residential units, whether multi -family or single-family on that portion of the site could be too much too soon. Because CS does not require offices, retail, or other amenities to be offered on the northwest corner of the site, staff cannot support a rezoning to that district. Land Use Plan Analysis: Staff finds that the proposal is not in line with the goals in City Plan 2040 and adopted land use policies. The infill score for this site is low, which appears to counter the City's stated goal towards making infill development a priority. The area is also called out as both a Rural Residential Area, and a Residential Neighborhood Area. These designations do not lend themselves to the large amount of density and impact that could be added. Staff does finds that the smaller lot sizes lean this proposal towards meeting the goal of providing attainable housing and the combination of zoning districts does allow for a more mixed -use area. While staff supports the mix of uses that could be offered by this proposal, it is difficult to gauge whether what could be developed would ultimately be compatible in terms of scale, size, and density given the stated requirements and allowances of each zoning district. CITY PLAN 2040 INFILL MATRIX: City Plan 2040's Infill Matrix indicates a non -uniform infill score of 1-3 for this site. The following elements of the matrix contribute to the score, at varying points: • Adequate Fire Response (Station #3, 1050 S. Happy Hollow Road) • Near Sewer Main (E. Goff Farm Road) • Near Water Main (S. Dead Horse Mountain and E. Goff Farm Road) • Near Paved Trail (Saint Paul Trail) DISCUSSION: At the May 22, 2023 Planning Commission meeting, a vote of 5-4-0 forwarded the request to City Council with a recommendation of approval. After a motion to deny failed with a vote of 4-5-0, Commissioner Brink made a Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 271 of 524 motion to forward with a recommendation of approval, with Commissioner Holcomb seconding. Those Commissioners opposed to the request found that the proposal was not in line with the goals outlined in City Plan 2040, or with the Growth Concept map. Further, Commissioners issued concerns about the lack of information available about proposed or potential development plans for such a large site. Those Commissioners in favor stated that the traffic and infrastructure concerns could be addressed at the time of development. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: SRF, Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Planning Commission Staff Report, Additional Exhibits, Hall - Estill Dead Horse Mountain, Bill of Assurance Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 272 of 524 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Legislation Text File #: 2023-792 RZN-2023-0014: Rezoning (SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD/RIVERWOOD HOMES, 606, 607, 645, 646): Submitted by HALL ESTILL LAW FIRM for property located at SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD in WARD 1. The property is split zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, and R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 205.2 acres. The request is to rezone a portion of the property to NC, NEIGHBORHOOOD CONSERVATION AND CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. AN ORDINANCE TO REZONE THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN REZONING PETITION RZN 2023-014 LOCATED SOUTHEAST OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND GOFF FARM ROAD IN WARD ONE FOR APPROXIMATELY 112.98 ACRES FROM R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL AND RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE SUBJECT TO A BILL OF ASSURANCE TO NC, NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION; CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES; AND R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby changes the zone classification of the property shown on the map (Exhibit A) and the legal description (Exhibit B) both attached to the Planning Department's Agenda Memo from R-A, Residential Agricultural and RSF-4, Residential Single Family, 4 Units Per Acre subject to a Bill of Assurance to NC, Neighborhood Conservation; CS, Community Services; and R-A, Residential Agricultural. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1. Page 1 Page 273 of 524 Jonathan Curth Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2023-792 Item ID 6/20/2023 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 6/2/2023 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW (630) Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: RZN-2023-0014: Rezoning (SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD/RIVERWOOD HOMES, 606, 607, 645, 646): Submitted by HALL ESTILL LAW FIRM for property located at SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD in WARD 1. The property is split zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, and R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 205.2 acres. The request is to rezone a portion of the property to NC, NEIGHBORHOOOD CONSERVATION AND CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. Budget Impact: Account Number Fund Project Number Project Title Budgeted Item? No Total Amended Budget $ - Expenses (Actual+Encum) $ - Available Budget Does item have a direct cost? No Item Cost $ - Is a Budget Adjustment attached? No Budget Adjustment $ - Remaining Budget V20221130 Purchase Order Number: Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Change Order Number: Approval Date: Original Contract Number: Comments: Page 274 of 524 EXHIBIT 'A' RZN-2023-0014 SE OF DEAD HORSE One Mile View MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. NORTH 0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles i i i i Proposed CS ■ L. Subject Property Proposed INC --- N �— M --- O ' c ' z 0z .'�'A -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — RSF-4 — — — — — — — — — — — — — Neighborhood Link — Unclassified — Alley — Residential Link Planned Neighborhood Link - ■ I Planned Residential Link Shared -Use Paved Trail — — Trail (Proposed) — Fayetteville City Limits Planning Area Planning Area h1 Fayetteville City Limits _ �J Proposed NC n R-A L.,————; ———-1 Zoning �I-2 General lntluslrlel RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY EXTRACTION F-t Rsu NS L COMMERCIAL Residential -Off o Resldentlal-Agdcullurai C-t G2 RSF-1 FORM BASED DISTRICTS 1111111110 .C.. u RSFI M, R9F-8 �Downnthwn General RSF-18 Community Services RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY Neighborhood Services RMF Neighborhood Conservation RMF-12 RMF-1' PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS Commercial, Industrial, Residential INSTRITUTIONAL RMFaa INDUSTRIAL - y mmer and Light lndustriel Page 275 of 524 EXHIBIT'B' RZN-2023-0014 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - R-A TO NC: A part of the S1/2 of Section 24, T16N, R30W in Washington County, Arkansas, and being described as follows: Beginning at the SE Corner of the SE1/4 of the SW1/4, said point being the POINT OF BEGINNING, thence N86°49'17"W 987.59 feet, thence N03007'19"E 597.27 feet, thence S87°14'03"E 52.07 feet, thence S56°34'19"E 339.64 feet, thence S81 °26'17"E 630.62 feet, thence S33°48'42"E 271.55 feet, thence N88014'57"E 161.24 feet, thence S42°11'57"E 488.91 feet, thence N72°22'35"E 54.12 feet, thence N00019'58"E 468.73 feet, thence N18059'17"W 227.10 feet, thence N39028'21 "W 389.04 feet, thence S81 °02'45"W 397.71 feet, thence S08057'15"E 23.68 feet, thence S80007'59"W 108.00 feet, thence N74031'30"W 34.38 feet, thence N59050'02"W 97.58 feet, thence N29020'58"W 104.06 feet, thence N15°49'34"E 138.95 feet, thence N61 °00'05"E 91.68 feet, thence N81 ° 10'07"E 377.04 feet, thence N08057'15"W 156.17 feet, thence N81 °09'21 "E 171.90 feet, thence S08055'47"E 8.77 feet, thence N80056'09"E 120.20 feet, thence S08057'15"E 156.08 feet, thence S39028'21"E 468.95 feet, thence S50031'39"W 120.02 feet, thence S39029'12"E 76.44 feet, thence along a curve to the right 34.60 feet, said curve having a radius of 175.56 feet and a chord bearing and distance of S33050'26"E 34.54 feet, thence N71 °00'43"E 146.72 feet, thence S88059'17"E 219.11 feet, thence S71 °01'00"E 123.95 feet, thence S41001'48"E 143.32 feet, thence S15'42'11"E 266.28 feet, thence N74017'46"E 19.53 feet, thence S15042'17"E 81.70 feet, thence S10055'46"W 137.78 feet, thence S71 °00'43"W 156.33 feet, thence N 18°59'17"W 20.00 feet, thence S71 °00'43"W 208.00 feet, thence S18059'17"E 52.00 feet, thence N71°00'43"E 271.47 feet, thence S70052'46"E 183.52 feet, thence S39°36'57"E 439.73 feet, thence S22054'42"E 157.34 feet, thence S02032'46"E 213.06 feet, thence S43043'41 "W 235.14 feet, thence S28026'43"W 62.04 feet, thence S08020'49"W 184.25 feet, thence S19°43'24"W 70.60 feet, thence S49°53'43"W 156.88 feet, thence S80°04'03"W 147.49 feet, thence N73014'18"W 258.25 feet, thence N41 °49'52"W 200.37 feet, thence NO2°31'08"E 144.22 feet, thence N12°36'14"E 292.67 feet, thence N18°59'17"W 572.29 feet, thence S72022'35"W 226.24 feet, thence SO4°36'29"E 859.58 feet, thence S15°59'29"W 713.53 feet, thence S70036'56"W 185.38 feet, thence S32040'39"W 467.13 feet, thence S46054'37"W 162.88 feet, thence S18019'01"W 118.12 feet, thence S01°23'12"E 98.10 feet, thence S38052'47"E 79.66 feet, thence S16°20'29"E 74.72 feet, thence N86040'11"W 340.05 feet, thence N49021'23"W 36.69 feet, thence N61014'17"W 108.75 feet, thence N78006'50"W 129.20 feet, thence S87002'56"E 456.97 feet, thence N02034'06"E 405.39 feet, thence N87°05'45"W 214.58 feet, thence N02033'12"E 1,274.23 feet, thence S73018'48"W 819.41 feet, thence NO3°35'44"E 42.64 feet, thence N73019'49"E 1,046.13 feet, thence N02034'06"E 841.67 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING: Containing 95.17 acres more or less subject to easements and right of way of record. Page 276 of 524 EXHIBIT 'B' RZN-2023-0014 LEGAL DESCRIPTION - R-A TO CS: A part of the S1/2 of Section 24 and a part of Section 25 , T16N, R30W in Washington County, Arkansas, and being described as follows: Commencing at the SE Corner of the SE1/4, SW1A thence NO2°50'44"E 1,517.46 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, thence S82043'44"W 142.94 feet, thence S53°36'18"W 276.65 feet, thence S48°57'18"W 291.80 feet, thence S56°26'58"W 236.55 feet, thence S20°47'21 "W 64.36 feet, thence S42000'27"W 354.05 feet, thence N01 °56'58"E 39.05 feet, thence N00004'28"E 93.39 feet, thence N02058'53"W 129.30 feet, thence N04058'52"W 139.32 feet, thence N05030'35"W 237.75 feet, thence N05057'05"W 180.57 feet, thence N86038'24"E 750.00 feet, thence NO3°26'25"W 400.22 feet, thence N86°32'02"E 182.95 feet, thence N86056'15"E 608.75 feet, thence N89037'05"E 52.73 feet, thence along a non tangent curve to the right 78.72 feet, said curve having a radius of 131.27 feet and a chord bearing and distance of S71 °23'16"E 77.55 feet, thence along a non tangent curve to the right 61.31 feet, said curve having a radius of 125.59 feet and a chord bearing and distance of S34003'03"E 60.70 feet, thence S21 °20'30"E 40.99 feet, thence along a non tangent curve to the left 202.35 feet, said curve having a radius of 660.49 feet and a chord bearing and distance of S28018'01"E 201.56 feet, thence S37011'15"E 89.37 feet, thence along a non tangent curve to the left 55.52 feet, said curve having a radius of 1,677.52 feet and a chord bearing and distance of S38012'10"E 55.52 feet, thence S50027'50"W 170.70 feet, thence N39003'01 "W 157.90 feet, thence N55040'23"W 72.67 feet, thence N71 °40'52"W 120.12 feet, thence S81 °29'37"W 48.59 feet, thence N54037'53"W 99.63 feet, thence S75°02'54"W 48.07 feet, thence S22°12'33"W 121.04 feet; thence S22012'33"W 80.41 feet, thence S82043'44"W 117.69 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING: Containing 17.81 acres more or less subject to easements and right of way of record. Page 277 of 524 CITY OF VOWFAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS PLANNING COMMISSION MEMO TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Jessie Masters, Development Review Manager MEETING DATE: May 22, 2023 Updated with PC hearing results from May 22, 2023 SUBJECT: RZN-2023-0014: Rezoning (SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD/RIVERWOOD HOMES, 606, 607, 645, 646): Submitted by HALL ESTILL LAW FIRM for property located at SE OF DEAD HORSE MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. GOFF FARM ROAD. The property is split zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, FOUR UNITS PER ACRE, and R-A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 205.2 acres. The request is to rezone a portion of the property to NC, NEIGHBORHOOOD CONSERVATION AND CS, COMMUNITY SERVICES. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of RZN-2023-0014. RECOMMENDED MOTION: `7 move to deny RZN-2023-0014." BACKGROUND: The subject property is in south Fayetteville, southeast of the intersection of S. Dead Horse Mountain Road and E. Goff Farm Road. The property consists of 10 parcels, and in total adds up to approximately 205.2 acres. It is currently minimally developed with low -density residential structures and also incorporates the Stonebridge Meadows Golf Club. The property is currently zoned R-A, Residential Agricultural and RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre. The RSF-4 section of the property has a Bill of Assurance attached to it that limits the property to a density of. Surrounding land uses and zoning are listed in Table 1. Table 1: Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Direction Land Use Zoning North Golf Course R-A, Residential -Agricultural South Undeveloped RSF-2, Residential Single -Family, 2 Units per Acre East Single -Family Residential RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre West Undeveloped/Single-Family Residential R-A, Residential -Agricultural; RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre Request: The request is to rezone 95.17 acres to NC, Neighborhood Conservation, and 17.81 acres to CS, Community Services. The remainder of the site, approximately 92.22 acres, is to remain R-A, Residential Agricultural. Public Comment: Staff has received inquiries about the request, but no outright support or opposition. One neighbor issued a concern regarding an agreement with a previous property owner regarding the replacement of 20 pine trees that would be impacted by development. Staff Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HO � 278 of 524 Paqe 1 of 17 has determined that that is likely a civil matter at this time, and specific tree preservation requirements would be taken into account at the time of development. INFRASTRUCTURE: Streets: The subject area has frontage along S. Dead Horse Mountain Rd., which is a partially improved Neighborhood Link street with asphalt paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk on parts, and open ditches on the rest. The subject area also has frontage along E. Goff Farm Rd., which is a partially Residential Link street with asphalt paving and open ditches. Any street improvements required in these areas would be determined at the time of development proposal. Water: Public water is available to the subject area. An existing 6-inch water main is present on the west side of S. Dead Horse Mountain Rd. An existing 6-inch water main is present on the north side of E. Goff Farm Rd. Sewer: Sanitary sewer is available to the subject area. An existing 3-inch sewer main is present on the south side of E. Goff Farm Rd. Existing access to across the rest of the subject property. Drainage: No portion of the property lies within the Hillside -Hilltop Overlay District, or within a FEMA floodplain. However, the property is largely encumbered by hydric soils. Hydric soils are known indicators of wetlands, though for an area to be classified as wetlands, it may also need other characteristics such as hydrophytes (plants that grow in water), and shallow water during parts of the year. Hydric soils can be found across many areas of Fayetteville, including valleys, floodplains, and open prairies. It's important to identify these natural resources during development, so when these soils are identified on a property, further environmental studies will be required at the time of development. Before permits will be issued for the property a statement/report from an environmental professional must be provided summarizing the existence of wetlands on the property. If this statement/report indicates that wetlands may be present on site, a USACE Determination of Jurisdictional Wetlands will be required at the time of development submittal. There is also a protected stream on the northeast side of the property. Streamside Protection Zones generally consist of a protected area on each side of a stream or creek. This "protected area" is meant to preserve woody vegetation and natural areas along stream corridors to improve/protect stream health. At a minimum, it will be 50ft wide as measured from the top of bank but depending on the shape and extents of the floodway, it could be substantially more. Certain construction activities such as trails and some utilities are allowed in these zones, but in general, improvements such as parking lots or buildings are prohibited. Any additional improvements or requirements for drainage will be determined at the time of development. Fire: Fire apparatus access and fire protection water supplies will be reviewed for compliance with the Arkansas Fire Prevention Code at the time of development. Station 3, located at 1050 S. Happy Hollow Rd., protects this site. The property is located approximately 2 miles from the fire station with an anticipated drive time of approximately 4 minutes using existing streets. The anticipated response time Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 279 of 524 Paqe 2 of 17 would be approximately 6.2 minutes. Fire Department response time is calculated based on the drive time plus 1 minute for dispatch and 1.2 minutes for turn -out time. Within the City Limits, the Fayetteville Fire Department has a response time goal of 6 minutes for an engine and 8 minutes for a ladder truck. Police: The Police Department did not comment on this request. Tree Preservation: The current zoning districts of R-A, Residential -Agricultural and RSF-4, Residential Single -Family, 4 Units per Acre require 25% minimum canopy preservation. The proposed zoning districts of NC, Neighborhood Conservation and CS, Community Services require 20% minimum canopy preservation. CITY PLAN 2040 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN: City Plan 2040 Future Land Use Plan designates the property within the proposed rezone as Residential Neighborhood and Rural Residential areas. Residential Neighborhood areas are primarily residential in nature and support a wide variety of housing types of appropriate scale and context. Residential Neighborhood encourages highly connected, compact blocks with gridded street patterns and reduced building setbacks. It also encourages traditional neighborhood development that incorporates low -intensity non-residential uses intended to serve the surrounding neighborhoods. This designation recognizes the existing conventional subdivision developments that may have large blocks with conventional setbacks and development patterns that respond to features of the natural environment. Rural Residential Areas recognize existing low -density large lot development but are identified to encourage the conservation and preservation of woodlands, grasslands, or agricultural lands that are sparsely settled. These areas may or may not have adequate street and water infrastructure or public services, such as police and fire protection to support urban or suburban densities and development patterns. CITY PLAN 2040 INFILL MATRIX: City Plan 2040's Infill Matrix indicates a non -uniform infill score of 1-3 for this site with a weighted score of 3.5. The following elements of the matrix contribute to the score, at varying points: • Adequate Fire Response (Station #3, 1050 S. Happy Hollow Road) • Near Sewer Main (E. Goff Farm Road) • Near Water Main (S. Dead Horse Mountain and E. Goff Farm Road) • Near Paved Trail (Saint Paul Trail) FINDINGS OF THE STAFF A determination of the degree to which the proposed zoning is consistent with land use planning objectives, principles, and policies and with land use and zoning plans. Finding: Land Use Compatibility: Staff finds that the updated proposal is partially incompatible with surrounding land uses. There are some benefits to the proposal; the combination of R-A and NC will concentrate density to a smaller portion of the site, rather than a blanket rezoning to something like RSF-4, and have the potential to conserve additional land. NC, Neighborhood Conservation, is a single-family zoning district that allows for a density of 10 Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HO � 280 of 524 Paqe 3 of 17 units per acre with 40-foot lot widths. From a use perspective, adding additional single-family homes near single-family homes is inherently compatible, and staff does not find any issues with this. At such a large acreage, and from a density perspective, however, potentially 950 single- family lots could be created in the NC portion of the site. While this number does not account for necessary right-of-way dedication, tree preservation, or drainage requirements that would also accompany any subdivision of land, the large site would still allow for a large number of units (potentially within the 600-800 range). At this intensity, staff does not find that existing infrastructure could support this without significant investment. Most traffic would concentrate to the north towards Huntsville Road, and water and sewer capacity are also quite limited in this area. The area to the west, though generally rural in nature, has seen recent development, and with the inclusion of CS zoning in the northwestern portion of the site, this could help insert additional services in an area that is currently lacking in available amenities. The CS zoning district proposal, at 17 acres, while allowing for an insertion of uses, does not require it. With no stated density maximum and minimal lot width and area sizes, the potential impact of additional residential units, whether multi -family or single-family on that portion of the site could be too much too soon. Unless there was a guarantee that offices, retail, or other amenities were to be offered on the northwest corner of the site, staff cannot support a blanket rezoning to CS. Land Use Plan Analysis: Staff finds that the proposal is not in line with the goals in City Plan 2040 and adopted land use policies. The infill score for this site is low, which appears to counter the City's stated goal towards making infill development a priority. The area is also called out as both a Rural Residential Area, and a Residential Neighborhood Area. These designations do not lend themselves to the large amount of density that could be added to this area. Staff does finds that the smaller lot sizes lean this neighborhood towards meeting the goal of providing attainable housing and the combination of zoning districts does allow for a more mixed use area. Without assurances of the mix of uses, however, it is difficult to gauge whether what could be developed would ultimately be compatible in terms of scale, size, and density. 2. A determination of whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or needed at the time the rezoning is proposed. Finding: Staff finds that the proposed rezoning to NC, Neighborhood Conservation and CS, Community Services, is not necessarily justified. A rezoning of this nature, scale, and intensity may run counter to the long-term land use plans for the area. 3. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would create or appreciably increase traffic danger and congestion. Finding: The proposed zoning will increase traffic, and to a significant degree. With the addition of potentially anywhere between 600-900 homes in just the portion zoned NC, staff finds this may negatively contribute to traffic counts on Dead Horse Mountain Road, with residents having no viable alternative Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HO � 281 of 524 Paqe 4 of 17 transportation option. That said, with the addition of potential walkable services in the area through the CS zoning request, staff finds that this somewhat alleviates this concern. However, since CS also allows for residential uses by -right, there is no guarantee through that zoning district that services would be provided. Staff also finds that there is a possible connection to an existing bike trail, which does work in the development's favor towards the future reduction of traffic counts, but this does little to provide connectivity to the development in the short term. Staff finds that given the proposed unit counts and proposed densities, the applicant should plan to submit a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) with any proposed preliminary plat, should the rezoning at this site be approved. 4. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would alter the population density and thereby undesirably increase the load on public services including schools, water, and sewer facilities. Finding: Rezoning the property from its current zoning designation will significantly alter the potential population density in the area. Initial Engineering Division review indicates that utility extensions or upgrades are likely required, especially with regards to current water service to the site, which does not currently have the capacity to serve a development of this size. No comments were received from the Fayetteville Public School district. 5. If there are reasons why the proposed zoning should not be approved in view of considerations under b (1) through (4) above, a determination as to whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or necessitated by peculiar circumstances such as: a. It would be impractical to use the land for any of the uses permitted under its existing zoning classifications; b. There are extenuating circumstances which justify the rezoning even though there are reasons under b (1) through (4) above why the proposed zoning is not desirable. Finding: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends forwarding RZN-2023-0014 to the City Council with a recommendation of approval. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Date: May 22, 2023 Motion: Second: Vote: O Tabled Required YES Motion #1: Garlock 2nd: Madden Deny 4-5-0 (Motion failed) (Commissioners Brink, Payne, Holcomb, Winston, McGetrick opposed) 55 Forwarded O Denied Motion #2: Brink 2nd: Holcomb FWD, with a rec. of approval. 5-4-0 (Motion carried) (Commissioners Sparkman, Garlock, Madden, Gulley opposed) Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HO � 282 of 524 Paqe 5 of 17 BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: None ATTACHMENTS: • Unified Development Code: o §161.03 District R-A, Residential -Agricultural o §161.07 District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family - Four (4) Units Per Acre o §161.29 Neighborhood Conservation o §161.22 Community Services • Request Letter • Applicant Exhibit • One Mile Map • Close -Up Map • Current Land Use Map • Future Land Use Map Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HO � 283 of 524 Paqe 6 of 17 161.03 District R-A, Residential -Agricultural (A) Purposes. The regulations of the agricultural district are designed to protect agricultural land until an orderly transition to urban development has been accomplished; prevent wasteful scattering of development in rural areas; obtain economy of public funds in the providing of public improvements and services of orderly growth; conserve the tax base; provide opportunity for affordable housing, increase scenic attractiveness; and conserve open space. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted Uses. Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 6 Agriculture Unit 7 Animal husbandry Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 37 Manufactured homes Unit 41 Accessory dwellings Unit 43 Animal boarding and training Unit 46 Short-term rentals (2) Conditional Uses. Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 20 Commercial recreation, large sites Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 35 Outdoor Music Establishments Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities Unit 42 Clean technologies (C) Density. Units per acre I One-half '/z (D) Bulk and Area Regulations. Lot width minimum 200 feet Lot Area Minimum: Residential: 2 acres Nonresidential: 2 acres Lot area per dwelling unit 2 acres (E) Setback Requirements. Front Side Rear 35 feet 20 feet 35 feet (F) Height Requirements. There shall be no maximum height limits in the R-A District, provided, however, if a building exceeds the height of one (1) story, the portion of the building over one (1) story shall have an Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 284 of 524 Paqe 7 of 17 additional setback from any boundary line of an adjacent residential district. The amount of additional setback for the portion of the building over one (1) story shall be equal to the difference between the total height of that portion of the building and one (1) story. (G) Building area. None. (Code 1965, App. A., Art. 5(1); Ord. No. 1747, 6-29-70; Code 1991, §160.030; Ord. No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. No. 4178, 8-31-99; Ord. No. 5028, 6-19-07; Ord. No. 5128, 4-15-08; Ord. No. 5195, 11-6-08; Ord. No. 5238, 5-5- 09; Ord. No. 5479, 2-7-12; Ord. No. 5945, §3, 1-17-17; Ord. No. 6015, §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6427, §§l (Exh. C), 2, 4-20-21) Editor's note(s)—Ord. No. 6625 , §1 adopted December 6, 2022, "determines that Section 2 of Ordinance 6427 (Sunset Clause) be amended so that Ordinance 6427 and all amendments to Code Sections ordained or enacted by Ordinance 6427 shall automatically sunset, be repealed and become void on December 31, 2023, unless prior to that date the City Council amends this ordinance to repeal or further amend this sunset, repeal and termination section." 161.07 District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family - Four (4) Units Per Acre (A) Purpose. The RSF-4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted Uses. Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 41 Accessory dwellings Unit 46 Short-term rentals (2) Conditional Uses. Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 12a I Limited business Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities Unit 44 Cluster Housing Development (C) Density. Single-family dwellings Two (2) family dwellings Units per acre 4 or less 7 or less (D) Bulk and Area Regulations. Single-family dwellings Two (2) family dwellings Lot minimum width 70 feet 80 feet Lot area minimum 8,000 square feet 12,000 square feet Land area per dwelling unit 8,000 square feet 6,000 square feet Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 285 of 524 Paqe 8 of 17 Hillside Overlay 60 feet 70 feet District Lot minimum width Hillside Overlay 8,000 square feet 12,000 square feet District Lot area minimum Land area per 8,000 square feet 6,000 square feet dwelling unit (E) Setback Requirements. Front Side Rear 15 feet 5 feet 15 feet (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 1 3 stories (G) Building Area. On any lot the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40% of the total area of such lot. Accessory ground mounted solar energy systems shall not be considered buildings. (Code 1991, §160.031; Ord. No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. No. 4178, 8-31-99; Ord. No. 4858, 4-18-06; Ord. No. 5028, 6-19-07; Ord. No. 5128, 4-15-08; Ord. No. 5224, 3-3-09; Ord. No. 5312, 4-20-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord. No. 5921 , §1, 11-1-16; Ord. No. 5945 , §8, 1-17-17; Ord. No. 6015 , §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6245 , §2, 10-15- 19; Ord. No. 6427 , §§1(Exh. C), 2, 4-20-21) Editor's note(s)—Ord. No. 6625 , §1 adopted December 6, 2022, "determines that Section 2 of Ordinance 6427 (Sunset Clause) be amended so that Ordinance 6427 and all amendments to Code Sections ordained or enacted by Ordinance 6427 shall automatically sunset, be repealed and become void on December 31, 2023, unless prior to that date the City Council amends this ordinance to repeal or further amend this sunset, repeal and termination section." 161.29 Neighborhood Conservation (A) Purpose. The Neighborhood Conservation zone has the least activity and a lower density than the other zones. Although Neighborhood Conservation is the most purely residential zone, it can have some mix of uses, such as civic buildings. Neighborhood Conservation serves to promote and protect neighborhood character. For the purposes of Chapter 96: Noise Control, the Neighborhood Conservation district is a residential zone. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted Uses. Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 41 Accessory dwellings Unit 46 Short-term rentals (2) Conditional Uses. Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 9 Two 2 family dwellings Unit 10 Three (3) and four (4) family dwellings Unit 12a Limited business' Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 25 Offices, studios, and related services Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 286 of 524 Paqe 9 of 17 Unit 28 Center for collecting recyclable materials Unit 36 Wireless communication facilities Unit 44 Cluster Housing Development (C) Density. Ten (10) Units Per Acre. (D) Bulk and Area Regulations. (1) Lot Width Minimum. All dwelling types 140 feet (2) Lot Area Minimum. 4,000 square feet (E) Setback Regulations. Front A build -to zone that is located between the front property line and a line 25 feet from the front property line. Side 5 feet Rear 5 feet Rear, from center line of an alley 12 feet (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 1 3 stories (Ord. No. 5128, 4-15-08; Ord. No. 5312, 4-20-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord. No. 5592, 6-18-13; Ord. No. 5664, 2- 18-14; Ord. No. 5800 , §1(Exh. A), 10-6-15>; Ord. No. 5921 , §1, 11-1-16; Ord. No. 5945 , §§5, 7-9, 1-17-17; Ord. No. 6015 , §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6211 , §1, 8-6-19; Ord. No. 6427 , §§1(Exh. C), 2, 4-20-21) Ord. No. 6427 , § 2, adopted April 20, 2021, "determines that this ordinance and all amendments to Code sections ordained or enacted by this ordinance shall automatically sunset, be repealed, terminated, and become void twenty (20) months after the passage and approval of this ordinance, unless prior to that date, the City Council amends this ordinance to repeal this sunset, repeal and termination section." 161.22 Community Services (A) Purpose. The Community Services District is designed primarily to provide convenience goods and personal services for persons living in the surrounding residential areas and is intended to provide for adaptable mixed use centers located along commercial corridors that connect denser development nodes. There is a mixture of residential and commercial uses in a traditional urban form with buildings addressing the street. For the purposes of Chapter 96: Noise Control, the Community Services district is a commercial zone. The intent of this zoning district is to provide standards that enable development to be approved administratively. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted Uses. Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 10 Three 3 and four 4 family dwellings Unit 13 Eating laces Unit 15 Neighborhood Shopping goods Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 25 Offices, studios and related services Unit 26 Multi -family dwellings Unit 40 Sidewalk Cafes Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 287 of 524 Paqe 10 of 17 Unit 41 Accessory dwellings Unit 44 Cluster Housing Development Unit 45 Small scale production Unit 46 Short-term rentals Note: Any combination of above uses is permitted upon any lot within this zone. Conditional uses shall need approval when combined with pre -approved uses. (2) Conditional Uses. Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 14 Hotel, motel and amusement services Unit 16 Shopping goods Unit 17 Transportation, trades and services Unit 18 Gasoline service stations and drive-in/drive-through restaurants Unit 19 Commercial recreation, small sites Unit 28 Center for collecting recyclable materials Unit 34 Liquor stores Unit 35 Outdoor music establishments Unit 36 Wireless communication facilities* Unit 42 Clean technologies (C) Density. None. (D) Bulk and Area Regulations. (1) Lot Width Minimum. Dwelling 18 feet All others None (2) Lot Area Minimum. None. (E) Setback regulations. Front: A build -to zone that is located between 10 feet and a line 25 feet from the front property line. Side and rear: None Side or rear, when contiguous to 15 feet a single-family residential district: (F) Building Height Regulations. Building Height Maximum 1 5 stories (G) Minimum Buildable Street Frontage.50% of the lot width. (Ord. No. 5312, 4-20-10; Ord. No. 5339, 8-3-10; Ord. No. 5462, 12-6-11; Ord. No. 5592, 6-18-13; Ord. No. 5664, 2- 18-14; Ord. No. 5735, 1-20-15; Ord. No. 5800, §1(Exh. A), 10-6-15; Ord. No. 5921 , §1, 11-1-16; Ord. No. 5945, §§5, 7-9, 1-17-17; Ord. No. 6015 , §1(Exh. A), 11-21-17; Ord. No. 6223 , §1, 9-3-19; Ord. No. 6409 §1, 2-2-21; Ord. No. 6427, §§1(Exh. C), 2, 4-20-21; Ord. No. 6497, §1, 10-19-21) Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 288 of 524 Page 11 of 17 Editor's note(s)—Ord. No. 6625 , §1 adopted December 6, 2022, "determines that Section 2 of Ordinance 6427 (Sunset Clause) be amended so that Ordinance 6427 and all amendments to Code Sections ordained or enacted by Ordinance 6427 shall automatically sunset, be repealed and become void on December 31, 2023, unless prior to that date the City Council amends this ordinance to repeal or further amend this sunset, repeal and termination section." Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 289 of 524 Page 12 of 17 HALL LSTILL ATTORNEYS AT LAW April 12, 2023 City of Fayetteville Planning Commission and Planning Department 125 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Robert K. Rhoads 75 N. East Ave., Suite 500 Fayetteville, AR 72701-5388 Direct Dial: (479) 973-5202 rrhoads@hallestill.com Re: Rezoning of Parcel Nos. 765-15268-350, 765-15268-451, 765-15269-101, 765- 15269-102, 769-15269-150, 769-15269-151, 769-15268-452, 769-15268-400, 769-15268-401, 769-15268-150 ADDRESS: 2858 Dead Horse Mtn. Rd. and 3495 E. Goff Farm Rd. From RSF-4 and RA to Neighborhood Conservation (NC) and RA to Neighborhood Services (CS) To Whom It May Concern: This letter is in regard to rezoning parcels 765-15268-350, 765-15268-451, and 765-15269- 101 from its current designation of RSF-4 and RA to Neighborhood Conservation (NC) and parcels 765-15269-102, 769-15269-150, 769-15269-151, 769-15268-452, 769-15268-400, 769-15268- 401, 769-15268-150 from its current designation of RA to Neighborhood Services (CS). The Neighborhood Conservation zone promotes and protects neighborhood character, it is usually residential, but it can also have a mix of uses. CS is designed to give convenience goods and services to the surrounding residents. The future land use for these tracks and surrounding areas is mainly Residential Neighborhood. This designation is primarily residential with a wide variety of housing types of different scale, and it encourages highly connected compact blocks and traditional neighborhood development. Further, Neighborhood Conservation (NC) is presently compatible and would fit in this area as it currently exists, and the future and this rezoning will not unreasonably affect in any adverse way the surrounding land uses. Also, CS is compatible too and will not unreasonably or adversely impact the surrounding land uses. Cc: Client(s) Sincerely yours, Is/Robert K Rhoads Robert K. Rhoads Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, P.C. Planning Commission Tulsa • Oklahoma City • Northwest Arkansas • Denver www.hallestill.com May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HoF4W 290 of 524 Paqe 13 of 17 N I W E I � �00 I GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 300' IF GME FARM I Reside9",1 Link - �IhJI CRESCENT LAKE II 11 � P I . \ D -H / 1 _ TRACT A E ME S H2- bd I 4 \\ ACT C I � / I I TRACT IB � J I I —FT o J1a Y - - - — R K "o I Ir — A Ip I I PROJECT TITLE: STONEBRIDGE COTTAGES REZONING R-A TO REMAIN LOCATION: FAYETTEVILLE, AR R-A TO INC�JORGENSEN 124WSuobrid9aDrlve.SoiteS z ' Favet1eviNe,aR1z1oa SHEVt$Cd:1FRpND0E1dIg15SlOn � w+ASSOCIATES Office 479.442.9127 DRAWN BYPMM HEETSCALE'1"=300 May 22, 2023 ww.lorgensenassoc.com S R-A TO CS Civil Engineering + Surveying Established 1985 RZN-2023-0014 R1VmuVQQD.HdWw.99JDEPLp Paqe 14 of 17 RZN-2023-0014 SE OF DEAD HORSE One Mile View MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. NORTH 0 0.13 0.25 0.5 Miles i i i i Subject Property �— M --- O ' c z 0Iz .'�'A -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — RSF-4 — — — — — — — — — — — — — Neighborhood Link — Unclassified — Alley — Residential Link Planned Neighborhood Link - ■ I Planned Residential Link Shared -Use Paved Trail — — Trail (Proposed) — Fayetteville City Limits Planning Area Planning Area h1 Fayetteville City Limits _ �J n R-A L.,————; ———-1 Zoning �I-2 General lntluslrlel RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY EXTRACTION F-t Rsu NS L COMMERCIAL Resale .A -Off o Re sltlentlaFAgticullurai RSF-.5 C-t G2 Ill RSF-' FORM BASED DISTRICTS 1111111110 .C.. u RSFI M, R9F-8 �Downntnwn General RSF-18 Community Services RESIDENTIAL MULTI -FAMILY NCItJM1Leh— Services RMF Ne.,M1borM1ootl Conservation RMF-12 RMF-18 PLANNED ZONING DISTRICTS Commercial, Industrial, Residential INSTITUTIONAL RMFag INDUSTRIAL - y mmer and Light lndustriel RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 292 of 524 Paqe 16 of 17 RZN-2023-0014 SE OF DEAD HORSE Future Land Use MOUNTAIN ROAD AND E. 9 z D z v Neighborhood Link Residential Link ■ ■ Planned Residential Link ry 9 Plannin Area .-_. Fayetteville City Limits Trail (Proposed) Rural Subject Property Feet 0 145 290 580 870 :11 Residential Neighborhood ORTH City Neighborhood Civic Institutional Civic and Private Open Space Industrial Natural Non -Municipal Government 1,160 Residential Neighborhood Rural Residential Urban Center May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 293 of 524 Paqe 17 of 17 From: Kenneth Webster <fixitall123@att.net> Sent: Sunday, April 30, 2023 4:27 PM To: Masters, Jessica <jmasters@fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: RZN-2023-0014 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Jessica; I'm an adjacent landowner. I know this property sold recently. The last planning was for 50 acres. This is requesting 205 acres, and will surely be a lot more impact. Can you send me a drop box link for the proposed development. Also, I had an agreement written with the 2 past land owners. It was for the replacement of 20 pine trees that are 50 ft tall. They are located within 2 to 3 ft of the old, proposed road and will surely be affected by the new road installment. The roots will be impacted and most likely I will lose all 20. (I've been told by a Horticulturist with the County) I would like to readdress that with a new proposal that is updated and what I would like to see as a replacement. If you can direct me to the correct personal for that issue, I would be grateful. Kenny Webster 2396 S Dead Horse Mountain Road I:rielbN:1FOxT-3i Planning Commission May 22, 2023 RZN-2023-0014 (RIVERWOOD HOW 294 of 524 Page 15 of 17 Re: rezone number RZN-2023-0014 Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course Attn: Jessica Masters Fayetteville Planning Commission Enclosed are photos showing drainage issues from the golf course This was supposed to have been Taken care of by the bond issue 3 * years ago and to date has not yet been resolved. The property in rezone concerns is the water/pond/stream east of the clubhouse, the drainage indirectly affects the drainage on the14th tee side of Cherry Hills Drive. Alan Pugh of the Fayetteville Engineering Department is aware of this problem. I feel that before any rezoning is considered, the present drainage issues on the course should be addressed by the golf course and or the village. Ronald H Mueller Z/ 1880 S Cherry Hills _Drive Fay etteviIle Arkansas 72701 A Page 295 of 524 � n��n?lr1�f I111R11N�t� s , 1 r i 41 r l L-6- t 1� . . . 14 +` •+�� fir_ t,���_ M On 0n11 Page 299 of 524 From: Billy Franklin <billyfranklin2020@outlook.com> Sent: Sunday, May 21, 2023 8:48 PM To: Masters, Jessica <jmasters@fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: Support For Riverwood Homes Deadhorse development CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Jessie, My wife Leslie and I, Billy Franklin, support the Riverwood development in the Stonebridge/Deadhorse Mt area. We live in the Riverwalk Neighborhood and would appreciate all that Riverwood homes has to offer. We have no doubt that the development would enhance the quality, lifestyle, and property values for the people of our area. Please consider our support of the Riverwood Homes development off Goff Farm Rd near Stonebridge and Riverwalk neighborhoods. From: John Carpenter <johncarpenter@lindsey.com> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 11:40 AM To: Masters, Jessica <jmasters@fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: Dead Hors Mountain Rd. and Goff Farm Rd. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Masters, I am writing to you about the proposed rezoning of the properties that are coming before you today. I have lived in the community for the past 11 years and have sold real estate for the past 30 plus years. I am in complete support of the applications request to rezone the property. Best Regards, John K. Carpenter • Senior Vice President Lindsey & Associates Mobile # 479-957-8181 1 Direct # 479-527-8715 JohnkCarpenter.com o Page 300 of 524 -----Original Message ----- From: Sean McDonald <seanmcdon23@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 11:56 AM To: Masters, Jessica <jmasters @fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: tonight's mtg CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Jessica, Unfortunately I am not able to make the commission's meeting this evening, but I wanted to let you know that as a former resident of Stonebridge, that I am in favor of this project. I believe some additional commercial development will really help the area along with more affordable housing. It seems to make sense that Riverwood and the golf course working together could be a good solution in forward progress that would help accomplish a neighborhood that includes those traits desired by the city. Respectfully, Sean M -----Original Message ----- From: James Young <youngjames@cox.net> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 1:37 PM To: Masters, Jessica <jmasters @fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: RZN-2023-0014 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Jessica, I may be unable to attend tonight's commission session. In light of that, I wanted to email a quick note expressing my support for the above referenced project. This area in this project needs more commercial development. Furthermore, additional affordable housing in this area is a positive. I think Riverwood working with the golf course is a great approach to accomplishing the type of development with traits desirable to the city. Kind Regards, James S. Young Page 301 of 524 From: Stacey White <staceyellenwhite@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 1:59 PM To: Masters, Jessica <jmasters@fayetteville-ar.gov> Subject: RZN-2023-0014 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the City of Fayetteville. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Jessica, I may not be able to make tonight's commission meeting, but wanted to send a quick note in support of this project. This area needs more commercial development and additional affordable housing, I think Riverwood working with the golf course makes the most sense to accomplish a neighborhood consisting of those traits desired by the city. Regards, Stacey White Page 302 of 524 C7 M CJ d O N N O G CL d �7 ��S� tone'bridae-•` � Meadow: uoitvkLl_ (lh�?, 'co - 0 a uality _ fiction ` Riverwalk•Phase I mead-H�� ` ,7OO9Ie I � urainage concern o / . r • . • . ' O �`S CL :.Stonebridae Y Meadow 01 L1'utS • .' ® r _ f' S & G Pools & Spas Ho�m�pee mprovement su C Poo to e C / ®w /q;♦ O 2, , t11 h SiPumpk Vidg iDr _. r uality _0 1. uction _ 7-4 ` Riverwalk'Phase goo le mead-H��_ 9 _ Topography 3 Proposed rezoning to: *^ CS Community _o Services � o tA GOFFF, NC, Neighborhood Conservation c � I Stonebridge Golf Course Zoning boundaries are approximate Page 305 of 524 mail IF FEMA Floodplain Floodway 100-Year Floodplain 500-Year Floodplain Proposed rezoning to: CS, Community Services NC, Neighborhood Conservation Zoning boundaries are approximate Page 306 of 524 HALL ESTIL Lnv� June 20, 2023 VIA HAND DELIVERY City Council Members City Planning Commission Kara Paxton, City Clerk Lioneld Jordan, Mayor Kit Williams, City Attorney Re: RZN-2023-0014 - Dead Horse Mountain Road To Whom It May Concern: Robert K. Rhoads 75 N. East Ave., Suite 500 Fayetteville, AR 72701-5388 Direct Dial: (479) 973-5202 rrhoads@hallestill.com I represent the owners and developers of the subject properties of this rezoning which would be the good folks from Riverwood Homes as well as the Stonebridge Meadows Golf Course. I have attached some graphics of the project called "The Preserve at Stonebridge". Of the 200+ acres, half of that acreage will remain RA, therefore providing a lot of green space. Nestled within the green space will be the Neighborhood Conservation (NC) requested 97 acres will be a balance of affordable cottages (100+ starting under $275,000), manors (about 100 at 1,800 sq ft.) and estate homes (about 40 at 2,400 sq ft.) as well as a 55+ active adult community (about 100). Another eighteen acres is subject of the Community Services (CS) request, which will be on the corner of Goff Farm Road and Dead Horse Mountain Road, allowing the golf course to build a new clubhouse with a pool on Fayetteville's and North West Arkansas' only public 18 hole champion golf course. The balance of the property is to have a variety of uses such as coffee shop/cafe, small mercantile, along with no more than fifty (50) cottages, townhomes or condos. The owners of the property took the staff s report comments very seriously, specifically the concerns about density and that the NC could have up to 800 lots, however as you can see from the attached plats it's going to be no more than 350. It was asked at the Agenda Session: with the current zoning that exists for 53+ of the 97 acres at RSF-4 with a 2.5 Bill of Assurance which could yield about 134 lots, then how many more lots could there be? Since this request is not asking for 800 but instead 350, that is only 216 more than what it currently is entitled. Further, if indeed this property were developed with the 134 number those would not be affordable homes; economics would dictate $500-$600 hundred thousand dollars homes. With the presumption and request that this rezoning will be left on the first reading, we will have a Bill of Assurance prepared for the next meeting limiting the density to 350. So, if you look at Staffs concerns as it relates to water supply, over taxing the infrastructure, and traffic congestion then please note that those concerns were based on the potentiality of 800. The Bill of Assurance should completely eliminate those concerns. Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, P.C. Tulsa • Oklahoma City • Northwest Arkansas - Denver Page 307 of 524 www hallestill.com 9 Page 308 of 524 City Council June 19, 2023 Page 2 Further, regarding density see the plat, which is the last page of my attachments, two subdivisions (Riverwalk at 264 lots and Stonebridge Meadows at 300+) that are already in existence with considerable density and unlike ours not near the amount of ingress and egress. We will have three points of ingress and egress, two off Dead Horse Mountain Road and one on Goff Farm Road. As far as surrounding compatibility, you have those other dense subdivisions next door plus you have the golf course, the owners of which are requesting this rezoning. Although they opposed prior proposed developments they obviously are excited about this one because if fits in with the overall look and feel that they were going for to enhance and improved their golf course. In a nutshell, we are making a powerful argument for compatibility. Regarding the C.S., we again listened to staffs concerns about the potential density for housing and again we will bring forth a Bill of Assurance indicating we will not put apartment buildings nor a gas station, and we will indeed have some of the land to be earmarked for retail uses such as sidewalk cafes, offices, coffee shops on bottom, living quarters above and no more than 50 residential lots. Again, we believe this will complement the golf course. So, with this Bill of Assurance, staff gets density controlled and some much needed services for this area. Regarding some miscellaneous matters: the fire protection is within 12 seconds of the fire department's stated goal of 6 minutes; a bike trail will certainly get lots of use as there will be 100 of the 55+ homes which will be small and quite obtainable which is exactly what our city needs and studies show that traffic patterns are reduced by over 50% for this type of community; any concerns neighbors might have about flooding and drainage will of course be taken care of during development and all of the drainage of this development will drain to the golf course and to the creek so there is a certainty that no neighbors' drainage issue will get any worse and there is a probability that neighbor's drainage issues will get better. Finally, in regard to future land use calling for Residential Neighborhood and Rural Residential, we believe that having all of that green space, almost 100 acres, around these lots dovetails nicely with the , quoting the City's Plan, "conservation and preservation of woodlands, grasslands or agricultural lands" and "a proposed development should utilize alternative development patterns such as cluster or conservation subdivisions to achieve compatibility with surrounding areas". Further, the City's future plan calls for "primarily residential in nature and supporting a wide variety of housing types of appropriate scale and context" and further "compact blocks with gridded street patterns, retail and offices on corners and along connecting corridors encourage future existing neighborhoods to be more complete, compact, and connected,... walkable, and bicycle friendly... urban designed to create compatible, livable, accessible neighborhoods ... and scale of new development to be compatible in use and proportionality between a variety of residential and nonresidential uses." Again this development hits all of those points. On behalf of the applicants, I would hardly encourage you to leave this on 1st reading but then at the next meeting vote in favor of this rezoning. Thank you for your consideration. Page 309 of 524 Page 310 of 524 City Council June 19, 2023 Page 3 Sincerely yours, Hall, Estill, Hardwick, Gable, Golden & Nelson, P.C. Is/Robert K Rhoads Robert K. Rhoads RKR:sli Cc: Clients 5 565 8 8 9.1:011909.00001 Page 311 of 524 Page 312 of 524 01 � _= ry Q p p = vi uj �- 0� ui V X - V Xvoo Z E��u >(A Q = -0 p U V N _ fQ O`� t U � o � s o OO Q a� W O W o V o � > � .? LU a 0 u 0 LU � + Z o c4t; W W ° L a Z __� m = O O V m N cLn I�� =LU W o�- �;�rn 4 E a� = N a � a� '-C c m Fn rn e 313 of 524 m D �� ��-0u;- N�D 0�0=QM< 0 fDN=��, 3 o 3 :3 o O fD fD fD , cQ m �' o� o D N 0 cD s � N— =r(D(D o D _ M�v�� N . m rt� ° �1 Lrl2 C 3 rr . �- n �; o cD o o% 3 cD 0 rt ( r+ � al 0 0o C)7" rt = o 3 o c — �J 3 Q 0� o �, 0 . W o Q rt rt fD < O mF C < — m p .n O u m n C v = � o 3. 3 cQ (• � v - v 3 �. 3 Page 314 of 524 � LO N 4-J U LL M O 3: O L- D 4— C J 73u 73 U O >, ct U Uj cn O m � 0 t�A N � N nUp � tip V u -0 D J� � 4-J LIJ O 4- �= 0 � E �r ��� Q) Q LLI a) z _0� ° � - OU41 O 0 0� m W�� Q oo a) - O>1 N O 0- � 0 L 0 0 W W ����0 cz O 4— O U 4- E m z Z N �oc�Q,U-,�:o� N cn O - U c� 0 0 N U O O O O 4 >, m U O E> �... O W = Q �,�m UO J cZ °� V is 315 of 524 a) 30 Ul m m D Z 0 �� `� -� -� Q D CL C 2 3 m 2 3 M CL io 2 3 C) m 3 7 rt D N Wi i oc O 0 Ln 0 0 N W 0 0 c o(A 0 0 0 0 0 Iliv o c rtrt -� (D rt V) e 316 of 524 7v + N (n i O U > Ln N U Y X O dj LLI Q o �O 4-1 a,, N Q •E `� C) fu •� O OO s O > •� - � s C a s u - �' �i � N ��� >�� c C � c �� Y�m U U u O O O O N �' Z i � s,E mE M �O 0 u Ln O O O _OO f6W ULn-j U � u Z , IO ■w . I Page 317 of 524 RIVERWALK PHAS RIVERWALK PHA; RIVERWALK PHASE I Page 318 of 524 BILL OF ASSURANCE FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, AR In order to attempt to obtain approval of a request for a zoning reclassification (RZN 23-0014 at Goff Farm Road and Dead Horse Mountain Road), the owner, developer or buyer of this property, (hereinafter called "Petitioner') TABA20, LLC, hereby voluntarily offers this Bill of Assurance and enters in this binding agreement and contract with the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The Petitioner expressly grants to the City of Fayetteville the right to enforce any and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court of Washington County and agrees that if the Petitioner or Petitioner's heirs, assigns, or successors violate any term of this Bill of Assurance, substantial irreparable damage justifying injunctive relief has been done to the citizens and City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The Petitioner acknowledges that the Fayetteville Planning Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonably rely upon all of the terms and conditions within this Bill of Assurance in considering whether to approve Petitioners rezoning'request. 1 � Petitioner hereby voluntarily offers assurancds that Petitioner and Petitioners property shall be restricted as follows IF Petitioners rezoning is approved by -the Fayetteville City Council. 1. The area proposed to be rezoned to Neighborhood Conservation (NC), shall be limited to the following Permitted Uses: ' •' ..'-' t ,;, : *1 1 ""t. a. No more than 350 lots 2. Petitioner agrees to limit the density on the property to no more than 350 lots. 3. Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terms shall run with the land and bind all future owners unless and until specifically released by Resolution of the Fayetteville City Council. The Bill of Assurance shall be filed for record in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's Office after Petitioners rezoning is effective and shall be noted on any Final Plat or Large Scale Development, which includes some or all of Petitioners property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and conditions stated above, I, Mark Marquess, as the owner, developer or buyer (Petitioner) voluntarily offer all such assurances and sign my name below. C, (1-7 123 Date Mark Marquess, President TABA20, LLC V--) �� Signature Page 319 of 524 NOTARY OATH STATE OFARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHfNeTON } And now on this the Q7__ day ofTY—&( 2023, appeared before me Mark Marquess, and after being placed upon his oath swore or affirmed that he agreed with the terms of the above Bill of Assurance and signed his name above. C NotarV Public My Commission Expires �;%�CTA9`;•• Do �l- �o�'i PUBLIC •: -_ • 5570228 1011909.00001 = Z ; *12380302 ; y� UNVI 0ot "'141141,00d� Page 320 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEMO TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Jonathan Curth, Development Services Director FROM: Britin Bostick, Long Range Planning/Special Projects Manager DATE: June 13, 2023 SUBJECT: Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan RECOMMENDATION: 2023-833 City staff, the Historic District Commission and the Black Heritage Preservation Commission recommend approval of the citywide Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan. BACKGROUND: One of the near -term benchmarks in City Plan 2040 is, "Seek funding to complete a citywide Community Preservation Plan to identify resources for future historic survey and registration, assess current preservation efforts, and plan for new initiatives." This will be the city's first historic preservation plan, and it is being completed in partnership with the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP). AHPP awarded the city a $50,000 matching grant in March 2022 with the City Council approving a $20,000 match. Stantec Consulting Services was hired as the project consultant in August 2022 and public engagement began in September 2022 with the first public meeting on the plan held at the Fayetteville Public Library. A survey followed the meeting to capture the community's goals and concerns regarding historic preservation in Fayetteville. More than 600 people responded to the survey and showed strong support for historic preservation goals, ranked historic preservation approaches and tools, and provided open-ended responses identifying important areas and properties to preserve. This input was used to develop the five organizing goals and more than fifty action items in the plan. A draft of the plan was presented at a second public meeting in April 2023 with the draft document posted online. A second online survey captured community input on the plan's action items and the same survey was presented in person at the Fayetteville Farmer's Market all four Saturdays in May with city staff and Historic District Commission members assisting the community with the survey and speaking to the community about the plan draft. Community comments have been incorporated into the final document, which was approved by AHPP on May 30, 2023. DISCUSSION: The Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan is organized by five goals that seek to strengthen the existing program as well as promote and explore the inclusion of Fayetteville's rich cultural heritage. Based on community input, current best practices in historic preservation, and a thorough assessment of the current program, the five main goals for historic preservation in Fayetteville are: Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 321 of 524 1. Strengthen the preservation program through efficient adjustments to the program's administration. 2. Encourage compatible development that prioritizes historic preservation. 3. Identify and protect historic properties by utilizing historic resources surveys and designations to identify and protect historic resources for future generations. 4. Provide learning opportunities for the community about historic preservation and Fayetteville's unique history. 5. Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion and protect cultural heritage. The fifty-two action items organized by the five goals represent a plan of work for the next five to ten years that seeks to build partnerships, improve digital resources, support the protection of historic buildings and places, secure important grant funding, and tell the story of Fayetteville's rich cultural heritage. The Historic District Commission and Black Heritage Preservation Commission have been key to this planning process and have discussed the plan and received regular updates from staff throughout the process. Both commissions are already underway on implementing the plan and are in discussion or nearing completion on several action items as of June 2023, some of which will be forwarded to the City Council in the coming months. At their June 8, 2023 meeting, the Historic District Commission voted 4-0-0 in favor of recommending adoption of the plan to the City Council. No public comment was received. At their June 15, 2023 meeting, the Black Heritage Preservation Commission voted 4-0-0 in favor of recommending adoption of the plan to the City Council. No public comment was received. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: N/A ATTACHMENTS: SRF Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan, Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan, Item C.1 Approvals Signatures Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 322 of 524 Britin Bostick Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2023-833 Item ID 7/6/2023 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 6/16/2023 LONG RANGE PLANNING (634) Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: City staff, the Historic District Commission, and the Black Heritage Preservation Commission recommend approval of the citywide Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan. Budget Impact: 1010.090.6600-5314.00 1010 - General Fund Account Number Fund 32011 Historic Preservation Master Plan (CLG) Project Number Budgeted Item? Yes Does item have a direct cost? No Is a Budget Adjustment attached? No Purchase Order Number: Change Order Number: Original Contract Number: Comments: Total Amended Budget Expenses (Actual+Encum) Available Budget Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Project Title $ 70,000.00 $ 69,774.63 225.37 225.37 V20221130 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 169-22, 58-22 Approval Date: 8/2/2022, 3/1/2022 Page 323 of 524 Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan CITY OF 19 FAYETTEVILLE JULY 2023 ARKANSAS Page 324 of 524 Project Team Stantec Consulting Services ® StanteC of Austin, Texas Emily Reed, Project Manager Mitch Ford, Lead Architectural Historian Brandy Black, Architectural Historian Jennifer Brosz, Senior Architectural Historian Jenya Green, Architectural Historian Marcus Huerta, Architectural Historian Laura Kviklys, Senior Architectural Historian Izabella Nuckels, Historic Preservation Specialist Sandy Shannon, Deputy Project Manager Kory Van Hemert, Architectural Historian Sara Laurence, GIS Manager Tracie Quinn, Technical Editor M D o Cl X McDoux Preservation LLC PRESERVATION LLC of Houston, Texas Steph McDougal, Principal Jenn Beggs, Associate July 2023 © City of Fayetteville Attribution Note Unless otherwise noted, photographs, maps, data, and charts were produced by the authors listed above or are courtesy of the City of Fayetteville, Funding Note Partially funded by the Historic Preservation Fund managed by the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program 1100 North Street Little Rock, Arkansas (AR) 72201 (501) 324-9880 This material was produced with assistance from the Historic Preservation Fund, administered by the National Park Service, Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, an agency of the Division of Arkansas Heritage. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of the Interior or the Division of Arkansas Heritage. This program receives federal financial assistance for identification and protection of historic properties. Under Title A of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended, the DOI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, disability, or age in its federally assisted programs. If you believe you have been discriminated against in any program, activity, or facility as described above or you desire further information, please write to; Office for Equal Opportunity National Park Service 1849 C Street, Northwest (NW) Washington, District of Columbia (D.C.) 20240 United States (U.S.) CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANS ARKANSAS ARKANSAS HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Cover Image; Clockwise from top left The Fayetteville skyline facing southwest from Mount Sequoyah (East Mountain) in circa (ca.) 1905, ca. 1880, and in the spring of 2023. Images are courtesy of Charlie Alison (ca, 1880 and ca.1905 photographs) and Britin Bostock (2023 photograph), :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 325iof 524 IOW" k Acknowledgements E CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE RESIDENTS w MAYOR Lioneld Jordan CITY COUNCIL Sonia Harvey, Ward 1 D'Andre Jones, Ward 1 Sarah Moore, Ward 2 Mike Wiederkehr, Ward 2 CA Scott Berna, Ward 3 - Sarah Bunch, Ward 3 Teresa Turk, Ward 4 _ Holly Hertzberg, Ward 4 PLANNING COMMISSION Sarah Sparkman, Chair Andrew Brink, Vice Chair Mary McGetrick, Secretary - Jimm Garlock Fred Gulley Joseph Holcomb .,• Mary Madden Brad Payne ® - Porter Winston : a L-d ; HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION Christine Myres, Chair Meredith Mahan, Vice Chair Mark Harper Joann Goodley '� ' - •3 -r '-° 1 Tommie Flowers Davis Alexandra C. Lee r ;� •.�:/ ��• {�, �t' Julie Preddy 1 BLACK HERITAGE • 1\& - PRESERVATION COMMISSION D'Andre Jones, Council Member '•�; �►�r ;�;;� fi 'kt g JL Jennings, Chair -�� 7J �, �j!* t•.,. Lois Bryant, Vice Chair Kaleb Turner Joetta "Shawn" Walker Wendell Huggins a1, {r' Y •� _� . Veronica Huff ':.�'-� �`?�=�` +,�1< •' �S '' -�;''. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE STAFF ''' ;• � ' � �' is '� ,•=Y � Table of Contents Name Page 1. Executive Summary.............................................................................9 2. About Historic Preservation.............................................................12 2.1 Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation.......................................12 2J.1 Federal Level.................................................................................................................15 2J.2 State Level......................................................................................................................17 2J.3 Local Level.....................................................................................................................19 2.2 Tax Credits.......................................................................................................................20 2.3 Benefits of Historic Preservation.......................................................................21 2.3.1 Economic Benefits...................................................................................................21 2.3.2 Environmental Benefits......................................................................................22 2.3.3 Social Benefits..........................................................................................................23 2.4 Introduction to Historic Resources Surveys..............................................24 3. Fayetteville Background Information...........................................26 3.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................26 3.1.1 Brief History..................................................................................................................30 312 Architectural Character and Legacy............................................................33 3.2 Preservation Program..............................................................................................36 3.2.1 Overview........................................................................................................................36 3.2.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance....................................................................41 3.3 Certified Local Government.................................................................................44 3.4 Black Heritage Preservation Commission...................................................45 3.5 Preserve America Community............................................................................45 3.6 Completed Historic Resources Surveys.......................................................46 3.7 Existing Historic Designations............................................................................49 3.71 Local, ARHP, and NRHP Listings.......................................................................49 3.72 National Historic Trails..........................................................................................53 3.73 Historical Markers...................................................................................................53 3.74 Easements....................................................................................................................55 3.8 Evaluation........................................................................................................................56 3,8,1 Successes and Challenges................................................................................56 3.8,2 Ordinance Evaluation............................................................................................57 3.83 Planning Context and Alignment..................................................................59 3.8A Data Management and Availability...............................................................61 3.85 Use of Preservation Incentives.......................................................................62 3.8,6 Program Benchmark.............................................................................................63 4. Stakeholder & Community Engagement.....................................65 43 Stakeholder Engagement.......................................................................................66 4.2 Community Meetings...............................................................................................66 4.3 Community Opinion Survey.................................................................................67 4.33 Survey Results...........................................................................................................67 5. Strategic Plan......................................................................................70 5,1 Goals.....................................................................................................................................71 52 Implementation Matrices......................................................................................80 Goal 1. Strengthen the Preservation Program...................................................80 Goal 2. Encourage Compatible Development.....................................................81 Goal 3. Identify and Protect Historic Properties..............................................82 Goal 4. Provide Learning Opportunities for the Community....................83 Goal 5. Promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.............................................84 5.3 Conclusion & Plan Maintenance.......................................................................85 Page 328 of 524 TABLE OF CONTENTS Name Page Appendices...............................................................................................91 AppendixA: Acronyms....................................................................................................92 AppendixB: Glossary.......................................................................................................93 Appendix C: Partnership Opportunities................................................................96 Appendix D: Funding Opportunities........................................................................98 Appendix E: SOI Standards for Rehabilitation.................................................100 Appendix F: SOI Professional Qualifications.....................................................101 Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance.........................................................102 Appendix H: Historic District Properties..............................................................104 Appendix I: Historic Resources Survey Plan....................................................323 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Trail of Tears..........................................................................................................ui Figure 2. Lewis Brothers Building..............................................................................iv Figure3. Center Street........................................................................................................v Figure 4. House at 348 Washington Avenue........................................................ vi Figure 5. Butterfly House by Fay Jones(1961). .................................................. vii Figure 6. Public Art in Gregory Par.......................................................................wii Figure 7 Plan Organization..............................................................................................ix Figure8. Skyline.....................................................................................................................9 Figure 9. Planning Process and Timeline.............................................................10 Figure10. Goals......................................................................................................................11 Figure11. Planning Period................................................................................................11 Figure12. Old Main..............................................................................................................12 Figure 13. Key Terms and Concepts..........................................................................13 Figure 14. Dickson Street During the Fall..............................................................13 Figure 15. Overview of Historic Designations.....................................................14 Figure 16. David and Mary Margaret Durst House...........................................15 Figure 17 Hathcock House..............................................................................................16 Figure 18. Sixteenth Street Baptist Church..........................................................16 Figure 19. Fayetteville Police Department............................................................17 Figure 20. Fayetteville Fire Department.................................................................17 Figure 21. White Hangar Local Historic District.................................................18 Figure 22. Heffelfinger-Freund House.....................................................................18 Figure 23. Downtown Fayetteville.............................................................................19 Figure 24. Interior of White Hangar...........................................................................19 Figure 25. Historic Tax Credits.....................................................................................20 Figure 26. Scenes from Downtown and South Fayetteville ......................22 Figure 27 Fayetteville Farmers Market . ................................................................. 23 Figure28. Surveying.........................................................................................................25 Figure 29. Fayetteville Square.....................................................................................26 Figure 30. Map of Fayetteville......................................................................................27 Figure31. Demographics................................................................................................29 Figure 32. Racial Composition....................................................................................29 Figure33. Building Age...................................................................................................29 Figure 34. Overlooking Fayetteville.........................................................................30 Figure 35. Fayetteville Frisco Depot........................................................................30 Figure 36. First Day of Integration in 1954............................................................31 Figure 37. Urban Renewal Plan(1968).....................................................................31 Figure 38. Guisinger Building......................................................................................33 Figure 39. Guisinger Building(ca.1905)...............................................................33 Figure 40. Work by lames Lambeth........................................................................34 Page 329 of 524 Figure 5. Butterfly- H'66s6.1 : 'aI r> - - „r LIST OF FIGURES Name Page Figure41. Root School ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,35 Figure 42. Fine Arts Building at the U of A..........................................................35 Figure43. Waxhaws Hall ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,36 Figure 44, In the Way of Progress.............................................................................36 Figure 45, Archibald Yell's Law Office......................................................................37 Figure 46. Steeple Replacement................................................................................37 Figure 47 Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse/ John Porter Produce Building ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,39 Figure 48. Rendering of the Woolsey Farmstead post restoration . ..... 39 Figure 49. Lights of the Ozarks ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,40 Figure 50. Center Street facing the courthouse...............................................41 Figure 51. Parade on College Avenue.....................................................................42 Figure 52, Parade on Block Street............................................................................43 Figure 53, East Side of Square(ca,1910)..............................................................44 Figure 54, Downtown Mural ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,45 Figure 55. Johnson Plumbing,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,46 Figure 56. Surveys in central Fayetteville ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,48 Figure 57 House in Mount Nord NRHP Historic District..............................49 Figure 58. House Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District ..........................49 Figure 59. VA Medical Center,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,49 Figure 60, Designation Tally ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,50 Figure 61. White Hangar Local Historic District.................................................51 Figure 62. Properties in the NRHP and ARHP....................................................52 Figure 63. Butterfield Overland Mail Route....................................................53 Figure 64, Trail of Tears Sign,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,, .... .53 Figure 65. Community Remembrance Project................................................53 Figure 66, National Historic Trails ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,54 Figure 67. Woolsey Homestead pre-restoration...............................................55 Figure68, City Hall ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,56 Figure 69, You are Beautiful Building ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,57 Figure 70, Trent's Pond with Old Main in the Background . ......................58 Figure 71. Public Artwork in Gregory Park............................................................61 Figure 72. Merchants Club in 1912,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,62 Figure 73. House at 828 Skyline Drive by Fay Jones (1960)......................63 Figure 74. Comparable Cities ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,64 Figure 75. September 2022 Community Meeting...........................................65 Figure 76. Planning and Engagement Process................................................65 Figure 77 Priority Results from the Workshop..................................................67 Figure 78. Priority results from the Community Opinion Survey ........... 68 Figure 79, Downtown Fayetteville Branding.......................................................70 Figure80, The Ramble ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,71 Figure 81, SWEPCO Building by Warren Segraves(1968)1...........................73 Figure 82, Fulbright Peace Fountain........................................................................74 Figure 83. Thomas -Tharp House(1854).................................................................75 Figure 84. Sanborn Map(1886),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,75 Figure 85, Preservation Event ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,76 Figure 86. Historic Core Connections and Gateways....................................77 Figure87 Diversity ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,78 Figure 88. Fayetteville Pride ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,78 Figure 89. Fayettville Public Schools Yearbook in 1954. ............................79 Figure90.112 Drive In,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,85 Figure 91. Tightrope Walker Above the Square in 1919..................................91 Figure 92, NIPS informational panels ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1103 Figure93, Story Map ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1103 Page 330 of 524 iiA�y I.� LIST OF TABLES Name Page Table 1; City Plan 2040 Benchmarks........................................................................10 Table 2, Types of Historic Resources Surveys...................................................24 Table 3, History Timeline ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,32 Table 4, Historic Preservation Timeline.................................................................38 Table 5, Historic Preservation Program Budget 2021-2025.......................39 Table 6, Historic Resources Surveys.......................................................................47 Table 7. NRHP Historic Districts in Fayetteville, Arkansas ..........................50 Table 8, Historical Markers............................................................................................55 Table9, Easements...........................................................................................................55 Table 10. Historic Preservation Successes and Challenges .....................56 Table 11. HDC Ordinance Evaluation.........................................................................57 Table 12. Plan Alignment ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,59 Table 13. Preservation Incentives in Arkansas.................................................63 Table 14. Goal 1 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................72 Table 15. Goal 2 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................73 Table 16. Goal 3 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................74 Table 17. Goal 4 Challenges and Solutions...........................................................76 Table 18. Goal 5 Challenges and Solutions..........................................................79 Page 331 of 524 Plan Organization • Plan Overview and Organization • Summary of Plan Goals • Definition of Historic Preservation • Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation • Historic Preservation Tax Credits • Benefits of Historic Preservation • Historic Resources Surveys • Community Overview • Brief History of Fayetteville • Architectural Character and Legacy • Overview of Historic Preservation Program • Historic Districts and Properties • Evaluation of Historic Preservation Efforts Stakeholder and Stakeholder Engagement Efforts CommunityCommunity Workshops and Meetings Community Opinion Survey Engagement Survey and Workshop Results • Summary of Goals • Goal Challenges and Solutions • Action Items • Implementation Matrices • Plan Maintenance • Acronyms (Appendix A) • Glossary of Terms (B) • Partnership Opportunities (C) • Funding Opportunities (D) • Secretary of the Interior Resources (E-F) • Historical Marker Guidance (G) • Index of Historic District Properties (H) • Historic Resources Survey Plan (1) Figure 7 Plan Organization. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAI. age 3 2 Of 524 Founded in 1828, Fayetteville is presently the second largest city in Arkansas. It is a college town and economic center, as well as a destination for art, culture, and natural scenery, As Fayetteville prepares for its bicentennial in 2028, the city looks forward to its next chapter of growth. Historic preservation is the practice of managing historic resources through protection, reuse, conservation, education, and other means, It encourages responsible growth and development while considering and maintaining places important to the past. Historic places make communities unique and tell the story of each place. They help us celebrate, understand, and learn from our shared history and help make a community attractive to residents, visitors, and businesses. Historic places are also valuable for economic development, tourism, and civic pride. A well -crafted historic preservation plan provides the framework for successful long-term management of a community's historic resources. The government of the City of Fayetteville (hereafter, City) began its commitment to historic preservation more than 40 years ago with the creation of its local historic preservation ordinance and municipal preservation program. In 2020, the City adopted two short-term (2019-2025) historic preservation -related benchmarks in City Plan 2040: 1) the development of a historic preservation plan and 2) preservation of historic neighborhoods (Table 1). This Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan (hereafter, plan) fulfills the first benchmark and provides objectives and actions for historic preservation work for the next ten years (2023-2033). The planning process for this project began with a review and assessment of the City's existing historic preservation program, administrative organization, tools for preservation, partnerships, and economic factors. City programs, policies, documents, and procedures related to historic preservation were reviewed and analyzed. Figure 8, Skyline, Source; Denis Tagney Jr.,, :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTERPage 300f 524 Existing planning documents, the Code of Fayetteville (hereafter, City Code), and recommendations from the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) were studied to assess the extent to which the city had accomplished prior preservation -related goals. Previous historic resources surveys were analyzed for their historic contexts and geographical and historical coverage. A list of local and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) properties and districts was developed. Lastly, an interactive map was created using geographic information systems (GIS) to plot historical survey activities, demolition activities, designated historic properties and districts, property improvement data from the Washington County Assessor (WCA), proposed transportation projects, and areas prioritized for infill development. Project personnel also conducted a limited windshield survey of Fayetteville to understand the city's broad patterns of development and built environment. Summer 2022 August 2022 Figure 9. Planning Process and Timeline. Fall 2022 Winter 2022-2023 Spring 2023 Summer 2023 The background review provided a solid understanding of Fayetteville, its history, and the City's historic preservation efforts to date and informed topics for discussion with the community. Community engagement efforts for this plan included stakeholder interviews, a survey questionnaire, and public meetings. Members of the community expressed strong support for historic preservation, prioritized historic preservation activities for the City to undertake, and identified areas or properties that they believe are important to protect, among other topics discussed. Table 1; City Plan 2040 Benchmarks City Plan 2040 Benchmarks Result Seek funding to complete a citywide Community Preservation Plan This plan fulfills this to identify resources for future historic survey and registration, assess benchmark. current preservation efforts, and plan for new initiatives, Work to preserve the historic character and integrity of neighborhoods This plan has specific goals with multiple approaches including but not limited to creating one or and action items to achieve more Local Regulated District(s) in neighborhoods listed on the National this benchmark. Register of Historic Places; and utilize other preservation tools such as overlay districts with the main goal of preserving historic character, As a result of the background review and community engagement, five historic preservation goals were identified (Figure 10). Over 50 action items are provided to address each goal. Goals focus on developing a stronger historic preservation program, using survey and designation tools to document and protect historic resources, promoting sustainable development that is compatible with and respectful of the city's historic character, providing learning opportunities to the community, and uplifting diverse and underrepresented histories, These goals are not categorized by importance, but it is important to note that the action items listed for Goal 5 (Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion and protect cultural heritage) are focused on addressing the exclusionary nature of past policies and identifying the need for systemic change to celebrate and recognize Fayetteville's full heritage. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAP ge 3�4 of 524 Figure 10. Goals, The purpose of this plan is not necessarily a direct path forward but is instead the identification of a planned approach for the next ten years. This plan should be revisited annually to ensure goals and actions are being implemented, and to identify upcoming priorities, At the planning period midpoint, the City should hold a meeting to discuss progress and remaining objectives with the public. The plan should be updated every ten years, with the next planning effort commencing in 2033 (Figure 11). As the first historic preservation plan for Fayetteville, this plan affirms the City's commitment to its history and historic built environment and will help the community achieve its preservation goals. 2023 2028 2033 Plan period Plan period Commence begins midpoint plan update 1 2023-2025 1 Short -Term (Less than 2 years) Address critical dependencies 1 2023-2027 Mid -Term (2 to 4 years) 2023+ Ongoing & Long -Term (Over 4 years) Figure 11. Planning Period. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 3�5 of 524 2.1 Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation Historic preservation is a broad term to describe the practice of identifying what is important about our history and how we can manage that history. It involves the evaluation, documentation, acquisition, protection, rehabilitation, restoration, interpretation, and conservation of historic places, education about history, and other activities. In the United States, historic preservation is managed at the federal, state, and local levels through laws, processes, and agencies that work together. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 ushered in the current landscape of historic preservation in the United States. The NHPA created the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); the national list of propertiesplaces deemed worthy of preservation for their historical significance, and the Section 106 review process. Section 106 of the NHPA requires the evaluation of effects on historic - age (typically 45-50 years old) resources associated with a federal and federally -supported project (i.e., construction of a highway with federal funds). The Section 106 process provides an opportunity for the public to provide input into projects affecting historic properties. Figure 13 defines key terms used in this section, and Figure 15 details the differences between local, state, and federal levels of historic property designations. Figure 12. Old Main. One of the first buildings listed in the NRHP in 1970. Source; Brandon Rush 2.1 Federal, State, and Local Levels of Preservation ...................................12 Contents211 Federal Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,15 2.1.2 State Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,17 2.1.3 Local Level ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,19 2.2 Tax Credits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,20 2.3 Benefits of Historic Preservation ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,21 2.3.1 Economic Benefits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,21 2.3.2 Environmental Benefits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,22 I 2.3.3 Social Benefits ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,23 2.4 Introduction to Historic Resources Surveys............................................24 This chapter describes how historic preservation is managed at the three levels of government, explains the benefits of historic preservation, and describes the role of historic resources surveys in preservation planning and how they work. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTERPag3�6 oaf 524 Key Terms and Concepts Resource A building, structure, object, site, or district, Historic vs. Historical The word "historic" is used to describe something important in history. The word "historical" describes anything from the past, important or not. In a regulatory context, "historic" means eligible for the NRHP. Historic -age vs. Nonhistoric-age Historic -age resources are at least 45 to 50 years old, and nonhistoric-age resources are less than 45 years old. Surveyed Resources vs. Designated Resources Surveys typically document resources of a certain age —usually forty-five or fifty years old or older. Inclusion in a historic resources survey does not mean a resource is historic (i.e., eligible for designation or significant), Historic resources surveys make recommendations about eligibility for potential future designations, but designation is a separate process, For example, a survey could document one hundred historical properties, and of those, three might meet the criteria for NRHP designation and would be deemed "historic." Designated resources have gone through an application process to be formally recognized as historic resources by a government agency. In Fayetteville, historic resources can be part of a local historic district or listed in the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP) or NRHP, individually or as part of a historic district. Eligible vs. Designated Resources recommended eligible for historic designation as part of a survey do not automatically become designated historic properties at the local, state, or national level. The historic designation process is typically initiated by property owners. Figure 13. Key Terms and Concepts. Figure 14. Dickson Street During the Fall, .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP ge 3�7 of 524 Description: Contiguous or noncontiguous areas having special historic community or architectural value. Regulated: Yes Number Designated: One local historic district (Drake Field White Hangar) Designation process: • Historic District Commission (HDC) confers designation • No defined public designation process to date Figure 15. Overview of Historic Designations. Description: Individual properties or areas having association with events or people of state or local historical significance; a type, style, or period of architecture; or important elements of Arkansas's history or prehistory. Less stringent requirements than NRHP designation. Regulated: No, honorary Description: Individual properties or areas significant for their association with events or broad patterns of history; persons significant in our past; architectural, engineering, artistic, or construction characteristics; or archaeological value. Must retain sufficient integrity to convey historic associations. Number Designated: All 69 Regulated: No, honorary for NRHP properties + 11 NRHP private property owners. districts + 3 ARHP Regulated for federal properties not listed in the properties. NRHP Number Designated: 69 Designation process: properties, 11 NRHP historic • Same application/ districts nomination process as NRHP Designation process: • AHPP confers NRHP nomination form designation HDC, AHPP, and NPS • Several months to review one-year process Approximately one-year • NRHP properties are process automatically listed in the ARHP :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 3�8 of 524 2.1.1 Federal Level The National Park Service (NIPS) is the primary federal agency responsible for oversight of historic preservation in the United States. The agency works with tribes, states, local governments, nonprofit organizations, and other stewards of our shared heritage. It provides historic preservation guidance, technical support, funding, and management for programs and sites. One of the functions of the NPS is management of the NRHP, the federal government's official list of historically significant places. NRHP designation is honorary for non-federal resources and does not protect resources from demolition unless the property is involved in a project that would receive federal funding, licensing, or permitting? However, it can make a property eligible for financial incentives. For example, rehabilitation projects on properties listed in or eligible for the NRHP may qualify for federal historic preservation tax credits (Section 2.1,4). Historic properties must retain significance under at least one of the following criteria outlined below to become eligible for listing in the NRHP, either individually or as a contributing resource to a historic district: Criterion A. Properties associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; Criterion B. Properties associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; Criterion C. Properties that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction, and/or; Criterion D. Properties that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history,' Additionally, for a property to qualify for the NRHP, it must retain enough physical and historical integrity to convey its significance. Seven aspects of integrity are considered: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. All seven aspects of integrity do not need to be present for a property to be eligible for the NRHP. In general, a historic property should retain enough integrity to be recognizable from the time period during which is achieved its significance, known as the period of significance (POS). Figure 16. David and Mary Margaret Durst House. This Mid -Twentieth Century Modern style house was designed by architect John G, Williams in 1952 and is listed in the NRHP. Source: Wikimedia.F NRHP Data Points: • Resource Number • Criterion: C • Significance Area; • Significance Level • POS:1950-1956 11�1:•• Architecture State .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP ge 3�9 of 524 Figure 17 Hathcock House. The house is a contributing resource in the Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District, Jl, Figure 18, Sixteenth Street Baptist Church The church is one of numerous resources that contribute to the Civil Rights MPS in Birmingham, Alabama, Source; John Morse, Buildings, structures, objects, and sites can be listed in the NRHP individually or as part of a historic district. A historic district is a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects with a shared history or aesthetic. Each building, structure, site, and object in a historic district is categorized as either contributing or noncontributing to the district, based on its historic significance and integrity. Multiple properties may also be listed in the NRHP in a Multiple Property Submission (MPS) to the NPS, These discontiguous properties are typically linked through a shared history, architectural commonality, or historical trend. To learn more about the NRHP, visit the NPS program website, What is Multiple Property Documentation? Multiple property documentation is a designation approach that identifies a collection of related significant properties. As the name suggests, multiple property documentation includes two or more properties that are connected based on themes, trends, and patterns of history. This method eliminates the geographic contiguity needed in a historic district. These properties may be connected through an organized historic context or are similar property types. Multiple properties may be submitted to the NPS for NRHP nomination via a multiple property submission (MPS). Examples of MPS documentation received by the NPS include; the Civil Rights Movement in Birmingham 1933-1979 (Figure 18), Historic Residential Subdivisions in Metropolitan Denver 1940-1965, and Sculpture by Dionicio Rodriguez in Texas. For more information on Multiple Property Documentation, view; National Register Bulletin 16B, :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 3 0 of 524 Page 2.1.2 State Level State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs) play a pivotal role in the management of historic resources by administering the national historic preservation program at the state level. They cooperate with the NIPS and other federal agencies, local governments, and private organizations to promote stewardship of historic resources. In Arkansas, the SHPO is the Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. Among its many programs, the AHPP reviews NRHP nominations, documents and registers Arkansas's cultural resources, administers historic preservation - related grants and easements, consults with federal agencies, and supports Certified Local Governments (CLGs) (Section 3,3), among other activities. 2.1.2.1 State Law Governing Local Historic Districts In Arkansas, state legislation allows municipalities to establish local historic districts managed by historic district commissions (State Act 484, amended in 1965 by State Act 170, §14-172-207). According to the law, before a local historic district can be created, either the district must already be listed in the NRHP or a majority of property owners must demonstrate support of the measure. Therefore, it is possible for an existing NRHP district to become regulated as a local historic district without the explicit consent of current property owners. Although listing in the NRHP also requires owner consent, the two designations are different, and property ownership may have changed since the time of NRHP listing, The law does not allow for the designation of individual properties as local historic landmarks, although it lists as its purpose the "preservation and protection of buildings, sites, places, and districts of historic interest through the maintenance of such as landmarks" (emphasis added),3 It also allows for discontiguous historic districts by stating, "any single historic district may embrace noncontiguous lands. Figure 19. Fayetteville Police Department. Photograph of police vehicle (ca. 1915), Figure 20. Fayetteville Fire Department. Photograph of fire truck (ca. 1920). .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP g2 31 of 524 DRAKE MUNICIPAL ETTEVILLE Figure 21. White Hangar Local Historic District. The White Hangar at Drake Field was determined eligible for the ARHP, but it has not been determined eligible or listed in the NRHP. Figure 22. Heffelfinger-Freund House, The house was determined eligible for the ARHP in 2018. Source: AHPP." 2.1.2.2 The Arkansas Register of Historic Places The Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP) is the state equivalent of the NRHP. Properties are eligible for the ARHP if they are at least fifty years old and possess significance in any of the areas listed below. • Association with events of state or local historical significance • Association with the lives of persons of significance in the history of the state or locality • Represent a type, style, or period of architecture • Association with important elements of Arkansas's history or prehistory ARHP designation criteria are less stringent than NRHP criteria. For example, ARHP properties do not have to be in their original location, may have compromised integrity, and can be commemorative.' All Arkansas places listed in or nominated to the NRHP are automatically placed in the Arkansas Register.6 Listing in the ARHP constitutes a recognition of a property's historic significance and in no way restricts or abridges an owner's right to use, modify, or dispose of their property. The AHPP provides grant funds for properties listed in the ARHP through the Historic Preservation Restoration Grant (HPRG) program. Properties that have been listed in the ARHP and/or are a noncontributing resource in an NRHP historic district are eligible to participate in the HPRG program. Participants are eligible to receive a grant of up to $10,000 to fund restoration activities that will make the property eligible for the NRHP. Appendix D: Funding Opportunities provides more information on the HPRG program and other funding opportunities. 2.1.2.3 State Marker Programs In addition to the ARHP, the State of Arkansas has two marker programs, one commemorating sites associated with the Civil War and the second being the Arkansas Historical Marker Program, created in 2017 to honor historically significant people, places, and events that have shaped the state.' To be eligible for a historical marker, the significance of a person, place, or event must have occurred at least fifty years ago, but there are exceptions for extraordinary significance. An application and consultation with the SHPO are required to determine marker eligibility. TVA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP ge 32 of 524 2.7.2.4 Main Street Arkansas and Arkansas Downtown Network The AHPP manages Main Street Arkansas, an affiliate of the national Main Street America program sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP). The program can help transform historical downtowns into vibrant places through economic vitality, design, community organization, and promotion strategies." Communities accepted into the program are provided with technical assistance, resources, and ongoing education in exchange for a commitment to investing in buildings, infrastructure, and community improvements that celebrate historic character. The program provides grants for facade renovation, building rehabilitation, new construction, and other projects that stimulate economic growth and revitalization. The AHPP's Arkansas Downtown Network program is like the Arkansas Main Street program in its use of historic preservation to promote economic development, but it has less stringent requirements. Downtown Network communities do not have to form nonprofit organizations to administer the program or have full-time staff, and budgetary requirements are lower. As of 2021, Arkansas has nineteen Main Street and twenty Downtown Network communities. 2.1.3 Local Level In the U.S., preservation laws have the most enforcement power at the local level, Local governments can create ordinances to establish a historic preservation program, designate properties or districts as local landmarks or local historic districts and manage historic resources. For example, a building listed in the NRHP can be demolished without any review by the public or local, state, or federal agencies; however, if that building were locally designated, the City ordinance could require a review process to take place and potentially stop the demolition. Figure 23. Downtown Fayetteville, The city center is home to numerous festivals and events. Figure 24. Interior of White Hangar. The White Hangar is the only local historic district in Fayetteville. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP ge 33 of 524 �����`I�: �s ��,,lBlll l_IIIIIIIIiIII Figure 25. Historic Tax Credits, This rehabilitation project in Little Rock received historic tax credits after following the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. The top image shows the Judson Millard House before rehabilitation and the bottom image shows the end result. The once - vacant historic house is now several apartments, Source; AHPR1 2.2 Tax Credits Historic tax credits (HTCs) are a valuable opportunity to harness historic preservation as an economic tool. The federal historic tax credit program was established in the 1970s and is administered through the NIPS and the Internal Revenue Service. In the 1980s, states also began to offer tax credit programs to incentivize the rehabilitation of historic buildings. The federal and state HTC programs can be used together, maximizing the return value of a project. The HTC program provides a credit for eligible rehabilitation expenses on federal income taxes at the federal level and credits that vary at the state level, ranging from credits on state income tax to franchise tax credits. The federal historic preservation tax credit returns 20 percent of eligible rehabilitation expenses, and the Arkansas historic preservation tax credit returns 25 percent of approved rehabilitation expenses. To be eligible for historic tax credits, a building must be individually listed in the NRHP, a contributing resource to a historic district, or determined eligible for listing by the end of the rehabilitation project. At the federal level, eligible properties must be income producing, and at the Arkansas state level, private property owners and owners of income -producing properties are eligible. Property owners are not required to apply for both federal and state tax credits, but these credits can be layered for eligible properties. The proposed work must be substantial and follow the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation (Appendix E) to retain the historic character of the building. The State of Arkansas tax credit also applies to properties that are individually listed in the NRHP, a contributing resource to a historic district, or determined eligible for listing by the end of the rehabilitation project. The credit requires adherence to the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation,' Projects must also contribute to new business creation, existing business expansion, tourism, business revitalization, and/or neighborhood revitalization. Unlike the federal program, Arkansas HTCs are available for income -producing and residential properties. Whereas the federal program has no funding limit, the state tax credit has an $8 million cap in awards per year. Tax benefits like a federal income tax deduction may also be available for historic property owners who donate an easemenVO Additional information on economic opportunities can be found in Appendix D. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION IHA%1I 344 Of 524 2.3 Benefits of Historic Preservation A city and its residents benefit from historic preservation in myriad ways. Historic preservation has been proven to provide economic benefits to individuals and the community at large" Investment in historic areas can bolster the local economy and increase property values. This investment in the existing built environment is a sustainable development practice that takes advantage of standing buildings, reduces landfill waste, and limits the use of new construction materials. Cultivating a successful historic preservation program promotes a strong community identity and can foster civic pride. This identity supports an engaged population, and can attract others to live, work, and play in a community. 2.3.1 Economic Benefits Historic preservation contributes to job creation, development, and income generation, directly and indirectly. Historic preservation projects are generally more economically impactful than new construction projects because they are more labor-intensive, and materials are more likely to be purchased locally. Neighborhoods and communities benefit from historic tax credit projects because they attract private investors who may not have otherwise undertaken a rehabilitation project. As historic buildings are often located in downtowns and areas where infrastructure is already in place, preservation projects conserve municipal resources and combat sprawl. Finally, historic preservation projects increase property values and often encourage other renovation and investment projects. Much of the role of historic preservation in economic development is tied to the incentives available, including grants. Since 1971, the AHPP has awarded approximately 2,400 grants in 170 cities, totaling more than $55 million dollars 2 Main Street communities in Arkansas have invested over $377 million in their Main Street districts since 1984, 78 percent of which was from the private sector?3 Each year since the state HTC program was established in Arkansas, over 175 direct jobs and 133 indirect jobs were created, and a direct income value of more than $7 million dollars and indirect value of more than $4.7 million dollars was generated14 Benefits • Civic pride • Supports local trades and other industries • Cultural and community identity • Supports small businesses • Connection to heritage • Natural resource conservation • Charm and character • Maintains affordable housing • Creates jobs • Heritage tourism • Economic growth • Increases property values • Educates population • Reduces waste Since 1971, the AHPP has awarded more than $55 million dollars through grants. Main Street Arkansas has seen more than $377 million dollars in investment since 1984. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP ge 35 of 524 t 07Q Figure 26. Scenes from Downtown and South Fayetteville, Downtown Fayetteville has already created a dynamic community that takes advantage of its historic buildings and streets, which contribute to the economy. Approximately 20 percent of landfill is from construction and demolition activities in Fayetteville" Historic preservation provides economic opportunities related to heritage tourism, Heritage tourism is the activity of "traveling to experience the places, artifacts and activities that authentically represent the stories and people of the past," which can be framed by cultural, historic, and/ or natural resources and environments15 Heritage tourism relies on historic preservation to maintain the historical appearance of environments, as well as the preservation of stories and traditions linked to a community. Museums and cultural institutions play a central role, but the local government ensures an overall commitment to heritage tourism activities. Heritage tourism bolsters the local economy by attracting visitors and residents. Small businesses benefit from historic preservation. The preservation and rehabilitation of historical buildings, especially smaller, older buildings, stimulates small business incubatioW6 A small historic building provides the opportunity to secure an affordable space with character that would be otherwise unavailable for a small business owner. Communities with smaller, older buildings provide opportunities for entrepreneurs of all backgrounds. Creative industries also thrive in these areas, providing a supportive environment for artists and artisans. A higher density of buildings encourages walking and bicycling, in contrast to suburban sprawl -style development, The range of small businesses attracts many, especially younger, people to live, work, and play in these areas. Furthermore, these areas create an active nightlife and music scene which can encourage visitors and heritage tourists to spend the night rather than return home the same day. 2.3.2 Environmental Benefits Historic preservation is a sustainable approach to development and waste reduction. The rehabilitation of existing buildings promotes the adaptive reuse of a space, rather than demolishing and replacing with new construction, Existing walls and building materials can often be reused at an affordable cost. This environmentally friendly strategy works to prevent the purchase of new construction materials and reduce landfill waste that is harmful to the environment. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTERPage 3 6 oaf 524 Oftentimes, buildings suitable for rehabilitation are in downtown communities that already present a livable environment due to a compact street network, sidewalks, and proximity to resources. Mixed -use projects contribute to this livable community, in that upper stories may be used for residential use and street -level spaces may be occupied by commercial or professional entities. Overall, this approach works to reduce the reliance on automobiles to attain services and encourage healthy, walkable communities. Historic preservation reduces a city's carbon footprint and encourages resilience in the face of climate change. Federal HTCs have been notable for production of affordable housing units in Arkansas, with 38% of housing units created through HTC projects being designated for low-income residents'$ 2.3.3 Social Benefits Historic preservation fosters civic pride and identity, Beautification through the maintenance and investment in the historic character of a place contributes to a greater sense of place and enjoyment of surroundings, The establishment of one's sense of place contributes to the memory landscape and orientation of their environment. Historic preservation activities work to preserve and maintain sense of place, which contributes to a collective memory and shared identity. Historic preservation attracts newcomers and retains current residents. The college -town environment of Fayetteville's historic core attracts prospective students to the University of Arkansas (U of A). Residents enjoy a walkable downtown enhanced by festivals and events, like the downtown farmers' market, which has been active since 1973. Rehabilitated buildings also provide opportunities for the creation of affordable housing. Historic preservation encourages interest in local history. Heritage tourism activities provide the opportunity to explore local history and untold stories and grow awareness around a physical place for both visitors and residents. Investment in historic buildings and interpretation can spark interest in learning more about the past and can generate support for historic preservation activities. Figure 27 Fayetteville Farmers Market. Since 1973, the Fayetteville Farmers Market has operated in the Downtown Square. Events like the farmers market stimulate activity in walkable downtown centers. Source: Art Meripol (1974),' :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 3 7 of 524 Page 2.4 Introduction to Historic Resources Surveys The systematic documentation of historical resources is central to successful historic preservation planning. This section describes historic resources surveys, why they are completed, and different levels of documentation. Fayetteville's survey activities to date are detailed in Section 3.6 and Appendix I; Historic Resources Survey Plan, Historic resources surveys are the principal tool for identifying and documenting buildings, structures, sites, objects, and districts, and evaluating them for historic significance?g They can be conducted as part of a community's historic preservation initiatives, or they may be completed for regulatory reasons. Background data review, such as historical and current map analysis and historic context development, are important tasks conducted prior to fieldwork. A historic context documents the major historical trends, events, people, and architecture in the survey area and provides the framework for identifying and evaluating historic resources. Historic contexts are intended to be a guide rather than a comprehensive narrative of history. Historic preservation practitioners historically wrote chronological contexts, but today, contexts organized thematically to analyze architectural, social, ethnic, and cultural topics are the industry standard. Historic context statements are not just useful tools for survey work; they can also serve as the foundation for public education activities, historic designations, and other historic preservation initiatives. There are three main types of historic resources surveys; windshield, reconnaissance, and intensive surveys (Table 2). The type of survey appropriate for a project depends on existing documentation, the needs and goals of a community, and available funding. Table 2, Types of Historic Resources Surveys Survey Type Definition A windshield -level survey consists of methodologically driving a large area to Windshield understand the composition and makeup and to note those properties or areas with Survey the most potential to have historic significance. No survey forms are completed. This type of survey is often completed before a reconnaissance survey to inform which properties or areas should be later documented with a survey form. Representative photographs and notes may be taken. A reconnaissance -level survey involves documentation of properties on a survey form Reconnaissance and an evaluation of historic significance using readily available sources. Fieldworkers Survey photograph each resource and document key information, such as the architectural style, exterior materials, and changes that have occurred over time. Survey forms also typically include property information and an assessment of integrity. Surveyors conduct analyses to identify those resources that represent a significant part of history identified in the historic context and maintain sufficient integrity to convey those historic associations. Certain properties require a close examination to answer complex research questions, Intensive understand their history, and evaluate historic significance. Intensive -level surveys Survey involve detailed documentation; comprehensive research like oral history interviews and the review of deeds, census data, and other primary sources; and robust analysis of integrity and significance. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAP ge 38 of 524 Figure 28. Surveying. Architectural historians completing a reconnaissance survey in Fort Smith, AR Depending on the survey and where it is completed, a resource documented at the reconnaissance or intensive level may be evaluated for eligibility for NRHP, state, and/or local historic designations. Surveys in Arkansas are frequently conducted in coordination with the SHPO, reviewed by SHPO staff, and entered into the SHPO database of surveyed properties. These projects require documentation using the AHPP's Arkansas Architectural Resources Survey Form and Ancillary Structures Form, detailed drawn site plans, a comparison of prior survey data, and printed reports and survey forms. Municipalities can also conduct surveys independently. The advantage of an independent project is that the city can customize the data they collect and eliminate unnecessary, costly, and time-consuming tasks. The disadvantage is the lack of formal evaluation by the SHPO, some potential funding limitations, and city responsibility for maintaining all records and data, Once completed, a historic resources survey serves as the foundation for future preservation planning initiatives, such as the designation of individual properties and historic districts and Certificate of Appropriateness reviews. Historic resources surveys are typically conducted every ten years to ensure the survey provides an accurate record of a community's historic resources and is a useful tool for planners. For more information on historic resources surveys, view National Register Bulletin 24, :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION CHAPTER 3 9 of 524 Page • 3.1 Introduction Fayetteville is the largest city in Northwest Arkansas (NWA), a growing metropolitan area in the Boston Mountains encompassing Benton, Madison, and Washington Counties (Figure 30). The city is the southern anchor of the NWA metropolitan area; the cities of Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville lie to the north. The smaller communities of Farmington, Greenland, and Elkins are to the southwest, south, and southeast of the city, respectively. Fayetteville sits in a valley between several mountains that drain into the White and Illinois Rivers. It is home to the flagship campus of the University of Arkansas (U of A) System, which is also the city's largest employer. Museums and attractions include the Arkansas Air and Military Museum, the Botanical Garden of the Ozarks, the Clinton House Museum, the U of A Museum, the Walton Arts Center, the Wilson Art Museum, and the Washington County Historical Society Museum at the Headquarters House. Fayetteville has more than 70 public parks. Numerous festivals and events are held throughout the year. Contents This section describes the community context, background information, and existing conditions analysis relevant to the development of the historic preservation plan. It includes a brief history of Fayetteville and its architecture, a description of the City's historic preservation program and preservation -related initiatives to date, and an evaluation of the program and planning context. 3.1 Introduction..................................................................................26 311 Brief History...............................................................................30 312 Architectural Character and Legacy...................33 3.2 Preservation Program........................................................36 3.2.1 Overview.....................................................................................36 3.2.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance ............................41 3.3 Certified Local Government...........................................44 3.4 Black Heritage Preservation Commission,,,,,,,,,45 3.5 Preserve America Community....................................45 3.6 Completed Historic Resources Surveys..............46 3.7 Existing Historic Designations.....................................49 3.71 Local, ARHP, and NRHP Listings...............................49 3.72 National Historic Trails....................................................53 3.73 Historical Markers...............................................................53 3.74 Easements................................................................................55 3.8 Evaluation.....................................................................................56 3.8.1 Successes and Challenges.........................................56 3.8.2 Ordinance Evaluation......................................................57 3.8.3 Planning Context and Alignment ..........................59 3.8.4 Data Management and Availability ......................61 3.8.5 Use of Preservation Incentives...............................62 3.8.6 Program Benchmark.......................................................63 Figure 29. Fayetteville Square. Downtown in present day (top) and in 1935 (bottom). Sources; Brandon Rush (top).' City of Fayetteville (bottom)."' �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�0 of 524 31 Gtee* Major roads in Fayetteville include the John Paul Hammerschmidt Highway-Ful bright Expressway (Interstate 49), Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard (U.S. Route 62), Nelson Hackett Boulevard -College Avenue (U.S. Route 71B), Wedington Drive-15th Street -Huntsville Road (State Route 16), North Street (State Route 116), and S. Razorback Road (State Route 265). The city has one municipal airport, Drake Field, The Arkansas & Missouri (A&M) Railroad runs north -south through Fayetteville, Ozark Regional Transit and Razorback Transit provides bus service to Fayetteville, Fayetteville had a population of 93,949 in 2020 and an estimated population of 95,230 in 2021.20 The city has a population density of 1,735 persons per square mile, which is higher than Little Rock at 1,688. Most residents (76.8%) are white (Figure 32). Fayetteville has a smaller percentage of Black residents than the rest of the state (5,9 percent compared to 15.7 percent).21 tp d Harmon Arbor Acres Rd z e Wheeler White�7ock 4 n- 76487 112 s Opp, rn d Hamestring Creek Trail v c Corridor W Wedi gton or Z z rc McNair Farmington Fayette Junction Johnson ' ayetteville Park Mud Creek Trail Corridor -%a, Fayetteville i<. per Mountain Appleby ional Walnut Grove Gr�enl �, Figure 30. Map of Fayetteville. Li __""'"•'A1e Sonora' 2 F w4 GUY Teri Rd i O M Habberton 0�� d MWSS,OV% Harris Q Fayetteville City Limits N 0 2 Miles n �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 351 of 524 Fayetteville at a glance... 93,949 Population 1,735A People per Square Mile Population Density $52j111 Median Household Income 21.2% Poverty Pate 941% High School Education or Higher 37.9% Owner Occupied Housing Rate Figure 31. Demographics. Source: 2020 Census, US Census Bureau, Two or More 77% Latins Asian 2.80, American Indian 0.7% Black 5.9% 2020 Census *0.2% Native Hawaiian or Paci Figure 32. Racial Composition. Source: US Census Bureau. r,7 DATA PRESENT 75% Only 75% of parcels in Fayetteville have building age data. Of those parcels, more than 60% of buildings were constructed in 1990 or later. Building Age Washington County Assesor 1980-89 1990 or Later 9% 61 % White 76.8% 1840-19091% 1910-191 % 1920-291% 1930-39 2% 1940-49 3% Figure 33. Building Age. Source: Washington County Assessor's Office.12 Fayetteville has higher educational attainment than the state average; 94.7 percent of Fayetteville residents have high school or equivalent proficiency, and more than 50 percent have a bachelor's degree, compared to the state rates of 877 percent and 24.3 percent, respectively. Fayetteville has a higher poverty rate at 21.2 percent, compared to the state at 16.3 percent, but the median household income (2020) of $52,111 is on par with the state level of $52,123. Washington County Assessor (WCA) building data reveals that most properties in Fayetteville were built after 1960, with the largest percentage (60,7 percent of parcels with data; 45 percent of all parcels) built in 1990 or later (Figure 33).13 According to available WCA data, only 12,7 percent of this subset (approximately 9.5 percent of all parcels in the city) were built prior to 1960. 15% :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�2 of 524 Page 3.1.1 Brief History Located in the Ozark Mountains, the area of present- day Fayetteville and NWA was originally inhabited by the Osage Nation. European explorers arrived in the Mississippi River Valley in 1541, which was subsequently claimed by France and named Louisiana in 1682. In 1803, the United States finalized the Louisiana Purchase from France, and in 1817 took land from the Osage Nation that was given in part to the Cherokee Nation when they were removed from their ancestral homelands in the southeastern U,S,24 In 1828, George McGarrah moved his household to the area, settling in what would later become Fayetteville's Masonic Addition. The town was founded as Washington Courthouse in 1828, but its name was changed a year later to Fayetteville to avoid confusion with the community of Washington, Arkansas. Fayetteville's extents were officially recognized via a 160-acre patent issued on February 27, 1835, by President Andrew Jackson. The land was bound by what is now College Avenue on the east, Gregg Avenue on the west, Dickson Street on the north, and South Street on the south.21 By the late 1830s, all land plots for the town had been purchased and the town square complete. In 1841, the town of Fayetteville incorporated with a population of 425.26 Fayetteville prospered as a center for education during the nineteenth century with several notable schools. The Fayetteville Female Seminary opened in 1839, providing education for both white and Cherokee students. Arkansas College was founded in 1852, becoming the first degree -granting college in the state, though it was destroyed during the Civil War. After the war, Henderson School opened for Black students in 1866. In 1872, the Arkansas Industrial University was founded in Fayetteville, ultimately becoming the U of A in 1899. Fayetteville experienced economic growth in the late nineteenth century fueled by the arrival of the railroad. The St. Louis & San Francisco Railway reached Fayetteville in 1881, and the first passenger train arrived at Dickson Street Station in 1882. By 1886, construction began on the Fayetteville and Little Rock Railway, Fayetteville's location at the junction of multiple railroad lines provided access to other states, including Figure 34. Overlooking Fayetteville, A photograph of individuals looking towards the courthouse around 1920, Source; MC1427, WSC Collection, Special Collections, University of Arkansas Libraries, Fayetteville, Figure 35. Fayetteville Frisco Depot The Fayetteville Frisco Depot pictured ca. 1910. Source; Encyclopedia of Arkansas," :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 353 of 524 Figure 36. First Day of Integration in 1954. Source; Fayetteville History.,' AYETTV E ARKA1\SAS PROGRAM FOR COMMUNITY RENEWAL •r[iF NEED ECONW01C BASIS — GOALS RESOURCES SCII EWILE JAMES A. VIZZIER- CONSULTING PLANNER E0 Figure 37 Urban Renewal Plan (1968). Source; James A. Vizzier.P Oklahoma and Missouri, allowing the city to serve as an economic center for the surrounding agricultural area." As a result, the county's fruit production, mostly apples, increased during the 1890s,28 Continued railway development fostered the growth of a new lumber industry, By the turn of the century, the timber trade grew into an important enterprise with mills and factories providing economic growth and stability for Fayetteville residents as the population grew to more than 4,000.21 The University of Arkansas expanded with the creation of a college of agriculture in 1905, followed by colleges of engineering, education, and arts and science. During the 1920s, Fayetteville saw additional industrial and manufacturing growth. Due to its diverse economy, Fayetteville did not suffer as much as other parts of Arkansas during the Great Depression.30 By 1940, the population had almost doubled to about 8,200, and by 1950, the population reached more than 17,000. Economically, Fayetteville experienced the growth of a number of industries during the 1940s, including processing plants for Armour, Swift, and Campbell's Soup." During this period, the U of A became the first public state college south of the Mason Dixon Line to integrate, in 1948. In 1954, Fayetteville became the second school district in the southern United States to implement integration following the Brown v, Board of Education Supreme Court ruling. Fayetteville continued to become home to a diverse community, with the Jewish population increasing during the 1940s and 1950s and a Latino surge beginning in the 1990S.33 By the mid -twentieth century, a new county hospital opened in Fayetteville, which later became the Washington Regional Medical Center. The U of A added a college of business and school of architecture. Although passenger train service in Fayetteville ended by 1965, the city continued to develop through the introduction of diverse industries like agriculture (including poultry), automotive, business, and banking.34 The city reached more than 30,000 residents by the 1970s. Like many American cities, the downtown of Fayetteville experienced some decline due to the rise of shopping centers and malls outside the historical core. Portions of historic downtown were also lost to the City's urban renewal efforts.31 Throughout the remainder of the twentieth century, Fayetteville continued to grow and expand as a university town and commercial center in NWA. See Table 3. for a timeline of historical events. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER Page3�43of 524 Table 3. History Timeline Year Event 1541 Prior to 1541, the land that would be known as Fayetteville was inhabited by the Osage Nation. Europeans began their exploration of the land at this time. 1682 France claims the land that would become Fayetteville as part of Louisiana. 1803 The U.S. acquires the land that would become Fayetteville with the Louisiana Purchase. 1819 Arkansas Territory is established out of Missouri Territory. 1828 Fayetteville is founded as Washington Courthouse. 1829 Washington Courthouse is renamed Fayetteville after the Tennessee hometown of two of the town's commissioners, John Woody and James Buchanan. 1833 The first general store is opened by Mr. Nye and Mr. Sevier in what is now Fayetteville Square. 1835 Fayetteville is officially recognized with a land patent of 160 acres issued by President Jackson. 1836 Arkansas becomes a state. 1839 Fayetteville Female Seminary opened by Sofia Sawyer, with both White and Cherokee students. 1841 Fayetteville becomes incorporated. 1852 Arkansas College chartered as the first degree -granting college in the State. The college buildings were burned during the Civil War. 1858 The Butterfield Overland Mail Company begins postal operations between St. Louis and San Francisco. Fayetteville is one of the postal stops along the route. The Fayetteville Female Institute is established at College Avenue and Dickson Street. 1863 Battle of Fayetteville takes place, resulting in a Union victory. The Headquarters House, which was used as a base for Union operations, sustains minor damage from the attacks. 1865 Civil War ends and enslaved people are emancipated. 1866 The first public school for Black students (and first public school district in the state) opens. A brick building was built between 1868-1870 and later named for E. E. Henderson. 1872 Arkansas Industrial University opens, later renamed the University of Arkansas (U of A) in 1899. 1882 Passenger and freight rail service begins. 1916 Fayetteville Public Library opens in the Washington County Courthouse basement. 1918 The first streets are paved in Fayetteville. 1922 Construction begins atop Mount Sequoyah for a Methodist summer campground. Over 30 cottages and other recreational buildings remain in the complex. 1937 Construction begins on Drake Field Airport, which is later used for training during World War II during the early 1940s. The 1943 White Hangar building is now an aviation museum. 1948 U of A becomes the first university south of the Mason Dixon Line to integrate with Silas Hunt's enrollment in the U of A School of Law. 1954 Integration of Fayetteville High School begins. Elementary school integration would take place in the early 1960s. 1965 Passenger rail service ends. 1968 Urban renewal planning activities take place, demolishing portions of downtown. 1973 Fayetteville Farmers Market is established in Fayetteville Square, 1975 Future -president Bill Clinton and future Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton purchase their first home in Fayetteville. 1992 Voters approve a measure to return the Fayetteville city government to a City Council, Between 1965 and 1992, the city government was administered by a board, :rr� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTERPage 355 of 524 3.1.2 Architectural Character and Legacy Fayetteville's early architecture reflects national trends of the late nineteenth to mid -twentieth centuries. Examples from the Victorian, Revival, and Early Modern eras of architecture are common. The city's historical downtown has rows of one- and two-part commercial block buildings, such as the 1899 Romanesque Revival -style and the 1908 Queen Anne -style Bank of Fayetteville Building and the 1886 Italianate-style Guisinger Building. Some properties were architect - designed, but more often, they are vernacular examples constructed by local builders. The Neoclassical -style 1911 post office sited prominently in the town square, the Romanesque Revival -style 1897 Washington County Jail, and 1905 Washington County Courthouse are landmark civic buildings anchoring downtown. The U of A campus near downtown has a distinctive collection of early Fayetteville architecture. Among its many notable buildings are Colonial Revival, Collegiate Gothic, Classical Revival, and Art Deco style examples, popular styles during the school's early years of development. Historical residential neighborhoods expand outward from downtown and the campus. These areas are characterized by Victorian -era architecture, like the popular Folk Victorian and Queen Anne styles; Revival -era architecture, such as the Colonial Revival, Classical Revival, Tudor Revival styles; and Early Modernist -era architecture, most commonly the Craftsman -style bungalow. Like the city's commercial buildings, most residences were constructed by builders rather than architects. Further from Fayetteville's historical core are automobile - oriented commercial corridors and post -World War II housing developments comprising mostly Minimal Traditional and Ranch -style houses. The city is best known for its collection of mid - twentieth century Modernistic architecture. When the U of A began offering architecture courses in 1946, it brought architects to the city who taught forward - thinking and innovative design principles, created a pipeline of talent in the community, and designed properties in Fayetteville for themselves and private clients. Often this work, which rejected ornament and embraced minimalism, was influenced by and responded to the region's picturesque landscape. Figure 38. Guisinger Building. Figure 39. Guisinger Building (ca. 1905), :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�63of 524 Page Figure 40. Work (top and bottom) by James Lambeth. Source; Sundancing by James Lambeth (1992).Q Architect and landscape architect John Gilbert Williams (1915-2008) was a founding member of the U of A architecture program and served as its chair for 20 yea rs.36 He was known as a progressive thinker and champion of the modern movement in design who introduced his students to leading architects of the era through guest critics and lecturers. In addition to his academic responsibilities, he had a private practice and designed his own Organic -style home following the ideas of renowned architect Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959).31 Williams's most widely known and celebrated student was Euine (E.) Fay Jones (1921-2004), who received the AIA Gold Medal, the highest honor awarded by the American Institute of Architects.38 Jones was Fayetteville's most prolific Modernistic architect and designed residential, educational, commercial, and religious buildings, among others. He apprenticed under Frank Lloyd Wright, and many of his buildings reflect principles he shared with Wright of geometry, organic architecture, native materials, craftsmanship, and integration of building and site.31 In addition to his private practice, Jones also taught architecture at U of A for 35 years. Another of Williams's first students and Jones's classmates was Warren Dennis Segraves (1924- 1978),40 In contrast to the Organic architecture favored by Williams and Jones, Segraves's buildings were structurally simple and glassy designs influenced by the International Style and the work of California architect Craig Ellwood.41 The 1962 Fayetteville Public Library, U of A Wesley Chapel, and the Fayetteville Federal Building are prominent examples of his work. Like Williams and Jones, architects Cyrus Arden Sutherland (1920-2008) and James Lambeth (1942-2003) were also long-term U of A professors of architecture who had private practices. Sutherland designed residences, churches, and libraries in Northwest Arkansas and was an early leader in the historic preservation movement in the state. Lambeth designed Contemporary and Shed -style single and multifamily residences, educational facilities, and churches. He is best known for his innovations in solar design; buildings designed to optimize the heating effects of the sun when warmth is needed and provide shade and natural ventilation when cooling is needed.44 .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTERPage A73of 524 G-------------- 17 /6 Thayer (T) Ewing Shelton (1899-1982) contributed to the local architectural legacy of Fayetteville and designed buildings across the state." Among his Fayetteville works are Root Elementary School, Woodland Jr. High School, Fire Stations #1 and #3, the Lynn Shelton American Legion Post No. 27 on College Avenue, and a remodel of the Rieff House (Moore's Chapel) on W, Center Street. In 1956, Shelton patented his design that was used for the Root School; a partial - hexagonal school plant with pentagonal classrooms (Figure 41),46 Famed architect Edward Durell Stone (1902-1978) designed buildings in his hometown of Fayetteville after becoming a major figure in American architecture. He worked internationally and was a leading architect of the New Formalist style. Among his limited work in Fayetteville is the 1951 International -style Fine Arts Center and the Wrightian-influenced Sigma Nu Fraternity house at the U of A campus, World -class and innovative architecture is uncommon in smaller cities in the central U.S., and even less common are communities with examples by multiple architects practicing with different styles, materials, and property types. Fayetteville's collection of mid - twentieth -century architecture is a unique asset that should be protected as an important aspect of the city's history. Because of the influence of U of Ns architecture program, there are likely undiscovered architect -designed buildings in Fayetteville worthy of historic preservation, such as those by lesser -known architects and works from more recent eras, like the 1970s, Figure 41. Root School, Plan in the 1956 patent by T Ewing Shelton (left) and 1956 aerial image (bottom) by Shelton Fayetteville's Newest School' Figure 42. Fine Arts Building at the U of A. The building was designed by world-renowned architect Edward Durell Stone. IVA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 358 of 524 3.2 Preservation Program 3.2.1 Overview Following the demolition of numerous high -profile historically significant buildings during the mid - twentieth century, historic preservation became a growing concern for Americans. In 1963, the General Assembly of the State of Arkansas authorized local governments to create historic preservation commissions, establish local historic districts, and manage those districts through certificates of appropriateness (State Act 484, amended in 1965 by State Act 170) (see Section 2.1.2). In 1966, the N H PA [16 U.S. Code (USC) 470 et seq.] was passed, providing a regulatory framework for historic preservation efforts across the country. Preservation activities began in Fayetteville in the 1970s with the city's first NRHP listings and the fight to save the 1911 post office from demolition.47 At the end of the decade, the Washington County Historical Society urged the Fayetteville Board of Directors to adopt an ordinance creating a historic district commission and establish via ordinance the Big Spring Historical District. In March of 1979, the City adopted Ordinance No. 2509 that established a five -member Historic District Commission (HDC) and gave the commission the powers delegated to such a commission by State Act 484, as amended. The proposed Big Spring local historical district was never established, though the area later become part of the 1980 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District. In 1994, Ordinance No. 3836 expanded the commission to seven members. After failed attempts to establish a local historic district, the HDC disbanded in 2003.48 In 2008, the City Council enacted Ordinance 5177, which re-established the HDC and created the city's first local ordinance historic district, or local historic district, comprising a single building, White Hangar, at Drake Field, It remains the only local historic district in Fayetteville. In the same year, the City became a CLG and gained access to NPS and SHPO support and funding for its historic preservation initiatives (Section 3.3). Figure 43. The ca. 1835 Waxhaws Hall (demolished) was built by second Governor of Arkansas, Archibald Yell, Source: University of Arkansas.s IN THE W,%Y OF PROGRESS .. an!eW m Aame eppmn doomed at Pat lWe apande. (TIMC50holo by Fcq Coal) Figure 44. In the Way of Progress. Caption reading "Antebellum home appears doomed as post office expands" in 1970. Source: Ken Good (1970), Northwest Arkansas Times :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�93of 524 Page Figure 45, Archibald Yell's Law Office. Relocation of the law office to the Headquarters House in 1992. Source; University of Arkansas Collections, Figure 46. Steeple Replacement, Replacement of the Washington County Courthouse Steeple in 1974. Source; Washington County, Arkansas," Since becoming a CLG, the City has undertaken numerous historic preservation projects, including eight historic resources surveys and six NRHP historic district designations. In 2009, Fayetteville became a Preserve America community, joining a federal program that encourages and supports community efforts to preserve and enjoy cultural and natural heritage (Section 3,5), Beginning in 2011, the city established a Preservation Awards program to recognize outstanding commitment, practice, and leadership in preservation. In 2015, the city began a restoration project at the 1842 Woolsey farmstead; once complete, the farmhouse will be used for educational purposes and the property will be a wet prairie nature sanctuary. In 2019, Fayetteville established design guidelines for the Washington - Willow NRHP Historic District, In 2021, the city created a Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) (Ordinance 6472, amended in 2022 by Ordinance 6543) to recognize historical resources and create historical markers associated with Black heritage (Section 3,4), Fayetteville's Long Range Planning Division of the Development Services Department is responsible for the City's historic preservation program. Currently, two employees support the program part-time; the Long-Range/Special Projects Manager and Long Range & Preservation Planner (Planner), The program's planner serves as the administrative support to the HDC, and the Long-Range/Special Projects Manager provides program oversight and direction. The historic preservation program has a dedicated section of the City's website. Content includes a statement about the city's commitment to historic preservation and a description of its historic program and initiatives. More in-depth content about the City's Historic Preservation Awards, NRHP districts, the Woolsey Farmstead and Wet Prairie project, and the Washington -Willow District Design Standards is provided, along with a link to a dynamic StoryMap of more than 350 historical sites. An HDC page includes commission information, commissioner contacts, attendance requirements, upcoming meeting information, and video recordings of past meetings. The website also provides accessibility functions to assist individuals in their viewing experience. :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�03of 524 Page Table 4, Historic Preservation Timeline Year Event 1963 Arkansas State Act 484 is passed, authorizing municipalities to establish local historic districts. 1966 The National Historic Preservation Act is established, creating a framework for historic preservation in the U.S. 1970 Several individual properties listed in the NRHP in Fayetteville. 1974 Fayetteville's first historic resources survey is completed of Big Spring. Community protests save the 1911 post office from demolition. 1979 Fayetteville ordinance 2509 passed on March 1,1979, providing the City a mechanism to safeguard and manage historic resources and establish an HDC. 1980 Washington -Willow and Fayetteville Veterans Affairs (VA) Hospital become the city's first two NRHP historic districts. 1982 Mount Nord NRHP Historic District is listed. 1983-84 Historic resources surveys of West Dickson Street and Lafayette Gregg are completed. 1988 Pratt Place Farm is surveyed. 1991-92 Historic resources surveys of Washington -Willow, Mount Nord, and Wilson Park are completed. 1994 Historic resource documentation takes place in Root School and Ridgeway View. 1995 Wilson Park NRHP Historic District is listed. 2000-01 Several individual NRHP designations for architect -designed mid -twentieth century houses around Lake Lucille, including the Fay Jones House. 2003 HDC disbanded. 2007 West Dickson Street Commercial NRHP Historic District is listed. 2008 HDC re-established. Fayetteville becomes a Certified Local Government. White Hangar becomes the city's first local historic district. Historic resources surveys at U of A, Washington County Fairgrounds, and the Butterfield Overland Mail Route are completed. 2009 University of Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District is listed. Butterfield Overland Mail Route is listed in the NRHP. Fayetteville becomes a Preserve America community. 2010-12 Historic resources surveys of Mount Sequoyah Cottages and the VA Hospital are completed. 2012 Mount Sequoyah Cottages NRHP Historic District is listed. 2015 Woolsey Farmstead Restoration Project begins. 2016 University Heights is surveyed. South Fayetteville is considered for survey, but AHPP rejects attempt. 2017 Meadow Spring is surveyed. 2019 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District Design Guidelines are created. Meadow Springs NRHP Historic District is listed. The Benjamin Franklin Johnson II homestead becomes the city's first agricultural NRHP district. 2020 City purchases and plans to preserve the Porter Produce Building/Apple Warehouse. 2021 BHPC is created. Community Remembrance Project erects marker describing racial terrorism in the county. North Garvin Drive, the city's first post -World War II NRHP historic district is created. 2022 Aviation -related buildings at Drake Field are surveyed. City completes grant to restore the Woolsey Family Cemetery. City receives grant for its first heritage and historic preservation plan. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�1 of 524 The City has organized a historical walking tour of Fayetteville Square; participated in National Historic Preservation Month in May; and used social media to communicate historic preservation news and progress. During National Historic Preservation Month, the City took part in the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) This Place Matters program (now discontinued). In recent years, branding was incorporated at sites of local importance, using the This Place Matters guidance from the NTHP, Social media platforms like Facebook have been used to disseminate information about the historic preservation program and publish information about historical sites during National Historic Preservation Month. Recent preservation - related events in Fayetteville include historic walking tours hosted by the Fayetteville Public Library and events by the Washington County Historical Society. The historic preservation program does not receive appropriated funds besides the funding of two employees in the Long -Range Planning Program who spend a small percentage of their time on preservation work (Table 5: Budget),49Grant funds are the primary mechanism for accomplishing historic preservation initiatives. Since 2015, the City has completed cost sharing for the restoration of the ca, 1842 Woolsey Farm and Homestead. In 2020, the City appropriated funds to stabilize the ca. 1906 Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse/John Porter Produce Building (NR 2020) at 200 North West Avenue."' Additional grants include funding from the AHPP for restoration of the ca. 1845 Woolsey Family Cemetery (NR 2020) and the creation of this plan. Although the historic preservation program does not receive direct funds, departmental funding has increased since 2021, and the City has shown interest in protecting historical resources through capital improvements and grant funding. Figure 47 Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse/John Porter Produce Building, Source: Google Street View,W Figure 48. Rendering of the Woolsey Farmstead post restoration. Source: Revival Architecture, Inc. Watercolor by Vladislav Yeliselivx Table 5. City of Fayetteville Historic Preservation Program Budget 2021-2025 Budget Item 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Long -Range Planning $185,236 $191,511 $203,223* - - Woolsey Homestead Historic Preservation $141,000 $150,000 $250,000* $200,000* $200,000* Woolsey Family Cemetery - $13,725 (G) - - - Porter Building Stabilization - - $280,000* $85,000* $80,000* Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan I - 1$70,000 (G) I - I- - *Projected/Estimated, (G) Grant funds .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A2 of 524 3.2.7.7 Preservation Partners Cities often perform historic preservation activities in partnership with local organizations, Potential preservation partners for the City include the Downtown Fayetteville Coalition, Chamber Fayetteville, and Experience Fayetteville, These organizations are key to connecting with the city's business community and downtown property owners, as well as the community at large and visitors, Additional partnerships are listed in Appendix C; Partnership Opportunities. Downtown Fayetteville Coalition (DFC) is an association of small businesses in downtown Fayetteville. DFC provides a centralized marketing platform for downtown merchants and supportive services, including dedicated staff at the A&P Commission, The merchant association is also a major stakeholder for planning projects, including the ongoing Cultural Arts Corridor project, also known as the Ramble, which will link cultural and natural attractions downtown. Chamber Fayetteville is the city's Chamber of Commerce. The Chamber provides support to business owners throughout the city and sponsors events and programs contributing to Fayetteville's economy, Their activities include; • Business planning tools and employment services; • Committees specializing on diplomacy, diversity, equity and inclusion, economic development, workforce and transportation, education, government affairs, health, leadership, and teenager leadership for Washington County; • Events including the business network meetings, ribbon cuttings, the Construction & Developers Awards, and the Northwest Arkansas Hispanic Heritage Festival, and; • Greenway, a certification and recognition program for businesses that follow sustainable business practices. Experience Fayetteville is the convention and visitor's bureau for the City, The bureau markets the city to visitors and operates a visitor center at 21 South Block Avenue in Fayetteville Square. Initiatives sponsored by the organization include; Annual events such as the Joe Martin Stage Race, First Thursday, Artosphere, NWA Pride, Fayetteville Roots Festival, Fayetteville Film Festival, and the Lights of the Ozarks; Calendar of events and activities at local businesses and points of interest; Conventions and activities for tourism and promotion, including the Walmart UCI Cyclo-cross World Championship held in 2022, and; Operation of the Fayetteville Town Center and historic Walker -Stone House. Figure 49. Lights of the Ozarks. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A3 of 524 3.2.2 Historic Preservation Ordinance Fayetteville's 1979 historic preservation ordinance (2509, as revised) was established to safeguard and manage the City's historic resources (City of Fayetteville Code 33,226). Specifically, the purpose of the ordinance is to; Effect and accomplish the protection, enhancement, and perpetuation of districts that reflect the City's cultural, social, economic, political, and architectural history; Safeguard the City's historic, aesthetic, and cultural heritage as embodied and reflected in such areas; Stabilize and improve property values in such districts; Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past; Protect and enhance the City's attractions to tourists and visitors as well as residents; Strengthen the economy of the City; and Promote the use of historic districts and landmarks for the education, pleasure, and welfare of the people of the City, The ordinance established the City's ability to form an HDC to administer the goals and purpose of the law. It also grants the City the ability to designate historic districts via a local ordinance and oversee alterations and demolitions to properties within locally designated districts. Aside from indicating that local historic districts should have "special historic community or architectural value;' there is no designation criteria, nor is there an application process by which a member of the public or a group of individuals could seek designation. The ordinance uses language related to "historic landmarks;' but following state law, it does not provide for the designation of individual properties, just historic districts. The ordinance does not apply to properties designated at the state or federal levels, unless also designated at the local level, 32.2.1 Historic District Commission The 1979 historic preservation ordinance (2509; 986-503) outlines the composition and duties of the HDC,51 The HDC is a seven -member body tasked with safeguarding the heritage of Fayetteville and promoting the education, health, and welfare of the public through these preservation activities. Specific duties include undertaking historic resources surveys, keeping a register of designated historic properties, nominating resources to the NRHP, providing suggestions to the City Council on potential local historic districts, adopting design guidelines for local historic districts, assessing the appropriateness of proposed exterior alterations and demolitions to properties in local historic districts, providing advice to historic property homeowners, and communicating with the AHPP or other historical associations, 1_4 t It �A Figure 50. Center Street faci the�ourthouse. 1 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 3(ti4 of 524 rkip The HDC may also provide comments and advice on general City planning matters pertaining to historic preservation and historic preservation plans and ordinances. Those who serve on the Commission are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council (City Code 33,227), All members must be electors of the city, not employed by the City or elected to municipal office. Members serve three-year terms, Additionally, the HDC has adopted bylaws to provide a structure and operating procedures for HDC meetings and other activities. The most recent set of bylaws were adopted in February of 2023, which increased meeting intervals from every other month to the second Thursday of every month. Per Arkansas CLG Procedures ClA and C,1,13 (issued in 1985, revised in 2001), at least five commissioners should possess expertise in historic preservation -related fields including archaeology, architecture, history, landscape architecture, planning, or other related fields." If a community lacks professionals or individuals with relevant expertise, the _ City must demonstrate that the government make a reasonable effort to fill the vacancy with a preservation - related professiona1.13 To assist with training and professional development of the commission, the City may actively explore training options offered by various organizations, especially remote options that reduce travel and funding expenditures, If a matter is being reviewed that requires expert assistance, the HDC must consult with a professional. For archaeology matters, an archaeologist may be contacted from the Arkansas Archaeology Survey. Otherwise, a private consultant or pro bono professional who meets appropriate qualifications may also be contacted, Information on appropriate qualifications can be viewed in Appendix F; Secretary of the Interior Professional Qualifications, Commissioners receive training at the outset of their appointment and during their term, Written materials like the bylaws, historic preservation ordinance, Arkansas CLG requirements, and other resources are provided to new commissioners. Annually, HDC members are invited to attend training administered by the AHPP CLG program. In 2023, the City plans to complete the Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program (CAMP) offered by the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions (NAPC), NAPC is an independent organization dedicated to supporting local preservation programs throughout the United States. One of many NAPC programs, CAMP provides municipalities with the ability to customize training to focus on specific topics or areas of interest. Trainers at CAMP include attorneys, commissioners, government employees, and commission partners,54 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A5 oaf 524 The 1979 ordinance (2509) allows for the establishment of local historic districts; the exteriors of historic resources in a district are regulated by the HDC. Fayetteville has established one local historic district; the White Hangar Local Historic District at Drake Field airport at the south end of the Fayetteville city limits. 3.2.2.3 Certificates of Appropriateness Owners of properties in Fayetteville local historic districts who wish to make exterior alterations must apply for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA), A COA is a design approval issued by the City allowing a property owner to perform work on the exterior of any building in a local historic district. The COA process requires the review of applicable design standards and the submission of an application and plans for review by the HDC or staff. A qualifying resource in a local historic district must be granted a COA before any building permit or other permit will be granted. A COA is required for a qualifying resource even in cases where a building permit is not required. Resources may be buildings, walls, fences, light fixtures, steps, paving, or other elements specified in the local historic district design guidelines, The COA process ensures that the special character of the historic district is preserved by meeting adopted design standards based on the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (Appendix E; Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation), Ordinary maintenance and repairs, work required for public safety, or work not visible from the public right-of-way does not require a COA, After the filing of a COA, a public hearing is held to review the application. A COA may be approved or denied based on HDC analysis. Failure to comply with the COA process may result in a stop work order and a fine. A COA is also required for the demolition, relocation, or restoration of any building in a local historic district. Figure 52. Parade on Block Street, 4) ON— Al2 FURNITU .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAI�age 3(ti6 of 524 �� •� �v✓ �t It 3.2.2.3.1 Design Guidelines White Hangar Local Historic District The City adopted design guidelines for the White Hangar Local Historic District based on the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation. These guidelines are general and are not customized to the hangar building, Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District In 2019, the City commissioned design guidelines for the Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District. However, since the i district is not designated locally, these guidelines are not currently used for regulatory design review. The document, however, provides a strong example for the development of historic design guidelines for future local historic districts, ft 'Aft 3.3 Certified Local Government As a CLG, the City has entered into a partnership with the AHPP and the NPS to preserve local community resources according to national historic preservation standards, It has committed to the following; - Establishing a qualified historic preservation commission that provides an advisory role to officials and City departments regarding historic preservation; • Enforcing appropriate state or local legislation for the designation and protection of historic properties, typically through a local historic preservation ordinance; • Maintaining a system for the survey and inventory of local historic resources; • Facilitating public participation in local preservation, including review of NRHP nominations; and • Following additional requirements allowed in the State's CLG procedures and holding meetings in accordance with the Open Public Meeting Law of Arkansas (State Code §25-19-106), The Arkansas SHPO monitors the state's 21 CLGs and evaluates their performance every four years to ensure that each local government is fulfilling the requirements for certification.51 Fayetteville has been in good standing with the program since joining, The SHPO will issue their next evaluation of Fayetteville in early 2023 with recommendations for future work. Figure 53. East Side of Square (ca. 1910). .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A7 of 524 3.4 Black Heritage Preservation Commission Established in 2021, the Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) is a seven -member body created to recognize, acknowledge, protect, and preserve historical resources and cemeteries associated with Black heritage, with special regard for Fayetteville's early Black families and =1�` individuals and the churches and other cultural resources they built. The BHPC is also tasked to create Black Historical •. Markers that recognize the struggles and achievements of Fayetteville's Black citizens to promote diversity and equality. The BHPC may work with the HDC to coordinate their r,#, preservation goals. They may also recommend protection measures for historical Black resources to the City Council and the HDC. Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and include a Council Member, a member familiar with the y historical Black churches of Fayetteville, and five members at large (City Code 33.442). BHPC commission members typically serve three-year terms. The BHPC meets monthly. -- 3.5 Preserve America Community Fayetteville is one of 26 Preserve America communities in Arkansas and one of more than 900 in the U,S,66 Administered by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), the designation recognizes communities that protect and celebrate their local heritage, use historic resources for economic development and community revitalization, and encourage individuals to experience historic resources through education and heritage tourism. The program historically provided grants to Preserve America communities but has not issued awards since 2009. Funds may be appropriated in the future. The City of Fayetteville uses Preserve America branding on its website. Figure 54. Downtown Mural, :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 368 of 524 Figure 55, Johnson Plumbing, The Opening of Johnson Plumbing Presently known as the High Roller Cyclery located in the Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District, 3.6 Completed Historic Resources Surveys Nineteen historic resources surveys have been conducted in Fayetteville since 1971 (Table 6).57 In total, 1,032 resources have been documented, Most are residential and commercial resources, except for the U of A campus and the VA Hospital. The reconnaissance -level of documentation was typically used, but a few projects, including Butterfield Overland Mail Route, Pratt Place Farm, and Drake Field, were intensive -level evaluations. Most did not have a historic context to provide a framework for identifying and evaluating historic resources and those that did were not organized thematically, the current industry standard. Until recently, surveys conducted in coordination with the AHPP only required the completion of survey forms, not survey reports. Therefore, there is little or no documentation about the survey area selection, methodology, analysis, and findings. In addition to municipally sponsored historic resources surveys, some surveys are conducted for regulatory reasons, such as the 2012 survey of the VA Hospital, which was sponsored by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs in compliance with the NHPA. Regulatory studies may have resulted in determinations of eligibility for the NRHP, and the results can guide preservation planning efforts; however, such studies conducted in Fayetteville were not available for this project. Many Fayetteville surveys, both past and recent, have resulted in historic designations (Section 2,2),58 For instance, after the 1971-1974 Big Spring survey, the Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District was designated in 1980. In 1991-1992, that historic district was resurveyed, which led to the expansion of the district's boundaries in 1995. Since 2006, the City has conducted eight historic resources surveys, seven of which led to the creation of NRHP historic districts. This demonstrates a strong existing commitment to documentation followed by NRHP designation. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A9 of 524 Table 6, Historic Resources Surveys59 Date Survey Area Documented Resources Primary Time Period of Outcome Documented Resources 1971-74 Big Spring 72 buildings in the Mid-19th to early-20th 1980 Washington - Washington -Willow century Willow NRHP neighborhood Historic District 1983-84 West Dickson Commercial buildings along Early-20th century Documented Street West Dickson Street individual properties 1984 Lafayette Gregg Residences northwest of Early-20th century Documented downtown near the university individual properties 1991-92 Washington- Resurveyed residential Mid-19th to early-20th Updated Willow NRHP properties in the 1980 century Washington - Historic District Washington -Willow NRHP Willow NRHP resurvey Historic District Historic District 1992 Mount Nord Resurveyed five houses in Early-20th century Updated Mount NRHP Historic the 1982 Mount Nord NRHP Nord NRHP District resurvey Historic District Historic District 1992 Wilson Park Craftsman bungalow Early- to Mid-20th 1995 Wilson Park neighborhood south of Wilson century Historic District Park 1993-94 Downtown Select commercial buildings Early-20th century Several Square around the Downtown Square individual NRHP designations 1994-96 Root School- Mid-20th-century residential Mid-20th century Several Ridgeway View buildings in the Root School- individual NRHP Ridgeway View area northeast designations of downtown 1998 Pratt Place Farm Intensive -level survey of an Early-20th century No resources agricultural complex determined eligible for the NRHP or ARHP 2000-01 Lake Lucille Architect -designed houses Mid-20th century Several around Lake Lucille individual NRHP designations 2006 West Dickson Properties along West Dickson Early-20th century 2007 West Street Street in downtown Dickson Street Commercial NRHP Historic District 2008 University of Historical campus core Early- to Mid-20th 2009 University of Arkansas century Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District �� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�0 of 524 Historic Resources Surveys (continued) Date Survey Area Documented Resources Primary Time Period of Outcome Documented Resources 2008 Washington Approximately 20 Early- to Mid-20th century No resources County resources determined eligible for Fairgrounds the NRHP or ARHP 2008 Butterfield A historic stagecoach Mid-19th century 2009 Butterfield Overland Mail route in Lake Fayetteville Overland Mail Route Route Park Fayetteville Segments NRHP Historic District 2010 Mount Sequoyah Approximately 50 Mid-20th century 2012 Mount Sequoyah Cottages resources of mixed use Cottages NRHP Historic District comprising two cottages 2012 VA Hospital Approximately 30 Mid-20th century 2012 Veterans resources Administration Hospital NRHP Historic District 2017 Meadow Spring Residential neighborhood Early-20th century 2019 Meadow Springs south of West Dickson NRHP Historic District Street 2020 University Mid-20th century Mid-20th century 2021 North Garvin Heights residences Drive NRHP Historic District 2022 Drake Field Recorded aviation -related Mid-20th century Determined several resources not previously airport buildings documented eligible for the NRHP 2.000 W_Clevelan!} sl - -v i—;�JL_j, ILJ � IL_ O .I' J r- Feet I =" l 11 1���r • � � • • •' ' - •�-•� •-_is� a�,gy`�i• �-_elf_ rMS 1- •i►i•• ti••••• �•`� �- •Ib 1' I —.w• l • �•••• d�`W��afaYetl�. -• _ i_ �� .: _ 1 db • • • • •• W Dickson ISt •�•' ,y --• ��r� iL •' �••:.iL Fayetteville •"•1 ill �i �+ i -- W-Slone S1- - W Mitchell St -- I AL • Unknown Figure 56. Surveys in central Fayetteville. LZ JAI � �� R40UNT SLOUOYAH ••• • 1719 R .. L :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3�1 of 524 3.7 Existing Historic Designations 3.7.1 Local, ARHP, and NRHP Listings Historic properties are designated at the local, state, and federal levels in Fayetteville.60 Though local designations provide historic resources with the greatest protections, the City only has one local historic district comprising a single building (Figure 60). Fayetteville has more than ten NRHP historic districts and numerous NRHP properties (Table 7, Figure 61). The city has several ARHP-designated properties, in addition to the NRHP properties which are automatically listed in the ARHP. However, the NRHP and ARHP designations are largely honorary and exempt from regulatory review unless the property is involved in a project that receives federal funding or requires federal licensing or permitting. Therefore, local historic districts are the best designation option for preserving historic resources. Over sixty Fayetteville properties are individually listed in the NRHP. Most are designated for their architectural significance. Others illustrate important events, trends, or people associated with the city's commercial, educational, exploration and settlement, health and medicine, military, politics and government, transportation, religious, and social history, among other topics. None of the properties nominated so far appear to be designated for their association with historically underrepresented people. Appendix H includes a list of property addresses in NRHP and local historic districts, as well as individual NRHP properties within the city limits. Figure 59. VA Medical Center. Photo by U.S, Army in May 1937`' Figure 57 House in Mount Nord NRHP Historic District. Figure 58, House Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District, .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTERPag3�2 of 524 Table 7 National Register of Historic Places Historic Districts in Fayetteville, Arkansas Name Year Listed Criteria Area(s) of Significance Level of Significance Washington -Willow 1980 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Community Planning Economics Education Law Veterans Administration 1980 A, C Architecture State Hospital District Health/Medicine Politics/Government Mount Nord 1982 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Commerce Politics/Government Wilson Park 1995 C Architecture Local Historic District West Dickson Street Commercial 2007 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Commerce University of Arkansas Campus 2009 A, C Architecture State Historic District Education Butterfield Overland Mail Route 2009 A Transportation State Fayetteville Segments Historic District Mount Sequoyah Cottages 2012 A Religion State Historic District Meadow Springs 2019 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Community Planning Benjamin Franklin Johnson II 2019 A, C Architecture Local Homestead District Agriculture North Garvin Drive 2021 C Architecture Local Historic District National Register of Historic Places 11 Historic Districts Over 60 Individual Property Listings Figure 60. Designation Tally, City of Fayetteville 1 Local Historic District .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTERPage 313 of 524 i y Qr -y9J by Rd E will otighby1Rd Z - V to r W �rh - •+ - CO a 01, 1' l N W Bailey Dr d4 N T Cu cp I _ _ fP�, •i i G (n QA -I Jy t_S MCCOIIum q r ,' WTShOft St r!_ Z 1 0 1� 4, w. 51 Roadrunner n xon St +. - .4 1 '4r 1 i ry� `C _r"7�•Laif-fjt�, Q- ` r . - . Ra `inter St r ' 0%\Ow Rd vdilson N Drake D Cj Z St > w N fn J 4 Z. I. > a' 1 WrTa'nner'Dr� a � � oc«b m N v M a� I W Wilson St -S z WhiteHangar• zHistoric • �" /r Drake Field Parcel Q M W Horn St • Q QFayetteville City Limits z W Circle Dr' y S Napi�, a t,y • • - ,� rn Frisco Figure 62, Properties in the NRHP and ARHP. d— o tk ele Rh I 28 ft Ste ti Lake a9 Johnson Fayetteville z 9� \,,, �i E Zion Rd co ; m E Joys o 71 w PBi o v �d 2 z x weir Rd D a W Weir Rd ° Fayetteville s 71 ° City Limits —`e W Mt=Comfort=Rd > n -W Deane -St .0_ o c fr m d e Rock Zn9t c) oz 1W on -Dr _z ® • v�o ��' �=W North St Z-- z / 2 1691 a / W Cleveland St 1 ersmmon St O o �i "'•�; MQCINT 'n • O _-SEQUO•YAH ' • ® • • - tteV111P, ��• �i :® ° < • , a�i r ,�, ��\��• - — __ - - - = y41ntsville.Rd- 0 In 62 McNair FaFaetferm�•��;ton Y Junction - -� o Wolfdab: E 0 SOU MOON: Appleby 18 ;o i r 4?OUI MC/UL I Sunrise Ln I UNTA z o NRHP Property • ARHP Listed Property Gr enla O NRHP District n s' 0 2 Miles PINCHER r.AVF I i �A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 3�5 of 524 3.7.2 National Historic Trails Administered by the NPS, the National Historic Trails (NHT) program documents, programs, and preserves over 25,000 miles of linear trail networks. Two of the program's trails are in Fayetteville and surrounding areas. The 1838-1839 Native American Trail of Tears was designated an NHT in 1987. The Butterfield Overland Route, a southwestern stagecoach route in service from 1858 to 1861, was designated an NHT in 2023 (S. 3519) (Figure 66).61 Although NHTs are administered by the NPS, the entirety of the trail route is not automatically eligible for the NRHP, Each trail may have NRHP-eligible sites and segments that provide opportunity to interpret its historic significance. For example, two segments of the Butterfield Overland Mail Route in Lake Fayetteville Park were listed in the NRHP in 2008. 3.7.3 Historical Markers Fayetteville has two Arkansas Civil War markers, one Arkansas Historic Marker for a cemetery, and one Community Remembrance Project marker (Table 8). The Equal Justice Initiative, a national nonprofit organization that works to challenge racial and economic injustice, created the Community Remembrance Project historical marker program to document diverse histories. The Fayetteville marker acknowledges historical racial terrorism in Washington County. The newly formed Fayetteville BHPC has the authority to create Black Historical Markers; the first being installed in 2023 honoring Nelson Hackett, an enslaved person from Fayetteville who escaped to Canada in 1841 helping to establish extradition protections for formerly enslaved Americans seeking refuge north of the border.12 See Appendix G for more information on historical marker guidance and program development. See an inventory of historical markers by l.B. Hogan on the City's website. Figure 63. Butterfield Overland Mail Route. Source; Fayetteville Historyz Figure 64, Trail of Tears Sign. Source; The Arkansas Democrat -Gazette AA Figure 65. Community Remembrance Project. Source; Equal Justice Initiative AB .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 3:'6 of 524 Figure 66. National Historic Trails. Elm Springs 60 atz Tontitown -- - - 71J - -- -- - -- ,56 Oak Grove 9— Q � 41 w o Harmon s t G o A 1 ■ z ■ i Springdale' r I I r r r _1428h Q ; y e � Johnson Fayettevi) e y 31 893 Park• ti OA, . Wheeler ` ` Mud Greek Trail �. Corridor ' 7t 'TKamestrin9 . s• • Creek Trail c S f • Corridor ° U y`• Wlr e Rock 2 i ' ' z •. ' ` 9 ti • Faysl eville ��• �. Farm • .. � p Kessler .' i N Mountain a Appleby oval P, - ` .;' Walnut Grove Miller ,a' q ` Mountain f �ti f ie .' f I 62 !t a9 71 32 Stevenson Mountain 81 ,= Bloyd Ho .4bye Mountain • 117o 1668 ft atz Sonora Fayetteville City Limits GUY Terry Rd I 113551 Habberton 8�� d t `'s"00 7r Pare Black Oak Harris c 57 Butterfield Overland Route National Historic Trail ... _ Trail of Tears National Historic Trail N 0 2 Miles Ell .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 3�7 of 524 Table 8, Historical Markers Type Name Date Location Arkansas Civil War 150 Markers David Walker 2013 East Rock Street and South Walker Road Arkansas Civil War 150 Markers Mount Comfort in the Civil War 2014 North Rupple Road and Starry Night View Arkansas Historic Marker Evergreen Cemetery, Fayetteville 2018 724 West Center Street Community Remembrance Project Racial Terrorism in Washington County 2021 Oaks Cemetery 3.7.4 Easements Conservation easements administered by the AHPP or by a nonprofit organization are present in Fayetteville, The AHPP has four conservation easements in Fayetteville and the NWA Land Trust holds 18 easements in Washington County (Table 9). AHPP easements prioritize protection of historic properties, whereas easements owned and managed by NWA Land Trust focus on land preservation. Table 9. Easements Figure 67 Woolsey Homestead pre -restoration, West Side Prairie, adjacent to the Woolsey Farm is protected by easement. Type Name Description AHPP 206 West Dickson Street ca. 1906 Queen Anne -style house in downtown AHPP Evergreen Cemetery ca. 1838 cemetery (NR 1997) NWA Historic Johnson Farm 168-acre ca, 1908 Johnson Farm NWA Kessler Mountain Reserve 386 acres around Kessler Mountain NWA Leflar Family 50 acres in south Fayetteville protecting the scenic viewshed along Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard NWA Lukens -Bachmann 128 acres along the West Fork of White River NWA Sutherland Fayetteville 10 acres of Markham Hill NWA Town Branch Preserve 0,77-acre pocket park along Town Branch AHPP Walker -Stone House 1845 brick house built by Judge David Walker (NR 1970) AHPP Washington County Courthouse 1905 Richardsonian Romanesque -style building (NR 1972) NWA West Side Prairie 38 acres adjacent to the Woolsey Farmstead NWA Wilson Springs Preserve 121 acres of the Clabber Creek headwaters :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 3:'8 of 524 3.8 Evaluation Evaluating the City's historic preservation program and progress is an important step in planning for the future. This section describes the City's preservation -related successes and challenges, evaluates the existing historic preservation ordinance, reviews other City plans and studies for historic preservation components, analyzes how the City manages data and uses preservation - related incentives, and compares historic preservation in Fayetteville with other cities. 3.8.1 Successes and Challenges The City has achieved many successes since establishing its preservation program; however, it has also had historic preservation -related challenges (Table 10). This plan seeks to build on its successes and address key concerns. Table 10. Historic Preservation Successes and Challenges Successes Challenges Many NRHP properties and Minimal survey districts documentation outside central Numerous historic resources Fayetteville and of resources surveys associated with diverse CLG program participant histories Engaging programs and Only one local historic district projects like the historic home comprising one resource tours, preservation awards, Lack of public understanding and participation in National about historic preservation Historic Preservation Month and how it works Preservation projects at the Lack of public support for Woolsey Farm Homestead, local historic districts Lafayette Street Bridge, and No local historic district the Porter Building/Apple designation criteria or public Warehouse process to pursue designation BHPC established No economic incentives for Preservation -related website preservation content No demolition review for Design guidelines historical properties Frequent historic preservation Lack of professional historic grant recipient preservation expertise on Presence of local knowledge HDC on HDC Increasing demands on staff Historic Sites Map time to manage preservation program Development pressures in old and historic neighborhoods No allocated preservation program funding Lack of use of HTCs .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge 3:'9 of 524 you are beautiful 3.8.2 Ordinance Evaluation Fayetteville's historic preservation ordinance provides the legal framework for the City's historic preservation program. It is ultimately the City's responsibility to ensure that the ordinance is followed; however, much of the work is carried out by the HDC through the nine powers and duties assigned to them by the ordinance. As shown below, each of the powers or duties was evaluated to ascertain if the HDC and City has fulfilled their historic preservation responsibilities (Table 11). All powers and duties have been addressed to some degree, but work remains to continue effective ordinance administration. Table 11. HDC Ordinance Evaluation HDC Powers and Duties Status Adopt design review Addressed. Guidelines have been guidelines to be used when established for White Hangar Local considering Certificate of Historic District; however, the Appropriateness applications. guidelines have not been customized These guidelines will be based to the hangar property, Guidelines upon the Secretary of Interior's have also been created for the Standards for Rehabilitation Washington -Willow neighborhood, and adapted specifically to but they are not in use because the Fayetteville's local ordinance area is not a local historic district. historic districts. Conduct surveys and studies Partially addressed. The City has a of neighborhoods, areas, long history of conducting historic places, structures, objects, and resources surveys; however, improvements within the City documentation efforts have of Fayetteville for the purpose focused on reconnaissance -level of determining those of documentation of the city's oldest distinctive historic, community, areas. Many areas have not been architectural, or archaeological assessed and contextual history is interest or value limited. Nominate buildings, structures, Partially addressed. Although many objects, and historic districts to properties are listed in the NRHP the NRHP in Fayetteville, the HDC could take a more active role in the process of identifying properties for nomination and assisting with nomination development (beyond reviewing nominations prepared by others). Figure 69, You are Beautiful Building Artwork by Matthew Hoffman (2021), .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A0 of 524 HDC Ordinance Evaluation Continued HDC Powers and Duties I status Keep a register of all properties and structures that have been designated as historically significant including all information required for each designation Obtain the services of qualified persons to direct, advise and assist the Historic District Commission Advise and assist owners of historic properties within historic districts on physical and financial aspects of preservation, renovation, rehabilitation, and reuse, and on procedures for inclusion on the NRHP Hold public hearings to review applications for Certificates of Appropriateness Cooperate with the AHPP, historical associations, and other agencies and organizations devoted to the history of this city and state Partially addressed. The Historic Sites story map depicts NRHP properties and districts, properties designed by E. Fay Jones, and non -registered sites. NRHP designation information, like links to nomination files, is limited. The map data does not clearly convey the designation status of properties/districts. The list of non -registered sites includes properties that do not appear to have historic significance and/or are not historic age, which could be confusing to members of the public, Addressed. Two City staff members perform this task. The City also retains SOI-qualified professionals to complete special projects. Partially addressed. The HDC provides review for NRHP nominations and general assistance to property owners, but programs/information are not in place that address all aspects of this item. Addressed. One COA application has been received for the White Hangar Local District. Otherwise, application review is not a regular activity of the commission, due to a scarcity of regulated resources. Partially addressed. The City collaborates with the AHPP as a CLG. Work remains to connect the City with other local organizations to accomplish historic preservation goals. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTERPage 311 of 524 3.8.3 Planning Context and Alignment The City has adopted numerous existing long-range plans to guide the growth and management of properties in the community. Each plan was assessed to identify existing historic preservation components and ways in which the plan may impact historic preservation. (Table 14). planning efforts. Table 12, Plan Alignment Plan Relation to Historic Preservation Topics to Consider Active Transportation Improves connectivity Improving access in historic areas Plan (2020) Reduces car dependency Compatible infrastructure (e.g., granite curbs, etc.) Bond 2019 Provides funding for projects in downtown Compatibility with historic character of downtown City Plan 2040 (2019) Encourages adaptive reuse, rehab, and Targeted growth centers' impact deconstruction to historic properties and Promotes preservation of community resources character 71B Corridor (2020) Encourages preservation of historic Opportunities for designation and character and mid- twentieth century historic interpretation resources Cultural Arts Corridor Improves connectivity and tourism in Compatibility with historic (2021) downtown character of downtown Digital Inclusion Plan Improves Internet access for preservation Compatibility with historic (2019) activities (e,g„ tours, events, meetings, character etc.) Small Cell Installation (2017) Downtown Master Plan Encourages use of AHPP grants for Infill development and its (2004) revitalization efforts compatibility with historic character of downtown Drainage Improvement Addresses the threat of flooding Readying historic buildings for Plan (2018) future flood events Economic Development Encourages adaptive reuse and Adherence to Secretary of Plan (2016) redevelopment of historic buildings the Interior Standards of downtown Rehabilitation for historic buildings Possible restoration project at the 1911 post office Economic Recovery and Ensures a strong local economy with Utilize historic preservation as a Vitality Plan (2021) an emphasis on small business and resource to the local economy workforce development IVA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A2 of 524 Plan Alignment Continued Plan Relation to Historic Preservation Topics to Consider Energy Action Plan (2017) Highlights benefit of historic preservation Ability to integrate sustainable over new construction energy with historic preservation Reduction of construction waste Fayetteville Mobility Plan Improves connectivity and equitable Compatibility with historic (2018) transit access character Master Street Plan (2020) Improves connectivity to historic areas Compatibility with historic character Landscape changes Neighborhood Plans Features historic resources that are being The redesign of Walker Park and Walker Park (2008) preserved its preservation of the design and resources A more complete history of the park land and surrounding lands Wedington Corridor (2012) Improves connectivity and infill Compatibility with historic development opportunities, relieving character pressure from downtown Landscape changes Fayetteville Junction (2009) Improves connectivity and infill Compatibility with historic development opportunities, relieving character pressure from downtown Landscape changes Parks Master Plan (2023) Sets preservation plan for historic Adherence to SOI Standards resources in city parks Rehabilitation for historic resources Parking Master Plan (2016) Improves parking areas for downtown Landscape changes Recycling & Trash Master Improves waste management services Deconstruction and salvaging of Plan (2017) historic materials Sewer Master Plan (2014) Improves water/sewer planning and Updating infrastructure in older management areas/for older buildings Water Master Plan (2017) Washington County Identifies natural hazards Preparing historic buildings for Hazard Mitigation Plan future hazards and post -storm (2015) repairs63 Welcoming Fayetteville Strives for inclusion and integration of Celebration of untold histories Plan (2018) new Americans Improve diversity of resources and HDC membership Provide multilingual resources �� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 3833 of 524 3.8.4 Data Management and Availability Historic preservation programs require management of large amounts of information and data accessible to staff, commissioners, and members of the public. Described next are the types of information the City must manage and how it is currently managed. Designations and Departmental Coordination; NRHP nominations have been made available via the HDC homepage for relevant meetings (prior to review by the State Review Board). However, these documents are not available in a central location. Although regular review of historic preservation in other City projects is not required, it would be helpful for the City to make this documentation available to residents on the City's website. Demolitions; Demolition permits are currently tracked by the City using the Energov program. Digital demolition data from 2014 to present was available for this plan analysis, although limited information was captured or transcribed into digital format until 2020. As of 2022, the associated addresses for demolition permits are readily apparent, but the online interface is difficult to navigate and does not appear to allow easy differentiation between the complete razing of an entire building versus partial demolition or removal of interior walls. Survey Work; City staff do not have access to all prior survey documentation and the lack of GIS-spatial data is a barrier to historic preservation planning for Fayetteville. Former surveys, whether regulatory or elective, should be included on the City's website or at least be cataloged for internal departmental use. Public Meetings; The HDC and BHPC have done well to document and archive public meetings. The meetings, which are held in the evening at City Hall, are easy to access and appropriately timed and noticed. Spanish translation assistance services are available, upon request. The commissions have access to the city attorney, upon request. The meeting agenda, minutes, and staff reports are published online. Prior meetings are video -recorded and stored for the public. 2 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A4 of 524 i r � nFRc CLt Social Media; The City has improved its social media presence in recent years, but continued work is needed to include historic preservation news and updates in the newsfeed. Facebook remains the main City's primary social media platform, which may limit interaction and engagement with younger audiences who are more likely to use Instagram, Snapchat or TikTok, I Website; The City's website contains seven web pages dedicated to historic preservation; the program webpage (https;//www,fayetteville-ar. gov/776/Historic-Preservation) and webpages for the HDC and BHPC. Within the homepage, separate pages are present for the Washington - Willow Design Standards, the Woolsey Farmstead and Wet Prairie project, and the Fayetteville Historic Preservation Awards. A story map developed on ArcGIS Online provides the public with an interactive mapping platform showing NRHP properties and districts, as well as properties with no historic designation. A review of the website identified the following areas for improvement; The website does not provide information describing the difference between local and NRHP historic districts; how to nominate a local historic district; preservation -related funding opportunities, and other topics Maps accessed through the Quick Links do not clearly indicate the NRHP designation or contributing/noncontributing status of buildings The brochure present under Fayetteville's Historic and Significant Architecture is outdated and includes broken links The Historic Sites StoryMap does not differentiate between NRHP, ARHP, and locally listed properties; does not provide links to designation files; and includes nonhistoric properties There is no link from the "Historic Preservation" page to the BHPC page There is no information about the White Hangar Local Historic District 3.8.5 Use of Preservation Incentives Fayetteville has received 42 historic preservation grants since 1971. Since 1993, the City has made 25 grant requests and was awarded 17 of those with a total value of $159,123. This number is relatively low for a city of Fayetteville's size; smaller cities in Arkansas received more than twice this amount during the same period. Cities like Conway and El Dorado have received more than $267,000 and $1.1 million dollars, respectively, in AHPP Grant Awards since 1979. The Main Street Arkansas program also offers historic preservation funding opportunities to members. Fayetteville was a member of the Downtown Network of the Main Street program in 2014 but left the program after a few years. Fayetteville has also leveraged fewer HTCs and other incentives than other Arkansas cities (Table 13). Only four Fayetteville projects used state HTCs since the program's creation in 2009 despite numerous downtown buildings being suitable for state and federal HTC projects.66 Figure 72. Merchants Club in 1912. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A5 oaf 524 Table 13. Preservation Incentives in Arkansas City Pop (2020)61 AHPP Grants Total HTC Projects State HTC State+Federal HTC* MSA Membership Little Rock 202.5K $4.61VI 196 ($109M) 131 ($31.7M) 65 ($777M) 2006 Fayetteville 93.9K $159.1K 7 ($1.7M) 4 ($100K) 2 ($471K)1 ($1.1M)** N/A*** Fort Smith 89.1K $967K 18 ($15.5M) 3 ($469K) 15 ($15M) 2020 N. Little Rock 64.5K $911K 25 ($77M) 1 10 ($1.9M) 15 ($5.7M) 1994 Conway 64.1K $267K 11 ($2.9M) 15 ($403K) 1 6 ($2.5M) 1987 Hot Springs 379K $967K 16 ($15.5K) 19 ($3.5M) 1 7 ($11.1M) 1986 El Dorado 177K $1.1M 7 ($33.9M) 4 ($2.1M) 3 ($31.8M) 1988 Batesville 11.1K $1.3M 6 ($1.2M) 3 ($336K) 3 ($905K) 1984 Helena 19.5K $3.61VI 5 ($951K) 2 ($331K) 3 ($620K) 1984 *Represents the combined state and federal HTC amount, **Federal HTC only, ***Active in 201468 3.8.6 Program Benchmark This section analyzes Fayetteville's preservation program compared to communities of similar size, economy, and natural landscape, including the CLG communities of Asheville and Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Boulder and Fort Collins, Colorado; and Lawrence, Kansas (Figure 74). Like Fayetteville, these cities have made a commitment to historic preservation and are attractive destinations for visitors, businesses, and new residents. In comparison to these cities, Fayetteville has made progress with NRHP designations, but it lacks local historic designations, historic resource regulation, and incentives for local designations, Fayetteville has recently taken steps to initiate historic preservation related to Black heritage, but other cities have gone farther, through work like a thematic survey of Black properties and a Civil Rights historic context. Other cities also have developed more web content, including informational videos, The number of properties subject to active regulations are the most notable contrast to between Fayetteville and the other cities, all of which have multiple local historic districts and local landmarks regulated by the COA process, Some also have adopted additional regulations, like demolition review of all buildings over 50 years old and or an environs buffer around historic districts to prevent encroaching development from affecting the historic setting. While Fayetteville lacks dedicated funding, other cities have appropriated funds to expand their historic preservation impact. Fayetteville has dedicated planning staff, but the program administration is shared with other areas of work, limiting the amount of time available for historic preservation. Figure 73. House at 828 Skyline Drive by Fay Jones (1960). .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAP ge A6 of 524 Fort Collins, CO POPULATION 169,810 Local Designations: Four local historic districts, 230landmarks Attractions: Universities, scenic landscape, and proximityto other populations centers Program: -Historic preservation incentives like rehabilitation loans, design assistance grants, and otherfunding options -Focus on reducing construction waste -Currently developing a series of seven historic contexts focusing on the i iLBights Movement -Numerous infdr ional videos ty's website -Has dedicated program fundinjar d has completed _ more than seventy grant projects ' -City has a Historic-Nservation Department with multiple full-time staff and an Historic Preservation Officer Boulder, CO POPULATION 104,175 Local Designations: Ten local historic districts, 200 landmarks Attractions: Scenic landscape, universities, and proximity to other population centers Program: -Demolition reviews for buildings more than fifty years old. -For contributing buildings in local historic districts, city sales tax waiver on construction materials if at least 30 percent of the work is exterior -Zoning variance and exemption options for historic properties -In addition to local landmarks, the city's Structures of Merit program provides an honorary designation but no requirement for design review by the city -No dedicated program funding -Two planners support program; Historic Preservation Planner serves as program manager -Sixteen surveys have been completed since 1977 -Fourteen documents, including historic contexts on the city's B lack and Swedish populations, have been created since 1988 Figure 74, Comparable Cities."' Lawrence, KS POPULATION 94,934 Local Designations: Two local historic districts Attractions: University and proximity to other population centers Asheville, NC POPULATION 94,589 Local Designations: Four local historic districts, 50 landmarks Attractions: Scenic landscape, universities, and Biltmore Estate NHL property Program: -Recently completed an African American Heritage Resource Survey and has completed various neighborhood surveys -Has landscape design guidelines in addition to traditional historic district design guidelines -Buncombe County landmarks are eligible for a 50 percent tax deferral, in addition to state and federal tax credit programs -Program is funded -Historic Preservation Planner serves as the program manager Fayetteville POPULATION 93,582 Local Designations: One local historic district comprising a single property Attractions: University, scenic landscape, and high concentration of Modernistic architecture Program: -Strong recent survey and NRHP designation efforts -Has taken steps to address racial inequity in historic preservation through the BHPC -No process for citizens to nominate local historic districts -No local financial incentives for historic preservation -No local landmarks (due to barriers in State law) -No direct funding -Designated staff, but less than 10 percent of staff time is dedicated to historic preservation Chapel Hill, NC POPULATION 61,960 Local Designations: Three local historic districts Attractions: Universities and proximity to other population centers Program: -Recently updated design guidelines for its historic districts at the citywide level that include specifications for landscape design and outdoor lighting -No local financial incentives -No dedicated program funding -Senior Planner serves as program manager -Has not completed surveys or developed historic contexts in recent years �� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I FAYETTEVILLE BACKGROUND INFORMATION CHAPTER 30of 524 4. Stakeholder & Community Engagement Contents Public input is crucial to any municipal planning process. This chapter summarizes the stakeholder and community engagement efforts that informed the development of this plan. 4, Stakeholder & Community Engagement...............65 4.1 Stakeholder Engagement.................................................66 4.2 Community Meetings ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,66 4.3 Community Opinion Survey...........................................67 4.3.1 Survey Results ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,67 Figure 75. September 2022 Community Meeting, A community involvement plan was developed at the onset of this project to define the community engagement approach, develop a comprehensive communication strategy, increase outreach accessibility, and provide opportunities for feedback and community conversation.71 Following a series of stakeholder engagement meetings and community meetings, a community opinion survey was released to the public. Press releases and social media were used to inform the public about the opportunities to participate in the meetings and survey. The Fayetteville Public Library and City staff provided support to individuals with Internet connectivity issues as well as those with impairments and disabilities in completing the survey. A Spanish -language version of the survey was made available at the City's Historic Preservation Office. All activities were productive with high attendance and feedback. Overall, community members overwhelmingly indicated that they support historic preservation in Fayetteville. Participants prioritized historic preservation initiatives for the next ten years and identified general areas, properties, and types of buildings that they believe are worthy of preservation. Analysis Stakeholders —> Community —> Plan Existing Conditions Analysis Stakeholder Engagement Community Meeting Community Involvement Plan City of Fayetteville Staff Community Opinion Survey Figure 76, Planning and Engagement Process. Evaluation Strategic Plan .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPPageA8 of 524 4.1 Stakeholder Engagement The City selected seven stakeholders — property owners in historic neighborhoods, local historians, former members of the Historic District Commission, and others — who were interviewed in September 2022.16 They shared opinions about historic preservation and the state of development activities in Fayetteville. Several major takeaways emerged from the interviews: • The concern most often stated was about the City's rapid growth and the demolitions and redevelopment in established neighborhoods. Speculative development, rapidly increasing density, and the University's contribution to that through growth in the student body and workforce were frequently mentioned. A few people also brought up the effects of rapid development on infrastructure, including stormwater drainage, throughout the city. • Stakeholders largely do not really understand how historic preservation works, including the difference between National Register -listed and locally -designated historic districts, historic tax credits, the City's historic preservation ordinance and design guidelines, etc. • Stakeholders are not focused on anything in particular when it comes to historic preservation. They have many interests and would probably benefit from some form of organizational structure that would help to direct volunteer activity and advocacy, • The City needs to establish a vision for historic preservation and then see it through. The community seems to be open to and desirous of leadership from the City. Once stakeholder interviews were complete, a list of topics for the community meeting and questions for the community opinion survey were created, with input from the City. 4.2 Community Meetings Community meetings took place in September 2022 and April 2023, During the first meeting, attendees gave feedback regarding how to prioritize future historic preservation efforts, Each person received four stickers numbered from 1 to 4 and placed the stickers on signs corresponding to options for preservation initiatives, with 1 being the highest priority and 4 being the lowest. The scores were tallied and ranked as follows: 1. Educate people about Fayetteville history and historic preservation 2. Document and protect historic properties 3. Regulate demolitions and redevelopment in established neighborhoods 4. Promote historic tourism The prioritization of these topics informed action items in this plan, Additional meetings provided the public with the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft historic preservation plan, as well as ask questions about the project. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAP ge A9 of 524 - � �.1 III � � � y■� jj �, .all PIBC9 Stick0i5 FIOI fI • � i � I Figure 77. Priority Results from the Workshop. Plea 9110kare Hare 0 • - ' ' ' • ' ' ' - -`- • • • . , , • Pqa Skk Hwn • , • , t • • , • • , • •1 •, • •••• • 4.3 Community Opinion Survey The qualitative feedback data collected through the stakeholder interviews and the first community meeting was used to develop a community opinion survey. The purpose of the survey was to test the extent to which the anecdotal opinions and ideas provided by the small group of stakeholders and meeting attendees represented the larger community. In October 2022, the online survey was released to the public." In total, 619 respondents completed the survey, exceeding the original target of 383 to reach a 95 percent confidence level with 4 percent margin of error, based on the population of Fayetteville. The survey comprised two demographic items, a set of questions about historic preservation priorities, an assessment of support for historic preservation, questions to identify places that should be preserved, and an open-ended item to collect additional thoughts. The survey responses, as summarized in the following sections, reflect an overwhelming support for historic preservation in Fayetteville.78 4.3.1 Survey Results Respondents The 619 respondents fairly evenly represented the four wards in Fayetteville. Twelve percent of respondents did not live in Fayetteville, and 4 percent did not answer the question about where they lived. Other than the youngest group (age nineteen and younger) and people who did not provide their age, the various age groups were represented fairly equally in the survey. Historic Preservation Priorities Respondents were asked to rate a list of six historic preservation activities on a five -point Likert scale from Very Important to Not at All Important. "No Opinion" was also an option. The activities are outlined on the following page. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAPTER 3�06of 524 Page Historic Preservation Support In the next set of questions, respondents reported the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements, using a Likert scale with the options Strongly Agree, Agree, Somewhat Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Somewhat Disagree, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree. The statements included; I care about preserving our community's history, including historic buildings, I need more information about what City historic preservation programs can do and how they work. Property owners in Fayetteville who make their building a historic landmark should be able to trust that the next owner will not be able to tear it down without getting permission from the City. Property owners who join with their neighbors to create a historic district should be able to trust that no one will be able to tear down historic houses without getting permission from the City. Property owners who receive financial incentives for fixing up historic buildings should be willing to follow clearly written rules about what they can do to those buildings. Respondents overwhelmingly indicated their agreement with all these statements, as shown below (Figure 78). Trio ritics Percentage of Importance Rankings Identifying more historic properties 95% Formally designating more historic 94% properties and historic districts ca 0 a Improving economic incentives for 94% E property owners of historic buildings o Developing history -related educational content 91% c co L- Q Getting young people excited about (� 1 O/0 E Fayetteville history and historic preservation J to N N J Increasing awareness of financial incentives 88% available for historic buildings Figure 78. Priority results from the Community Opinion Survey. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAP�;Ege 35l1 of 524 Areas/Properties to Preserve Most respondents indicated that there are specific buildings or places in Fayetteville that they would like to see preserved for future generations. The areas, buildings, or sites most often identified by respondents as important to preserve are shown below, in order from highest number of responses to lowest. Downtown (36 responses, or 5.8 percent): including Fayetteville Square, old post office, and other downtown buildings. 2. Dickson Street (31, or 5 percent): also known as the West Dickson Street Commercial Historic District, listed in the NRHP in 2007 and the main throughfare connecting downtown to the U of A campus. 3. Jefferson Elementary School (26, or 4.2 percent): Public school opened on February 19,1931, and integrated in 1965. Located at 612 S. College Avenue. 4. Depot buildings (22, or 3,5 percent): Frisco Depot at 550 Dickson Street and Fayetteville Depot at 528 W. Dickson Street. 5. Historic and older buildings, sites, or neighborhoods, generally (19, or 3 percent). 6. Cemeteries (15, or 2.4 percent), 7. Churches (15, or 2.4 percent). 8. Old Courthouse (15, or 2.4 percent): Listed in the NRHP in 1972, 9. Markham Hill (11, or 1.8 percent): 144 acres of woodlands and natural habitat currently facing development pressure. 10. Block Street (9, or 1.5 percent): Commercial area in downtown Fayetteville. 11. South Fayetteville (9, or 1.5 percent): A historically working-class neighborhood south of downtown. 12. Rock/"giraffe" houses (8, or 1.3 percent): Buildings clad in multicolored stone masonry that have a giraffe -like appearance; found in Wilson Park and other neighborhoods. 13. University Heights (8, or 13 percent): A neighborhood with a collection of Modernistic buildings by Architect Fay Jones. Many other buildings and sites were mentioned multiple times by respondents, including Willow Heights, a historical Black neighborhood; the 112 Drive -In; and motels along College Avenue, among others. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STAKEHOLDER & COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHAP ge A2 of 524 • Based on research results, community outreach, and anticipated historic preservation program staffing and budget levels, five main goals for historic preservation in Fayetteville have been identified; 1. Strengthen the preservation program through efficient adjustments to the program's administration. 2. Encourage compatible development that prioritizes historic preservation. 3. Identify and protect historic properties by utilizing historic resources surveys and designations to identify and protect historic resources for future generations. 4. Provide learning opportunities for the community about historic preservation and Fayetteville's unique history. 5. Promote diversity, equity, and inclusion and protect cultural heritage. This strategic plan provides a ten-year framework and over 50 action items for achieving these goals. The goals are described in more detail in the next section of this plan, followed by an implementation matrix for each goal. Each row in each matrix is an action item with priority and timeline recommendations, the personnel and partners and required changes needed to execute the action, and anticipated funding needs and level of effort. It is important to note that although the broader goals are not listed in terms of priority, the action items are prioritized as shown below. Action items prioritized as critical should be completed as soon as is practicable. In some cases, action items will be ongoing activities. Those categorized as short-term should be addressed within the next two years (by 2025). Some short- term action items may also be critical to accomplishing other goals or rectifying current challenges, like the presence of historic preservation expertise on the HDC. Mid-term action items are those that should be completed in the next two to four years (by 2027). Long-term action items should be completed by the end of the plan cycle in 2033. Figure 79. Downtown Fayetteville Branding. Contents This chapter outlines the strategic plan and action items for the Fayetteville Heritage and Historic Preservation Plan, 5, Strategic Plan ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,70 5.1 Goals ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,71 5.2 Implementation Matrices................................................80 GoalI . ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 80 Goal2,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 81 Goal3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 82 Goal4,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 83 Goal5,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 84 53 Conclusion & Plan Maintenance...............................85 .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAP ge A3 of 524 5.1 Goals Goal 1. Strengthening the Preservation Program Fayetteville can update and expand existing processes and platforms to strengthen its preservation program. The City should ensure preservation planning is integrated with other City planning and development processes. A central strategy to strengthening the preservation program is to create an ordinance that details eligibility criteria for local historic designation, including a provision for contributing and noncontributing resources within a district. This ordinance should be based on NRHP criteria and NPS standards but may be less stringent compared to the national program." Discouraging demolitions to decrease landfill waste and encouraging deconstruction to salvage materials can also be addressed via City policies that require a historic preservation review, demolition delays, and/or mandate salvaging and deconstruction of the building,80 Demolition delays are a key tool for working with the property owner to preserve a threatened historical building. The City should explore the following process for broader demolition reviews through a new or revised ordinance and subsequent workflow processes: 1. Staff review of the proposed demolition to determine potential for historic significance and discussion with applicant to ensure they are aware of benefits of preservation and alternatives to demolition, and prior survey documentation. 2. Demolition delay issued by the HDC to allow for an extended review, public comment, discussion of alternatives with the property owner, and a site visit, if needed. 3. Denial of a COA within a local historic district. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPPage364 of 524 The establishment of a citywide historic context and comprehensive survey plan (Appendix 1) would provide a strong foundation for determining the significance of a historic resource proposed for demolition. Expediting action items in Goal 3, Identify and Protect Historic Properties would strengthen demolition review procedures by the City and protection of vulnerable historical resources that the community values. For any property that will be demolished and that the City or HDC deems worthy of documentation, policies could also require a documentation package before a demolition permit is issued. Such documentation could include photographs of the building and notes on property history. The collected documentation packages could be stored and maintained digitally on the City's website or physically at the library or with a partner organization. The recordation of demolition data should be a top priority to help City staff and officials, the HDC, and members of the community understand trends affecting the historic fabric of the city. For example, addresses and year -built information, if included alongside demolition permit data, would provide a strong foundation for future analysis and evaluation of potential intervention measures. Additional measures like establishing dedicated funding for the historic preservation program will provide new opportunities for program expansion, including but not limited to the required dedicated funding for a Main Street program. Publishing online resources that provide information on preservation -related reviews, processes for property owners interested in seeking local historical designation, and a clear, centralized database detailing Fayetteville's historic resources will facilitate public participation in preservation processes. Examples of problems and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 14. Table 14. Goal 1 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Sufficient planning staff capacity to handle Thoughtful and proactive planning for staff capacity preservation activities (i.e., hiring plan considering the need for additional City staff positions and/or consultants, reallocating duties) Accessibility of prior preservation studies and Retroactive digitization of records and more robust demolition data tracking future data collection Unclear guidelines for local designations Create an ordinance that establishes designation criteria and an application form with guidance Degree of allocated funding Earmarked funds for program activities Demolition goes unchecked Require demolition reviews for resources that are forty-five years or older Demolitions contributing to landfill Avoiding demolition and requiring deconstruction and salvage Navigation of and access to City historic Refine website to include key information for access preservation information online can be improved and transparency IV HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAP ge A5 oaf 524 Goal 2. Encourage Development that is Compatible with Historic Preservation Goal 2 focuses on encouraging development that is sensitive to the city's historic fabric through regulation and planning methods. The city's historic character contributes to its identity and its appeal to visitors; future development should be planned with this in mind. This goal promotes development that is both environmentally sustainable and historically sensitive so that present and future generations can benefit from Fayetteville's historic character. Development pressures could be addressed through planning guidance, the establishment of character overlay zones, and planned unit developments. Developers and institutions should work with the City staff in promoting sustainable development that works with existing building stock, rather than demolishes or ignores the historical context of the community. Funding opportunities, which often require professional historical rehabilitation, should also be considered to spark other investment and maintain the city's historic fabric. Demolition activity is an ongoing threat to historic properties in Fayetteville. A thorough review of historic -age building stock proposed for demolition should be completed by City staff and the City should encourage alternatives like adaptive reuse. Examples of challenges and solutions related to this goal are listed in Table 15. Table 15, Goal 2 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Lack of regulatory authority Changes to code and processes regarding demolitions Preventing demolitions Exploring easements and independent property acquisition Loss of historic Create new local historic districts character through new ordinances and community engagement Degree of allocated funding Earmarked funds for program activities Insensitive development Character overlay zoning and planned unit developments with guidance from the City Absence of historic tax Facilitate investment and development credit usage and missed using historic tax credits and consider opportunities for funding joining Main Street Arkansas Institutional development Work with institutions in fostering encouraging gentrification community -centered development that and over -development protects historical resources Figure 81, SWEPCO Building by Warren Segraves (1968). .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAP ge A6 of 524 Goal 3. Identify and Protect Historic Properties Building upon Goal 2, the City must prioritize the surveying and designation of historic properties at the local level. Protection of historic properties begins with the systematic and comprehensive survey of historical resources. Future survey work should consider properties within the boundaries of prior surveys that have reached forty-five years of age or older since the time of original documentation. Future surveys should be customized for the needs of the City rather than limited to the use of AHPP survey forms, which are time-consuming to complete and collect more information than is necessary for local evaluation and designation. Developing historic contexts for appropriate themes will facilitate survey and designation efforts. Examples of challenges and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 16. The survey plan in Appendix I details the steps recommended to achieve this goal. Table 16, Goal 3 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Fifty years of surveying Resurveying activities and activity with inconsistent surveying primarily for local eligibility recommendations designation rather than AHPP standards Resources reaching Funding new surveys that historic -age (45 years target important architects like or older) are significant Fay Jones and others in Fayetteville due to its mid -twentieth century architectural legacy Lack of citywide historic Funding a citywide historic context context that can guide future survey efforts Lack of context for diverse Inclusion of diverse histories histories and preservation and places in future survey of these resources efforts Protecting historic Exploring local historic districts, properties easements, and property acquisition Maintaining historic Utilizing grant funds for properties restoration and rehabilitation projects and educating the public on historic property maintenance Figure 82. Fulbright Peace Fc Designed by Fay Jones in 19� front of the 1935 Vol Walker L (NR 1992) on the U of A caml :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 3�7 of 524 13 r` Y �4.C�Ktwr' � PrJBL /c U,"" O C ELM- 1 �.. CID sQ�HRE Local designation efforts should be a top priority for Fayetteville. Given that state law requires a proposed local district either have the support of a majority of owners or be currently listed in the NRHP, Fayetteville has an opportunity to expediently designate the 11 existing NRHP districts in the City as local districts, Although the NRHP listing status could allow the City to entirely bypass an owner petition, it is best practice to allow an avenue for owner input. The City could, however, place the burden on opponents of a district, by moving forward with local designation for current NRHP districts so long as a majority of owners (>_51%) do not object. The NPS takes this approach at the federal level for listing districts in the NRHP; listing will move forward as long as a majority of residents who own property do not object. As noted in Section 2, the state law's explicit allowance for embracing "noncontiguous lands" in a local historic district could allow for a thematic or multiple property -type local designation strategy, as employed for NRHP nominations. Fayetteville should explore establishing a discontiguous F- local historic district for Modernistic -style architecture co Q including works by Fay Jones and others. Multiple property W documentation through an MPS or local measure is an efficient method to address discontiguous resources (see Section 2.1.1 for more information on MPS). Figure 83. Thomas -Tharp House (1854). This house was placed on the Arkansas's Most Endangered Places list in 2018. Figure 84. Sanborn Map (1886) (at left), Numerous years of Sanborn maps of the city are available to the public for research. 41 Source; Sanborn Map Company,AC .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAP ge A8 of 524 �4& Goal 4. Provide Learning Opportunities for the Community The public engagement process for this plan revealed that residents of Fayetteville believe historic preservation is important, but they lack knowledge about how historic preservation works. Residents are also proud of their city and have desire to know more about the city's history. Strengthening partnerships between the City, local and regional institutions, and community groups can increase opportunities for community members to learn about preservation and Fayetteville's history, share their preservation priorities and local historical knowledge, and become empowered and active preservation partners. Collaboration with new and existing partners to provide tours, events, and hands-on trainings for the public allows diverse local stakeholders to contribute to crafting a shared sense of community identity rooted in the preservation of the city's historic resources. The City can empower residents to take preservation into their own hands by providing information on Fayetteville's historic resources and preservation processes, economic incentives, and by marketing available preservation tools and events to diverse Fayetteville communities. Appendix C. Partnership Opportunities and D. Funding Opportunities outline various existing and potential partnerships available to the City. Examples of challenges and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 17. Table 17. Goal 4 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Lack of awareness and Creation of historic education on historic preservation workshops and preservation information for the public Confusion on the difference Clearly inform the public on between historic designations the difference between these designations Desire to learn about Redesign the City's website Fayetteville's history but many to provide educational tools are unable to access this and work with institutions information on increasing accessibility to information Lack of interpretive signage Erect informational panels throughout the city to inform the public Lack of connection between Develop wayfinding and historical places and points of historical corridors (Figure 86) interest Figure 85. Preservation Event. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAP ge A9 of 524 1 r .{ m �� 4( i I w Trenion B , o son o Wil ' I I Park- 3 W Louise St WILSON•PARK Q I - °• ...r a a • • ip i_iE W Maple St z rt n MT NORD r E Maple St _.�4 low _T own v Mt. Nord St I z ¢' W '-. _ o > yf, •,w i, _ _ TJG ! o) a ..~r W Lafayette St J , n o F WAS-IINGTON WILLOW •� West I 'I TV •a 1 Dickson - _ �r DePal DI SIN C�iC�AL :�a r� HD — O - oy up i Area ' House � E Dickson�t r T JJJ��f"`��� I • 1 I'wana �. r � if��',i` : . '„'�!'°''�!"'r_• pr„ College/ Center Dickson, F All I a, p' I DOWOOW�j r: > 1 i • saea� E Spring St _ - CommunityE DO eete Tr a SPRING �- � ® �1 e — I �- a- > Evergreen ¢' T K > 3 Cemetery ¢ WM Meadow st' %r- - -o ¢ ° CUUNRAL — J ARTS �;� o — I ►s jk .,, a( .•0 1 CORRIDOR"` _ -♦ z Ridge W Center St O House_se.u.es West Church Center a - Neste -� Imo' �,Rj Square Courthouse ' �,. m W Moun ,st • Q [ ¢ Fryryettevllle Milli At - Public - - 1 i J I to c� co I i � ; W Rpck St . fir` E Rock Sty � 4'004TNAM ' � ' • %" tones a' r ADDITtOgJ. Woods = a - I • _ The TOVYIMOUNTAIN JOUT x r Ramblel •'•dew cke �. .,,,M or • �` 1= " 1� South Entran , JENM S• a 1�FFERSON/ AL ER 4. r _ _ 1 i J Historic Core Gateway Opportunity Downtown Zones Walkable Corridors Connections • Gateways �istorical Viewshed Links HistoricNRHP DistrictPoints oflnterest Goal 5. Promote Diversity, Equity, Inclusion.. and Protect Cultural Heritage Fayetteville residents expressed an interest in knowing more about the city's diverse histories, Along with telling this history, it is important to ensure all community members are included in the City's historic preservation program. This goal encompasses action items that seek to uplift diverse histories, expand whose voices are heard and whose interests are represented at preservation decision -making tables, and to provide accessible avenues for community participation in preservation processes. Combatting erasure, or the removal of history of a particular group, is a key method to this objective. In Fayetteville, particular focus should be given to the Black community for its notable history since the city's establishment. However, other historically underrepresented groups, including Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC), women, the disabled, and those who identity as lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgendered, and other queer identities (LGBT+) should be included as well. Explicit efforts to explore diverse histories, broaden the scope of local survey programs, and expand protections for cultural heritage can help shepherd the city's diverse historic resources into the future. Examples of challenges and solutions within this goal are listed in Table 18. Figure 87 Diversity. Diverse histories are key to understanding a complete history of Fayetteville. Figure 88. Fayetteville Pride. Fayetteville is a center of LGBT+ history, culture, and pride in NWA, AML :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTER 4�1 of 524 Table 18, Goal 5 Challenges and Solutions Challenge Solution/s Lack of awareness of diversity Celebrate diversity and cultural heritage through education and and cultural heritage protection of historical resources Erasure of Black history Partner with local Black and other non -white institutions to explore how and other historically this history can be protected and celebrated underrepresented groups Lack of inclusion of diverse Document and designate historic properties that are associated with histories at designated diverse histories properties Lack of representation in Develop historic contexts specific to African American and other historic context documents underrepresented groups, and/or address within other thematic contexts Lack of diverse representation Include diverse individuals on the HDC and continue to invest in the in the government BHPC The City of Fayetteville's historic preservation planning should also consider the 2022 recommendations of the Black Heritage Resources Task Force.$' This group is a collaborative effort of the Society for Black Archaeologists, the American Cultural Resources Association, the Society of Historical Archaeology, and the Society of American Archaeology, Between 2020- 2022, the group conducted surveys and research to evaluate the practices of SHPOs with a goal of addressing diversity and racial inclusion in archaeology and historic preservation. Key recommendations applicable to preservation planning in Fayetteville include: • Focus on identification of cultural/ethnic affiliations for documented resources, including consulting the community. Ensure that data collection fields are established to facilitate searches for such affiliations. Review and update existing records to retroactively add ethnic/ cultural affiliation. • Be proactive in outreach to BIPOC communities to determine their historic preservation needs and interests. Inquire about the properties considered significant to them and consult with Black experts when evaluating properties. Make sure BIPOC communities are aware of preservation resources and benefits. • Increase the number of BIPOC properties honored with preservation designations. gael ..I �fj Figure 89. Fayettville Public Schools Yearbook in 1954. Fayetteville began integration in 1954 following the Brown v. Board of Education ruling. Source: Fayetteville H istory.AD :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPPage462 of 524 5.2 Implementation Matrices Goal 1. Strengthen the Preservation Program No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 1.1 Local Historic Modify ordinance to include eligibility criteria Critical/ Planning, Ordinance N/A Medium District and a process for establishing local historic Short- HDC, districts. Term City Council 1.2 Commission Ensure HDC ordinance meets CLG criteria Critical/ Planning, Appointments, N/A Medium Qualifications for expertise in architecture, urban planning/ Short- HDC, Coordination, design, or history to the extent possible, Hire Term City Council Ordinance, consultants or pro bono professionals to Resolution assist the HDC on an as -needed basis. 1.3 Training Hold annual trainings with the HDC and City Short- AHPP, Budget Medium Medium staff. Term Consultant 1.4 Funding Allocate City budget to the historic Short- Budget Office, Budget Medium Medium preservation program that can be used for Term City Council surveys, educational programs, events, and other initiatives. 1.5 Data Improve digital data collection to assist with Short- Long Range Website, N/A High Management program analysis. Include digitized survey, Term Planning, Workflow designation information, demolition data, and GIS other relevant data. Demolition data should include year -built dates, demolition types, and historic designations, 1.6 Commission Encourage more collaboration between the Ongoing/ Planning, Management N/A Low Collaboration HDC and BHPC through additional meetings, Short- HDC, committees, and tasks. Term BHPC 1.7 Internship Offer a seasonal internship to students Mid -Term Long Range Staffing Low High interested in historic preservation, Planning architecture, history, or cultural studies to contribute to the program's initiatives. Consider a collaboration with the U of A. 13 Historic Sites Update the Historic Sites map, Clearly Mid -Term Long Range Workflow N/A Medium Map distinguish between NRHP properties, NRHP Planning, districts, ARHP properties, local historic GIS, districts, and other properties of interest, such Consultant as those that reflect cultural heritage but that are not designated. Attach the nomination application to each NRHP property/district, Depict historic district boundaries. Exclude resources less than forty-five years old. 1.9 Plan Review Include historic preservation staff in review of Mid -Term Planning, Workflow N/A Medium proposed major projects and zoning changes Engineering, to determine impacts to historic resources. Public Works 1.10 Demolition Pass an ordinance to allow for the review of Long- Planning, Processes, N/A Medium Ordinance proposed demolitions for resources forty-five Term HDC, Ordinance years or older. Staff to evaluate each property City Council for significance. Work with the property owner to discourage demolition. Reviews should be taken up by the HDC as needed. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTERPage 463 of 524 Goal 2. Encourage Compatible Development that Prioritizes Historic Preservation No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 2.1 Historic Highlight historical corridors and areas. Short- Long Range May need High Medium Corridors Examples include signage, gateways, and Term/ Planning, Grants or Other wayfinding to guide individuals to a historic Mid -Term HDC, Funding property or district or make them aware of the BHPC, historic property or area. Arts Council, Consultant 2.2 Downtown Develop guidelines for downtown that Mid -Term Planning, Document Medium Medium encourage new development that is Consultant Adoption compatible but differentiated from historical buildings. 2.3 Develop Establish an incentive program for property Mid -Term Planning, Budget Medium High Incentives owners in local historic districts to encourage HDC, designations. Consider faqade improvement City Council grants, design assistance, or local tax breaks. 2.4 Coordinate Collaborate with U of A to encourage new Long- Planning, No Change N/A High with development that thoughtfully considers Term Institutions Needed Institutions surrounding neighborhoods and protects historic properties on and off campus, 2.5 Zoning Explore overlay zoning as an alternative Long- Planning, Zoning Medium High to local historic districts to protect historic Term Consultant character. 2.6 Sustainability Encourage developers to utilize state and Ongoing/ Planning, Planning N/A High federal historic tax credits for redevelopment Short- Development Practices and rehabilitation in line with SOI. (City Plan Term Services 2040 Goal 1) 2.7 Design Though not currently enforceable, utilize the Ongoing/ Long Range Website, N/A Medium Guidelines Washington -Willow Design Guidelines as Short- Planning, Documents a tool for educating residents in the district Term HDC about historically sensitive alterations, Use the document as a base for developing guidelines for newly created local historic districts. 2.8 Sustainability Pass deconstruction ordinance requiring Long- Long Range Ordinance N/A High the salvaging and repurposing of historical Term Planning, materials in local and NRHP historic districts. HDC, City Council 2.9 Main Street Join Main Street Arkansas. The next workshop Short- City Council Application Low Medium Arkansas period begins in fall 2024 with application in Term 2025. �VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTERPage 464104 524 Goal 3. Identify and Protect Historic Properties No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline I Party Level 3.1 Restoration Continue historic preservation work on Ongoing Planning, Website, Medium Medium Projects city -owned properties, like the Woolsey Consultants Social Media Farmstead and Apple Warehouse. Publish progress on the projects to demonstrate the city's commitment to historic preservation. 3.2 Historic Develop a citywide and thematic historic Short- Consultant N/A Grants High Contexts; context. Term Citywide Context 3.3 Historically Black Identify and survey historical Black Short- Consultant N/A Grants Medium Neighborhoods neighborhoods and resources, especially Term and Resources the neighborhood east of downtown, that can be used for educational development. 3.4 Windshield Prepare for and conduct a comprehensive Short- Consultant N/A Grants, High Survey citywide windshield survey. Term Medium 3.5 Reconnaissance Based on windshield survey results, Mid -Term Consultant N/A Grants High Surveys conduct reconnaissance -level documentation. 3.6 Historic District Conduct outreach with property owners in Critical/ HDC, Management N/A Medium Outreach NRHP historic districts to instill community Short- Planning Marketing pride, educate them about the difference Term between NRHP and local historic districts, and encourage the creation of local historic districts. 3.7 Local Historic Poll NRHP historic district property owners Short- Planning Management N/A High District to gauge interest in becoming a local Term Designation historic district. Based on poll results, prioritize facilitation of local historic district designation. 3.8 Multiple Property Create noncontiguous local historic Mid -Term Planning, Survey Grants High Designation districts based on a multiple property Consultant, designation approach. Explore themes like Community modern architecture, Black history, and other topics. 3.9 Easements Encourage organizations and historic Long- Planning, Website N/A Medium property owners to use easements as Term Organizations a historic preservation tool. Consider donating AHPP easements for City properties. �� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTERPage 465861524 Goal 4. Provide Learning Opportunities for the Community No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 4.1 Community Improve the public's understanding of historic Short- Long Range Website Low Medium Engagement: preservation and Fayetteville's preservation Term Planning, Improve program by updating the city's website. Communications, Information Include information comparing NRHP, ARHP, GIS Channels and local historic designations; explaining the COA process and design guidelines; how to apply for a local historic district; details about initiatives; the updated Historic Sites map (1.10); preservation -related grants and funding opportunities; survey and historic context reports; etc. 4.2 History Install interpretive signage panels and Short- Planning, No Change Grants, Medium Sharing historical markers at historic places or utilize Term Consultant, Needed Medium other physical or visual ways (e.g., murals) to Commissions, share community history. Parks 4.3 Preservation Continue to award exceptional examples of Ongoing Planning, No Change Low Low Awards preservation through the Preservation Awards Commissions Needed program. 4.4 Program Promote the City's historic preservation Ongoing Planning, Website, N/A High Promotion initiatives and history through press, social Communications Social Media media, website content, and other means. 4.5 Learning Continue to host historic preservation tours Ongoing Planning, Training Grants High Opportunities: and events. Consider HDC and BHPC Commissions Tours members leading tours and events. 4.6 Learning Partner with the U of A in supporting history Short- Planning, Coordination N/A High Opportunities: coursework, programming, and cultural Term Commissions U of A resource management activities. 4.7 Learning Develop and hold historic preservation Short- Planning, Management Grants High Opportunities: workshops. Consider workshops related to Term Partners Workshops local historic district and NRHP designation, historic building, and stone wall maintenance, wood and metal window, door repair, and natural disaster preparedness for buildings. 4.8 Community Market to the community the importance of Ongoing/ Planning, Website, Medium High Engagement: local historic districts, especially as a tool for Short- Commissions Marketing Finding maintaining historic character. Find advocates Term Partners for local historic districts and partner with them to establish support. 4.9 Community Publish information about historic preservation Mid -Term Planning Website N/A Medium Engagement: reviews and demolitions of historic properties Transparency to increase transparency, 4.10 Catalog Work with the Fayetteville Public Library to Long- Planning, Processes Grants Low Contexts catalog historic contexts, oral histories, and Term Library other forms of documentation to provide the community with a central repository for historic preservation and local history. 4.11 National Explore funding opportunities and Mid -Term Planning, Website Grants Medium Historic Trails interpretation options for the Butterfield Consultant, Overland Route and Trail of Tears NHTs. Partners 4.12 Engage Young Consider projects and events to engage young Mid -Term Organizations, Social Media, Medium Medium Residents adults with Fayetteville's history and topics Schools Website of interest to them, such as histories of social justice, diverse histories, and preservation sustainability. .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTERPage 466 of 524 Goal 5. Promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Protect Cultural Heritage No. Title Action Item Priority/ Responsible Requires Cost Effort Timeline Party Level 5.1 Increase HDC Encourage diversity on the HDC, Consider a Ongoing City Council Appointments, N/A Medium Diversity merger of the HDC and BHPC to consolidate Ordinance efforts, empower Black preservation initiatives, and save funds. 5.2 Protect Black Work with the BHPC and community to Ongoing/ Planning, Community N/A Low Sites: Develop develop a list of threatened historical sites Short- Commissions, Engagement List of Sites associated with Black heritage and identify Term Partners ways to support their preservation, including Black ownership. 5.3 Share Black Support the designation of Black Historical Short- BHPC, N/A Grants, Medium History Markers. Term City Council Low 5.4 Increase BIPOC Add Black and Indigenous Historical Short- Planning, Community Low Low Representation: markers to the City's Historic Sites Map. Term GIS Engagement Add Markers 5.5 Historic Ensure that Fayetteville's diverse histories, Short- Planning, Community Grants Medium Contexts: particularly Black, Latino, Jewish, women, and Term Commissions, Engagement Diverse LGBT+ histories, are documented in historic Partners Histories context development. 5.6 Outreach Explore methods of outreach to diverse Short- Planning, Community Grants Medium to Diverse communities through events, commission Term Commissions, Engagement Communities meetings, and crowdsourcing platforms. (see Partners Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance) 5.7 Increase BIPOC Review properties and districts currently Ongoing BHPC, Community Medium Medium Representation: listed in the NRHP in Fayetteville for HDC, Engagement Retroactive overlooked associations with BIPOC history. Volunteers Review Develop supplemental documentation and update official records81 5.8 Protect Support NWA Black Heritage in securing Mid -Term Planning, Coordination N/A Medium Black Sites: historical Black sites. Consider assisting BHPC, Organization the organization with historic preservation HDC, Support activities and NRHP designation, if desired. City Council 5.9 Identify BIPOC Establish a directory of individuals and Ongoing BHPC Community N/A Low Preservation organizations that should be consulted when Engagement Stakeholders evaluating BIPOC heritage resources as subject matter experts," 5.10 Empower Conduct targeted outreach to BIPOC Ongoing Planning, Community NA Low BIPOC communities about the economic benefits of BHPC Engagement Preservationists historic preservation (e.g, tax breaks), 5.11 Increase BIPOC Work with BHPC to identify potential projects Long- Planning, Grant N/A Medium Representation: that could be funded through grants like the Term BHPC Application, Access to NPS' African American Civil Rights grants BHPC Funds and Underrepresented Community grants Coordination and apply for the grants. 5.12 Combat Research historic preservation -related Mid -Term Planning, Public N/A High Gentrification gentrification solutions in other cities to Economic Engagement, prepare Fayetteville for future threats. For Vitality, Policy, Council example, legacy business program, adaptive BHPC, Action reuse of historical buildings for affordable HDC housing, etc. :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAPTERPage 467 of 524 5.3 Conclusion & Plan Maintenance The rich historic character that defines Fayetteville is essential to its identity and success as the second-largest city in Arkansas. To ensure successful and effective historic preservation, the plan's action items should be achieved according to their priority as well as financial and timing constraints. Although the City is primarily responsible for the expansion of the Fayetteville Historic Preservation Program, residents, institutions, and organizations also play a critical role in shaping the outcome of a community that receives the many benefits from historic preservation. Fayetteville has had a long history of preservation advocacy, surveying historic resources, and, more recently, attaining funding and community support for historic preservation. The City should continue to use grant funding for special initiatives but should also support the preservation program through regular funding within its annual budget process. Building the network of stakeholders and organizations that work collaboratively to support the City's efforts will be an important effort. The City and HDC should follow this plan between 2023 and 2033. The HDC should meet annually to establish implementation priorities for the next year, and quarterly meetings should be used to discuss the status of plan action items to ensure plan maintenance. Unforeseen events or new initiatives that were not included in this document may require the City and/or HDC to develop an addendum, internal policy, or guideline prior to the next update cycle. A public meeting on the status of this plan should be held approximately five years after implementation (2028). The next plan update should take place no later than 2033. Let's get to work, Fayetteville! Figure 90.112 Drive In. CIE) EN THURS FRI UP 2•D PG IN STENEO SAT S SUN HANNAH MONT AIA THE MOVIE G 92.7E 0 CHECKS OR CREDIT CARDS ADM.SII PER CA r A A'a C .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN I STRATEGIC PLAN CHAP ge 468 of 524 References Cited Endnotes 1. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires that each federal agency identify and assess the effects its actions may have on historic properties. For more, see: https://www.ach-aov//protecting-historic-properties/section- 106-process/introduction-section-106. 2. National Park Service, National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Park Service (Washington, DC, 1997). Accessed 2022. 3. Arkansas Code § 14-172-202 (2020) - Purpose: 2020 Arkansas Code: US Codes and Statutes: US Law: Justia. Accessed 2022. 4. Arkansas Code § 14-172-207 (2020) - Establishment of historic districts: 2020 Arkansas Code: US Codes and Statutes: US Law: Justia. Accessed 2022. 5. "Arkansas Register of Historic Places," Arkansas Heritage, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), https://www. arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-preservation/properties/arkansas-register. Accessed 2022. 6. "Arkansas Register of Historic Places," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2021), https:// encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/arkansas-register-of-historic-places-8433/#:-:text=The%2OArkansas%20 Reg ister%20of%20Historic, the%20properties'%20rehab iIitation%20through %20grant; "Arkansas Register of Historic Places," Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Accessed 2023., https://www.arkansasheritage.com/arkansas- preservation/properties/arkansas-register. 7. "Historical Marker Program," Arkansas Heritage, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2022. https://www. arkansasheritage.com/arkansas-preservation/programs/historic-marker-program. 8. For more information on Main Street America, visit https://www.mainstreet.org/home. 9. "Tax Credits," Arkansas Heritage, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.arkansasheritage.com/ arkansas-preservation/about/rehabilitation-tax-incentives. 10. For more information on federal tax incentives, visit https://www.nps.gov/subjects/taxincentives/about.htm. 11. Donovan Rypkema and Caroline Cheong, Measuring Economic Impacts of Historic Preservation: A Report to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, (Washington, DC: University of Pennsylvania, 2011). Accessed 2023. 12. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas (Little Rock, AR: State of Arkansas, 2020). Accessed 2023. 13. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 14. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 15. "Heritage Tourism," National Trust for Historic Preservation, (Washington, DC 2014), Accessed 2023. http://www. preservation nation.org/information-center/economics-of-revital ization/heritage-tourism/#. Uz7tU 1 flvq E. 16. National Trust for Historic Preservation. Older, Smaller, Better. Measuring how the character of buildings and blocks influence urban vitality, Preservation Green Lab (Washington, DC, 2014), Accessed 2023. https://forum.savingplaces. org/connect/community-home/librarydocuments/viewdocument?DocumentKey=83ebde9b-8a23-458c-a70f- c66b46b6f714. 17. Kessler Consulting, Inc., Solid Waste Reduction Division and Recycling Master Plan, (Fayetteville, Arkansas 2016), City of Fayetteville, Accessed 2023. https://www.fayetteville-ar.gov/DocumentCenter/View/10583/Fayetteville-Master- Plan-Final?bidld=. 18. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas; Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, "Tax Credits." Accessed 2023. 19. H. Ward Jandl Anne Derry, Carol D. Shull, Jan Thorman, National Register Bulletin 24: Guidelines for Local Surveys A Basis for Preservation Planning, National Park Service (Washington, DC 1984), Accessed 2023. https://www.nps.gov/ subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB24-Complete_Partl t.pdf. 20. "QuickFacts," U.S. Census Bureau, (Washington, DC 2022), Accessed 2022. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/ tab le/littlerockcityarkansas,AR,fayetteviIlecityarkansas/POP010220. 21. U.S. Census Bureau, "QuickFacts." Accessed 2022. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 409 of 524 References Cited 22. "Assesor," Washington County, Arkansas, (Fayetteville, Arkansas 2023), Accessed 2023.https://www. washingtoncountyar.gov/government/departments-a-e/assessor. 23. Chart categorizes properties by their earliest Washington County Assessor construction date. Properties without a construction date may be developed, but missing improvement data. 24. "Fayetteville History," (Fayetteville, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.fayettevillehistory.org/. 25. FayettevilleHistory.com, "Fayetteville History." Accessed 2023. 26. FayettevilleHistory.com, "Fayetteville History." Accessed 2023. 27. Stephen Herman Dew, "The New Deal and Fayetteville, 1933-1941" (MA University of Arkansas, 1987). Accessed 2023. 28. "Fayetteville: Washington County," Encyclopedia of Arkansas, Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/Fayetteville. 29. Denele Campbell, Glimpses of Fayetteville's Past (Glimpses of Our Past) (Scotts Valley, CA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform 2014). Accessed 2023. 30. Dew, "The New Deal and Fayetteville, 1933-1941." Accessed 2023. 31. LLC Valenzuela Preservation Studio, Historic Resources Survey for the Meadow Springs Historic District (Fayetteville, AR, 2017). Accessed 2023. 32. "Before Little Rock: Successful Arkansas School Integration," (University of Arkansas, 2007), Accessed 2022. https:// news.uark.edu/articles/9136/before-little-rock-successful-arkansas-school-integration. 33. Fayetteville Historic District Commission, Historic District Commission December 2022 Meeting (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 2022); "Fayetteville, Arkansas," 2006. Accessed 2023. 34. Stewart, "Fayetteville: Washington County." Accessed 2023. 35. Anthony J. Wappel with J.B. Hogan, The Square Book: An Illustrated History of the Fayetteville Square (Salt Lake, UT: Signature Books, 2017, 2017); James A. Vizzier, Fayetteville Program for Community Renewal, (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 1968). Accessed 2023. 36. Kendall Curlee, "John G. Williams, Founder of School of Architecture, Dies at 92," (University of Arkansas, 2008), Accessed 2023. https://news.uark.edu/articles/10272/John-g-williams-founder-of-school-of-architecture-dies-at-92. 37. "John Gilbert Williams (1915-2008)," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/John-gilbert-williams-7598/. 38. Ellen Compton, "Fay Jones (1921-2004)," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.net/entries/fay-jones-447/. 39. Ellen Compton, "Fay Jones (1921-2004)." Accessed 2023. 40. Gregory Herman, "Warren Dennis Segraves (1924-1978)," Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2021), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.neVentries/warren-dennis-segraves-6745/. 41. Toms, Mason J., "Arkansas Listings in the National Register of Historic Places," The Arkansas Historical Quarterly 77, no. 2 (2008), Arkansas Historical Association, Accessed 2023. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26494892; Herman, "Warren Dennis Segraves (1924-1978)." 42. Compton, "Fay Jones (1921-2004)."; Curlee, "John G. Williams, Founder of School of Architecture, Dies at 92."; "Cyrus Sutherland," University of Arkansas, 2015, Accessed 2023, https://digitalcollections.uark.edu/digital/collection/ Cyrus; Wallack, "John Gilbert Williams (1915-2008)."; "Edward Durell Stone (1902-1978)," Central Arkansas Library System, 2022, Accessed 2023, https://encyclopediaofarkansas.neVentries/edward-durell-stone-l776/; Herman, "Warren Dennis Segraves (1924-1978)." 43. Collections, "Cyrus Sutherland." Accessed 2023. 44. "Architect Profile: James Lambeth (1942-2003)," Mid Century Modern SGF, 2022, Accessed 2023. https://www. midcenturymodernsgf.com/blog/2019/3/31 /architect-profile-james-lambeth. 45. "Thayer Ewing Shelton Memorial ID 28053161," Find A Grave, 2008, Accessed 2023. https://www.findagrave.com/ memorial/28053161 /thayer-ewi ng-shelton. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 410 of 524 References Cited 46. Thayer Ewing Shelton. School Building. Patent filed July 31, 1956. Accessed 2023. https://newspaperarchive.com/ fayetteville-northwest-arkansas-times-aug-26-1955-p-9/. 47. Pat Donat, "Fayetteville Enters New Preservation Era," Northwest Arkansas Times (Fayetteville, AR), March 28, 1975, Accessed 2023. https://www.newspapers.com/image/9298607/?terms=%22preserve%22%2B%22post%20 office%22&match=1. 48. Communication with the City of Fayetteville Department of Development Services, Historic Preservation Office, Accessed 2022. 49. Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022 Adopted Annual Budget & Work Program, (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 2022); Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2023 Adopted Annual Budget & Work Program, (Fayetteville, Arkansas: City of Fayetteville, 2023). 50. "Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse," Encyclopedia of Arkansas, Central Arkansas Library System, (Little Rock, Arkansas 2021), Accessed 2023. https://encyclopediaofarkansas.neVentries/vernon-and-moore-mcilroy- produce-warehouse-15541 /. 51. The Historic Preservation Commission, Title III, Chapter 33, Article X of the Fayetteville City Code of Ordinances, is available here: https://library.municode.com/ar/Fayetteville/codes/code_of ordinances?nodeld=CD_ORD_TITIIIAD_ CH33DEBOCOAU ARTXHIDICO. 52. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, Arkansas Certified Local Government Procedures, Arkansas Division of Heritage (Little Rock, AR: Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, 2001). Accessed 2023. 53. Arkansas CLG Procedure C.1.13: All members of the commission should be preservation -related professions, to the extent available in the community. If this requirement is not met the local government must demonstrate that it has made a reasonable effort to fill these positions with a preservation -related professional. When the commission is reviewing a matter in a discipline not represented on the commission, they shall consult with a professional who has expertise in that discipline. 54. For more information about NAPC training, visit https://www.napcommissions.ora . 55. The AHPP was unable to provide SHPO reports for the Fayetteville CLG. Self -assessment reporting completed by the City was used for analysis. The AHPP confirmed the City was in good standing with the CLG program in December 2022. Self -reporting CLG evaluations were only available for the years 2014, 2018, and 2022. 56. "Preserve America Communities." Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), Accessed 2023. https://www. achp.gov/preserve-america/community/fayetteville-arkansas. 57. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program, "Arkansas Historic Preservation Program," (State of Arkansas, 2022 2022). Accessed 2023. https://www. arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer. html?webmap=e904O629adab4l62bd21 b7dde5a5702d&extent=-95.8187,32.8399,-87.7053,36.6173. 58. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. 2022. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. State of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 59. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. 2022. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. State of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 60. See Section 2.1 for a comparison of local, state, and federal historic designations. 61. "S.3519 - Butterfield Overland National Historic Trail Designation Act," U.S. Congress, 2023, Accessed 2023. https:// www.congress.gov/bill/l 17th-congress/senate-bill/3519/titles. 62. "Nelson Hackett's Journey," The Nelson Hackett Project, University of Arkansas, 2023, Accessed 2023. https:// nelsonhackettproject.uark.edu/nelson-hacketts-journey/. 63. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) National Risk Analysis, Washington County scored relatively high for winter weather, tornadoes, and heat waves. Social vulnerability and community resilience may also be reviewed on the index website available here: Map I National Risk Index (fema.gov). 64. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 65. Joel Walsh, "Fayetteville Joins Arkansas Downtown Network," Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette (Fayetteville, Arkansas), June 14, 2014, Accessed 2023. https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2014/jun/16/fayetteville-joins-arkansas- downtown-ne/; Walsh, "Fayetteville Joins Arkansas Downtown Network."; Greg Phillips. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 411 of 524 References Cited 66. PlaceEconomics, The Impacts of Historic Preservation in Arkansas. Accessed 2023. 67. U.S. Census Bureau, "QuickFacts." Accessed 2023. 68. Personal communication with the Division of Arkansas Heritage, Accessed January 2023. 69. "QuickFacts: Asheville city, North Carolina; Lawrence city, Kansas; Fort Collins city, Colorado; Chapel Hill town, North Carolina; Boulder city, Colorado," U.S. Census Bureau (Washington, DC 2022), Accessed 2022, https://www.census. gov/quickfacts/fact/table/. 70. "Planning and Urban Design," City of Asheville. (Asheville, North Carolina 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www. ashevillenc.gov/departmenVplanning-urban-design/historic-resources/. 71. U.S. Census Bureau, "QuickFacts: Asheville city, North Carolina; Lawrence city, Kansas; Fort Collins city, Colorado; Chapel Hill town, North Carolina; Boulder city, Colorado." Accessed 2023. 72. "Planning," Town of Chapel Hill, (Chapel Hill, North Carolina 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.townofchapelhill.org/ government/departments-services/planning. 73. "Historic Preservation," City of Fort Collins, (Fort Collins, Colorado 2022), Accessed 2023. https://www.fcgov.com/ historicpreservation/fort-colIins-land marks. php. 74. "Historic Resources," City of Lawrence, (Lawrence, Kansas 2022), Accessed 2023. https://Iawrenceks.org/pds/ historic resources/. 75. McDoux Preservation LLC, City of Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Community Involvement Plan (Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022). Accessed 2023. 76. McDoux Preservation LLC, City of Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Stakeholder Interview Results (Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022). Accessed 2023. 77. McDoux Preservation LLC, City of Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Community Survey Report (Fayetteville, AR: Arkansas City of Fayetteville, 2022). Accessed 2023. 78. The Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan: Community Survey Report is available to view here: https:// www.fayetteville-ar.gov/4231 /Heritage -and -Historic -Preservation -Plan. 79. NRHP criteria and NPS standards are outlined in National Register Bulletin 15 available here: https://www.nps.aov/ subjects/nationalregister/upload/N RB-15_web508.pdf. 80. The City of San Antonio, Texas, has outlined steps for deconstruction of buildings built before 1945 outside of local historic districts and buildings built before 1960 inside local historic districts. Program materials are available here: https://www.sareuse.com/. 81. Maria Franklin et al., "Documenting U.S. State and Territorial Approaches to Black Heritage, Diversity, and Inclusion in Preservation Practices 2022," The Digital Archaeology Record (2022), Accessed 2023. https:Hdoi.org/l0.48512/ XCV8470407, https://core.tdar.org/document/470407/documenting-us-state-and-territorial-approaches-to-black- heritage-diversity-and-inclusion-in-preservation-practices-2022. 82. Maria Franklin et al., "Documenting U.S. State and Territorial Approaches to Black Heritage, Diversity, and Inclusion in Preservation Practices 2022." Accessed 2023. 83. Maria Franklin et al., "Documenting U.S. State and Territorial Approaches to Black Heritage, Diversity, and Inclusion in Preservation Practices 2022." Accessed 2023. 84. Todd Gill, "New state law bans cities from releasing HMR tax info," Fayetteville Flyer (Fayetteville, AR), August 18, 2015, Accessed 2023. https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2015/08/18/new-state-law-bans-cities-from-releasing-hmr-tax- i nfo/. 0 oto Special thanks to the City of Fayetteville, the Fayetteville Historic District Commission, the Fayetteville Black Historic Preservation Commission, community partners, and residents for their assistance in providing feedback, information, and sourcing historical photographs. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 412 of 524 References Cited images A. Village Creek State Park. 2021. "Trail of Tears." Arkansas State Parks. Accessed 2023. B. Rush, Brandon. 2020. "Poppies and old buildings on the square in Fayetteville, Arkansas." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. C. Rush, Brandon. 2013. "348 Washington Avenue, Washington -Willow Historic District, Fayetteville, Arkansas." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. D. Jr, Denis Tangney. 2018. "Fayetteville, Arkansas stock photo." istock. Accessed 2023. E. Wikipedia. 2007. "Old Main UofA." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. F. Wikipedia user: Valis55. 2015. "David and Mary Margaret Durst House.: Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. G. Morse, John. 2005. "16th Street Baptist Church." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. H. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. 2019. "Heffelfinger-Freund House." Arkansas Heritage. Accessed 2023. I. Arkansas Historic Preservation Program. "Rehabilitation Tax Credits." Arkansas Heritage. Accessed 2023. J. Meripol, Art. 1974. "Fayetteville Farmers Market." Fayetteville Flyer. https://www.fayettevilleflyer.com/2015/06/26/ photographer-unearths-1974-photos-of-fayetteville-farmers-market/. Accessed 2023. K. City of Fort Smith. 2021. "Untitled." Facebook, December 2, 2021. City of Fort Smith, Arkansas. Accessed 2023. L. Rush, Brandon. 2020. "Poppies and old buildings on the square in Fayetteville, Arkansas." Wikipedia. Accessed 2023. M. Rothstein, Arthur. 1935. "Untitled." Library of Congress. Accessed 2023. N. Unknown. 1910. "Fayetteville Frisco Depot."Encyclopedia of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. O. Press, Associated. 1954. "A Tradition Dies." Fayetteville History. Accessed 2023. R Vizzier, James A. 1968. Fayetteville, Arkansas Program for Community Renewal. City of Fayetteville. Accessed 2023. Q. Lambeth, James. 1992. Sundancing: The Art and Architecture of James Lambeth. Accessed 2023. R. Shelton, Thayer Ewing. School Building. Patent filed July 31, 1956. Accessed 2023. Shelton, Thayer Ewing. "Fayettville's New School." Northwest Arkansas Times. August 24, 1956. Accessed 2023. S. Yell, Archibald. n.d. "Waxhaws Hall." Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette. Accessed 2023. T. Good, Ken. 1970. In the Way of Progress. Fayetteville, Arkansas: Northwest Arkansas Times. Accessed 2023. U. Sutherland, Cyrus. 1992. "Archibald Yell's Law Office on the Road." Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Arkansas. Accessed 2023. V. Washington County, Arkansas. 1974. "Courthouse Steeple Replacement." Fayetteville, Arkansas: Washington County, Arkansas. Accessed 2023. W. Google Street View. 2023. Google Street View. Fayetteville, Arkansas: Google. Accessed 2023. X. Yeliseliv, Vladislay. 2015. "Woolsey Homestead." Revival Architecture, Inc. Accessed 2023. Y. U.S. Army. 1937. "Veterans Administration Medical Center." U.S. Army. Accessed 2023. Z. Unknown. Butterfield Route. Fayetteville History. Accessed 2023. AA. Raache, Hicham. 2017. "Trail of Tears to be marked with historic signs." Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 2017. Accessed 2023. https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2017/jun/05/trail-of-tears-to-be-marked-with-histor/. AB. Initiative, Equal Justice. 2021. "Historical Marker Recognizing Lynchings Dedicated in Washington County, Arkansas." Equal Justice Initiative Accessed 2023. https://eji.org/news/historical-marker-recognizing-lynchings-dedicated-in- washington-county-arkansas/. AC. Sanborn Map Company. 1886. Fayetteville, Arkansas. Library of Congress. Accessed 2023. AD. Fayetteville Public Schools. 1954. Yearbook. Fayetteville History. Accessed 2023. AE. National Park Service. Wayside Exhibits: A Guide to Developing Outdoor Interpretive Exhibits. First Edition. Harpers Ferry Center. October 2009. Accessed 2023. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/hfc/upload/Wayside-Guide-First-Edition.pdf AF. City of Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Story Maps." 2023. Accessed 2023. https://www.cambridgema.gov/GIS/ interactivemaps/Storymaps. AG."Alexander Residence (Raheen) Swimming Pool." 1978. Accessed 2023. Fay Jones Collection, Special Collections, University of Arkansas Libraries. .� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 413 of 524 0 Sol I Appendices Name Page AppendixA: Acronyms.............................................................................................92 AppendixB: Glossary................................................................................................93 Appendix C: Partnership Opportunities.........................................................96 Appendix D: Funding Opportunities.................................................................98 Appendix E: S01 Standards for Rehabilitation............................................100 Appendix F: S01 Professional Qualifications...............................................101 Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance....................................................102 Appendix H: Historic District Properties.........................................................104 Appendix I; Historic Resources Survey Plan................................................123 Figure 91. Tightrope Walker Above the Square in 1919. Page 414 of 524 Appendix A: Acronyms A&M Arkansas and Missouri Railroad A&P Advertising and Promotion Commission ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation AHPP Arkansas Historic Preservation Program ARHP Arkansas Register of Historic Places BHPC Black Heritage Preservation Commission BIPOC Black, Indigenous, and People of Color CAMP Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program CLG Certified Local Government COA Certificate of Appropriateness CFR Code of Federal Regulations DFC Downtown Fayetteville Coalition DOE Determination of Eligibility DOI Department of the Interior FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency GIS Geographic Information Systems HDC Historic District Commission HMR Hotel, Motel, Restaurant Tax HPF Historic Preservation Fund HPRG Historic Preservation Restoration Grant HTC Historic Tax Credit LGBT+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Asexual, Intersex, Queer, Questioning, etc. MPS Multiple Property Submission MSA Main Street America/Arkansas NAPC National Alliance of Preservation Commissions NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NHT National Historic Trail NPS National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NTH National Trust for Historic Preservation NWA Northwest Arkansas POS Period of Significance QRE Qualifying Rehabilitative Expenditure SRB State Review Board SHPO State Historic Preservation Office (AHPP) SOI Secretary of the Interior THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Office U of A University of Arkansas USC United States Code VA Veterans Affairs WCA Washington County Assessor .A HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPNNgIeX415 oaf 524 Appendix B: Glossary Arkansas Historic Preservation Program (AHPP) is the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for Arkansas, The AHPP State Review Board is responsible for reviewing nominations to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP). The AHPP also provides oversight and disbursement of funds for various grant programs. Arkansas Register of Historic Places (ARHP) is the state equivalent of the NRHP. The state register is less stringent than the NRHP, providing an alternative designation for historic properties. The AHPP manages the ARHP and determines eligibility for inclusion. Black Heritage Preservation Commission (BHPC) is a seven -member body created to recognize, acknowledge, protect, and preserve historical resources and cemeteries associated with Black ethnic heritage, with special regard for Fayetteville's early Black families and individuals and the churches and other cultural resources they built. The BHPC is responsible for erecting historical markers for places of Black history and heritage. Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is a legal permit petitioned by a property owner in a local historic district to complete alterations to a contributing resource in said district. The COA process is administered by the City's Historic District Commission (HDC) and typically requires the review of applicable design guidelines and submission of documents/plans for approval. Certified Local Government (CLG) is a government certified through national standards to manage local historic preservation initiatives. The CLG program was established in 1980 by Congress and is administered by the National Park Service (NPS) and the corresponding SHPO. City of Fayetteville, or City, is the local government of the municipality of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The use of the term City (uppercase) is differentiated from city (lowercase) which refers to the city's history, landscape, and geography. Contributing Resource is a historic resource that adds to the historic value of a district. The opposite of a contributing resource is a Noncontributing Resource which does not add value because of a lack of historic significance, alterations, or nonhistoric-age. Deconstruction is the act of removing building materials intact during demolition. This process aims to reuse and repurpose salvaged materials rather than discarding them for landfill. Designation is the official recognition status of a property or district's historic significance, These designations may be mostly honorary (federal and state) or have special protections (local ordinance historic district). Design Guidelines are specific design principles and recommendations one should follow when making changes or completing construction in a local historic district, The guidelines ensure that proposed changes are appropriate in the context of the local historic district. Easement is a legal protection for properties where covenants restrict certain property rights. The AHPP Conservation Easement program protects buildings from demolition through this legal restriction. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APP�age 416 of 524 Historic pertains to resources that have an official local, state, and/or federal designation(s). Historic -age are resources that are at least 45 to 50 years old. The opposite of historic -age is nonhistoric-age, which includes resources that are less than 45 years old. Historical pertains to resources that do not have an official local, state, or federal designation but are significant to the culture. It may also be used to describe "historical" maps or imagery, or an older house that does not have a historic designation. Historic Preservation is the identification, evaluation, recordation, documentation, curation, acquisition, protection, management, rehabilitation, restoration, stabilization, maintenance, research, interpretation, and conservation of historic properties, or education and training regarding the foregoing activities. Historic District Commission (HDC) is the legal body responsible for administering the COA process in Fayetteville, administering nominations for local historic districts and the NRHP, and providing comment and direction on the City's historic preservation program. Historic Preservation Fund (HPF) is a program funded by oil and gas lease revenues per the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, as amended, to assist in matching grants-in-aid for various historic preservation programs and projects. Historic Preservation Officer or Planner is the staff role of managing a historic preservation program and the executive secretary of the HDC. This program manager role is currently being filled by the Long Range & Preservation Planner with oversight from the Long -Range Planning & Special Projects Manager. Historic Integrity is a concept used to evaluate the significance of a historical resource. The resource must retain integrity of seven aspects; materials, workmanship, design, feeling, location, setting, and association. Ideally, the resource must retain some if not all of these aspects to be considered eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Historic Resources Survey, or Architectural Survey, is a planned process of identifying, evaluating, and documenting historical resources within a specific survey area. Local Ordinance District or Local Historic District is a historic district created by a municipality by the enactment of an ordinance for a specific area. Local historic districts include more than one contributing resource and often encompass neighborhoods. In Fayetteville, local historic districts are regulated by the City and HDC; in contrast, NRHP historic districts are largely honorary and only regulated when federal funds are used. Main Street Arkansas is a state -level program of the Main Street America program, sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Main Street communities receive funding and support opportunities from the AHPR .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPEagIeX417 Of 524 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is the legislation that created the National Register of Historic Places and expanded federal review to include the survey, identification, and documentation of historic properties of projects funded by the federal government. Section 106 of the NHPA requires federal agencies to identify and assess the effects its actions may have on historic properties. National Historic Trail (NHT) is a National Park Service program that documents, programs, and preserves more than 25,000 miles of linear trail networks. National Park Service (NPS) is the federal agency within the Department of the Interior (DOI) that administers the NRHP, in addition to administering the nation's national parks and other sites. National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) is a federally -maintained list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. NRHP Historic District is composed of districts sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. Property Type are groupings of properties defined by common physical and associative attributes. Public Private Partnerships (PPP) seek to complete projects or tasks using time and expenses approach to reduce expenses and improve project outcomes based on private expertise, Secretary of the Interior (SOI) is the executive official appointed by the President of the United States to administer the Department of the Interior (DOI, which includes the NPS). The SOI Standards for Rehabilitation are official guidelines for professional qualifications and for the categorization and methodology of preservation, rehabilitation, restoration, and reconstruction of historic buildings. SOI Professional Qualifications are federal standards published in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 36 CFR Part 61 to provide a standard baseline of professional requirements for professions in the cultural resource management field. Section 106 is stipulated in the NHPA as the federal review process for historic resources. This legislation requires federal agencies to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties and is generally triggered by a federal action such as federal agency's finding, licensing, permit, or approval, State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) is the state historic preservation program. Each SHPO has a State Historic Preservation Officer. In Arkansas, the AHPP fulfills the role as SHPO, .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPEagIeX418 Of 524 Appendix C: Partnership Opportunities Name Type of Organization Potential Areas of Expertise Potential Partnerships Arkansas Air and Military Museum Aviation, Military History Programming Museum Arkansas Historical Organization Historic Preservation Networking Association Local History Arkansas Historic Agency Historic Preservation Programming, Preservation Program Arkansas/National Registers Designations Arkansas Municipal League League Grants, Local Government Grants The Art Gallery at NWA Mall Museum Exhibit Curation Programming Black Historic Preservation Commission Black History Education, Designation, Commission Programming Black Action Collective Organization Black History Education, Designation, Programming Botanical Garden of the Museum Landscape Design, Plants Programming Ozarks Clinton House Museum Museum Political History Programming Crystal Bridges Museum of Museum Art History/Conservation, Art Conservation, American Art Exhibit Curation Regional Programming Dickson Street Merchants Organization Economic Development Main Street Arkansas Events, Tourism Programming Experience Fayetteville City Department Economic Development, Main Street Arkansas Tourism Programming Fayetteville Chamber Nonprofit Economic Development Main Street Arkansas Programming Fayetteville History Blog Local History Education, Programming Fayetteville Farmers Market Community Events Events Organization Fayetteville Forward Historic Community Local History Community Activism and Heritage Resource Action Organization Group Fayetteville Natural Heritage Nonprofit I Land Preservation, Education, Programming Association Historic Sites Mapping Fayetteville Public Library Agency Archives, Local History Education, Programming Fayetteville Public Schools Agency Community Engagement Education Fayetteville Senior Activity & Agency Community Engagement Community Activism, Wellness Center Local History Education, Programming Friends of the East Mountain Community Black History, Cemetery Education, Programming Cemetery Organization Preservation Habitat for Humanity ReStore Charity Salvaging Materials Donations of Washington County Headquarters House Museum Museum Local History Education, Programming Historic District Commission Commission Designations, Local History Community Activism Designation KUAF Public Radio Media Community Engagement Education The Nature Conservancy, Nonprofit Easements, Land :9:1 Easements Fayetteville Conservation :r� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPNDI 4�9 6of 524 Name Type of Organization Potential Areas of Expertise Potential Partnerships Neighborhood Associations Community Designations, Local History Community Activism (in Fayetteville) Organization Northwest Arkansas Nonprofit Black History, Education Programming African American Heritage F Association, Inc. I Northwest Arkansas Heritage Nonprofit Historic Trails, Local History, Programming Trail Partners Designations Northwest Arkansas Land Nonprofit Easements, Land Preservation Networking Trust Prairie Grove Heritage Museum Local History Programming, Museum Designations Shiloh Museum of Ozark Museum Exploration/Settlement Grants History History Washington County Historical Preservation Community Engagement, Programming Society Historic Preservation The Wilson Art Museum Museum Art History/Conservation Education, Designation, Programming Trail of Tears Association Organization History Education, Designation, Programming University of Arkansas University Community Engagement Programming U of A Fay Jones School of University College Architecture, Community & Education, Programming Architecture and Design Regional Planning, Design U of A Fulbright College of University College Archaeology, History Education, Programming Arts & Sciences U of A Community Design University Architecture, Design Design Assistance Center U of A Museum Museum University History Programming VA Medical Center - Agency Military/Medical History Education Fayetteville Washington County Fair County Fair Agriculture History, Events, Programming Fairgrounds History :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPNDDIIX4�0 7 N524 Appendix D: Funding Opportunities Funding opportunities are categorized below based on federal, state, and local/regional sources. Most of these grants are recurring annually, but it is possible for grants to change over time, become decommissioned, or institute new requirements, Therefore, it is recommended the City conduct research on each grant opportunity to determine the best path forward for funding projects, Federal Incentives Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program NPS oversight; tax credit of 20 percent of qualified expenditures; applies to income - producing properties only (https://www.nps,gov/tps/tax-incentives,htm) Federal Grants African American Civil Rights Grants* Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)* Disaster Recovery Grants Emergency Supplemental HPF History of Equal Rights Grant Opportunity* Save America's Treasures Tribal Historic Preservation Office Grant* Underrepresented Community Grants* Additional NPS Grants geared towards specific properties/projects State Grants AHPP County Courthouse Restoration Grant AHPP Historic Marker Program Grants AHPP CLG Grants (Funded by the NPS HPF)* AHPP Downtown Revitalization Grants Available to Downtown Network, Main Street Arkansas cities AHPP Historic Preservation Restoration Grant Option 1; Grants up to $10,000 to fund renovation and restoration projects that make properties eligible for nomination to the NRHP. 1) These grants are available to non-profit, local government, and private property owners. 2) Eligible properties must be listed on the ARHP or identified as noncontributing structures in an NRHP historic district. 3) The project must restore architectural features that will make the property eligible for the NRHP, 4) Grant recipients may apply for Option 2 funding in subsequent years. Requires a 2:1 match from the grantee. Option 2; Grants of $10,000 or more are available to fund approved restoration projects for properties currently listed on the National Register of Historic Places, 1) These grants are available to nonprofit and local government. Private property owners are not eligible for Option 2 grant funding. 2) Any owner receiving Option 2 grant funds must sign and file an easement agreement before grant funds are released (see page 12). 3) Option 2 recipients may also re -apply for additional funding in subsequent years, These grants require an easement to be donated to AHPP, Requires a 2:1 match from the grantee. Option 3; Grants of $5,000 to $9,999 for approved restoration projects for cemeteries listed on the NRHP. Recipients must provide a 20 percent match, 50 percent of which may be in -kind materials, services, and/or labor. This is a 4 to 1 match with AHPP, Arkansas Arts Council Grants Curtis H, Sykes Memorial Grant Program* :� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPNDDIIX4�1 8 N524 State and Local Incentives Arkansas Rehabilitation State tax credit of 25 percent of eligible expenditures; costs must have a minimum Tax Credits; Owner- investment of $5,000. There is a maximum cap of credit value of $25,000. Properties may be Occupied individually listed, contributing to an existing historic district, and deemed eligible for listing following the rehabilitation to be eligible for the state historic tax credit. The projects must follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Arkansas Rehabilitation State tax credit of up to 25 percent of eligible expenditures; costs have a minimum Tax Credits; Income- investment of $25,000. There is a maximum cap of credit value of $400,000. Properties may Producing be individually listed, contributing to an existing historic district, and deemed eligible for listing following the rehabilitation to be eligible for the state historic tax credit. The projects must follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Nonprofit Funding Sources National Funding African American Cultural Heritage Action Fund (NTHP)* Sources Clinton Foundation* Cynthia Woods Mitchell Fund for Historic Interiors (NTHP)** National Trust Emergency/Intervention Funding (NTHP) Hart Family Fund for Small Towns (NTHP) Johanna Favrot Fund for Historic Preservation (NTHP)** National Trust Preservation Funds* Shell Oil Company Foundation* Local and Regional Arkansas Black Hall of Fame Foundation* Funding Sources Arkansas Municipal League Benefit Programs Carpet One Floor & Home Greening of Arkansas Grants Program J.B. Hunt Company Giving* Northwest Arkansas Community Foundation* Preserve Arkansas Services Sunderland Foundation Grants* Tyson Foods Corporate Sponsorships* Union Pacific Foundation* Walmart Northwest Arkansas Giving Program* Willard & Pat Walker Charitable Foundation *Potential for funding historic resources surveys and/or historic context development. There is the possibility an agreement could be made with certain local sources for funding surveys and development of historic contexts. **Requires work to be completed on an NHL. Hotel, Motel, Restaurant Tax Since 1977, revenue from the Hotel, Motel, Restaurant (HMR) Tax (Arkansas Code §26-75-606) has been a tool for Fayetteville84 HMR taxes (2 percent sales) are split evenly between the Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Department and Advertising and Promotion (A&P) Commission. One percent of the HMR tax is used for the following tasks; • Advertising and promotion purposes; • Convention center construction and upkeep; • Operation of a visitor center or for other tourist promotion facilities; • Funding staffing for the A&P Commission; • Funding the arts; • Operation of tourist -oriented facilities, and; • Construction and maintenance activities for public recreation facilities and bond payment. The City may appropriate the sales revenue to the aforementioned activities, but they are not permitted to use these funds for capital improvements that differ from the ones mentioned above, operational costs, and/or for civic groups and the chamber of commerce. :r� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPNNDDIIX4�2 9 524 Appendix E: Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards for Rehabilitation The Secretary of the Interior (SOI) Standards for Rehabilitation, commonly referred to as the SOI Standards, are official guidelines for professional qualifications and on the categorization and methodology of preservation. Note the SOI Standards for Rehabilitation provide a basis for rehabilitation efforts. The White Hangar Local Historic District includes specifications for certain materials and features in addition to these standards. 1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships, 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided. 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken. 4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved. 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced, Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. 7 Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible, Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used, 8. Archaeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APP�l 413 'of 524 Appendix F: SOI Professional Qualifications The following are the Secretary of the Interior Professional Qualifications (36 CFR Part 61). History The minimum professional qualifications in history are a graduate degree in history or closely related field; or a bachelor's degree in history or closely related field plus one of the following: • At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, teaching, interpretation, or other demonstrable professional activity with an academic institution, historic organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or • Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of history. Architectural History The minimum professional qualifications in architectural history are a graduate degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation, or closely related field, with coursework in American architectural history, or a bachelor's degree in architectural history, art history, historic preservation, or closely related field plus one of the following: • At least two years of full-time experience in research, writing, or teaching in American architectural history or restoration architecture with an academic institution, historical organization or agency, museum, or other professional institution; or • Substantial contribution through research and publication to the body of scholarly knowledge in the field of American architectural history. Historic Architecture The minimum professional qualifications in historic architecture are a professional degree in architecture or a state license to practice architecture, plus one of the following: At least one year of graduate study in architectural preservation, American architectural history, preservation planning, or closely related field, or At least one year of full-time professional experience on historic preservation projects, Architecture The minimum professional qualifications in architecture are a professional degree in Architecture plus at least two years of full-time experience in architecture; or a state license to practice architecture. Archaeology The minimum professional qualifications in archaeology are a graduate degree in archaeology, anthropology, or closely related field plus: At least one year of full-time professional experience or equivalent specialized training in archaeological research, administration, or management; At least four months of supervised field and analytic experience in general North American archaeology, and Demonstrated ability to carry research to completion, In addition to these minimum qualifications, a professional in prehistoric archaeology shall have at least one year of full-time professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources of the prehistoric period. A professional in historic archaeology shall have at least one year of full-time professional experience at a supervisory level in the study of archaeological resources of the historic period. .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APP�age 414 ld524 Appendix G: Historical Markers Guidance Historical markers are an effective method of providing orientation to a significant historical resource, Markers can be related to a particular historical event, an important individual, sacred site, or notable building, structure, or object. In addition to state historical markers which are administered by the AHPP, the City is developing another program for local markers celebrating and recognizing history in Fayetteville, Both BHPC and HDC have a role in establishing historical markers. Historical Markers The process for approving historical markers can be organized by the following steps: eligibility, application, approval (or denial), and erection of the marker itself. Baseline steps for the historical marker process is outlined below. Eligibility Criteria The marker must fulfill at least one of the following parameters: 1. A historical event that happened at least 50 years ago, 2. A significant person who has passed away at least 50 years ago or has contributed to the community at least 50 years ago. (i.e., Jane Smith died in 1973 or Jane Smith was the first Black woman to be mayor in or before 1973). 3, A historical place (site, building, object, structure) that is at least 50 years old. Application Process 1, Complete an application form detailing the purpose and need for the historical marker, and ensuring the proposed marker meets eligibility criteria. 2. Draft a statement of significance for the historical marker topic. The statement should include referenced data and information in bibliographic format (Chicago citation style). 3. Submit the application with a fee for approval, Approval Process 1, The applicable historic commission or both historic commissions will review the application at their commission meeting, The applicant should be present for the meeting to present their case for the historical marker. 2. If denied, the staff and the commissions may work with the applicant in correcting their application or refining their proposed topic. 3. If approved, the commission(s) would request a formal draft text for the historical marker. The applicant will be allotted 90 days to draft the marker text. The marker draft should be approximately 200 to 300 words and should include a title for the marker. 4. Once resubmitted, the HDC and/or BHPC and Historic Preservation staff will review the draft and work with the applicant to develop a final draft. Erection of the Marker 1, Once approved, staff will order the marker to be manufactured. 2. The City may work to facilitate the siting of the maker if it is placed on public property. Implementation .VA HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPEagIeX4�5 16f2524 Alternative Methods There are many ways to express and share history in the built environment, as well as virtually. Formal historical markers are expensive and require more time for approval, therefore other methods of recognizing history should also be explored by the BHPC, HDC, and the City. Below is a list of additional options that may be explored in addition to formal historical marker programs: Informational Panels Informational panels that include imagery and text. Panels often accompany historical sites and complexes that require additional orientation of public history through detailed text and images. National Park Service informational panel design is used frequently in national parks and other NPS sites as a way to clearly convey history and the environment. Online Tools Online map portal for crowdsourced story submissions. Examples include: There's A Story Here developed by the City of San Antonio. This website provides users the opportunity to share their own personal stories that celebrate their upbringing and cultural heritage in San Antonio. Texas Freedom Colonies Atlas developed by Dr. Andrea Roberts. This crowdsourced interactive map fact -checks user -submissions about freedom colonies and other significant Black communities in Texas. Virtual walking tour with map and points of interest. Virtual walking tours can be explored virtually or in -person, and are equipped with an interactive map, images, and/or audio media. A traditional map with interactive points (Wake Forest, North Carolina). A story map platform with a short narrative and data points (Hart Island, New York City). Audio storytelling with imagery (Longmont, Colorado). This example provides virtual tours for downtown, Latino, and Women's history. Various story maps depicting legacy businesses and Black, LGBT+, and women histories (Cambridge, Massachusetts). Video recordings of walking tour stops (Baltimore National Heritage Area). Y v aN y Y 36 x 48 uDnght; tiRis Zion National Park Figure 92. NPS informational panels. Source: National Park Service lr< Maria Baldwin (32 Sacramento St)-� ru L,iur IYIAM'in v:u �n. hr,ame�rrr of,hr A;.su, tremmnr xnow �n t,mhr;agr. mr rm, i_,� arno. nm.n<,nronma..rn. C \ romptr,.a c.mnr;aR�.m,rn.r mne p.otnmmfeRi hm n.. � ;y`s� rearvnl.n eppomunm�m,e,rn a, Figure 93. Story Map. Source: City of Cambridge, Massachusetts :� HERITAGE &HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPage"4�6 69?524 Appendix H: Historic District Properties The following tables include a list of property addresses in NRHP and local historic districts in Fayetteville as of 2023. Historic Districts Local Historic District Name Year Listed Significance White Hangar 2008 Local NRHP Historic Districts Name Year Listed Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Washington -Willow Historic District 1980 A, C Architecture Local Community Planning Economics Education Law Fayetteville Veterans Administration 1980 A, C Architecture State Hospital District Health/Medicine Politics/Government Mount Nord Historic District 1982 A, C Architecture Local Commerce Politics/Government Wilson Park Historic District 1995 C Architecture Local West Dickson Street Commercial 2007 A, C Architecture Local Historic District Commerce University of Arkansas Campus 2009 A, C Architecture State Historic District Education Butterfield Overland Mail Route 2009 A Transportation State Fayetteville Segments Historic District Mount Sequoyah Cottages Historic 2012 A Religion State District Meadow Springs Historic District 2019 A, C Architecture Local Community Planning Benjamin Franklin Johnson II 2019 A, C Architecture Local Homestead District Agriculture North Garvin Drive Historic District 2021 C Architecture Local �� HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN Page 427 of 524 Historic District Properties Local Historic District White Hangar Local Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0792 White Hangar White Hangar at Drake Field 4290 S, School Ave I No style NRHP Historic District Benjamin Franklin Johnson II Homestead District NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0345 Ben Johnson Barn Johnson Barn 3150 W Pear Lane Craftsman WA1691 Benjamin Johnson II House Johnson House 3150 W Pear Lane Craftsman N/A Chicken House N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Spring House N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Dam N/A 3150 W Pear Lane N/A N/A Rock walls N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Cistern N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Pergola N/A 3150 W Pear Lane No style N/A Workhouse foundation Site of the former Workhouse 3150 W Pear Lane N/A N/A Orchard Site of the Orchard 3150 W Pear Lane N/A Butterfield Overland Route, Fayetteville Segment NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0975 Butterfield Overland Mail Route Butterfield Route Segment 1 West of Old Missouri Road N/A WA0976 Butterfield Overland Mail Route Butterfield Route Segment 2 West of Old Missouri Road N/A Fayetteville Veterans Affairs Hospital NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Name Address Style WA1207 Main Hospital Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1208 Dining Hall and Attendants' Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1209 I Recreation Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1205 I Nurses' Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1210 Director's Residence 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1211 Duplex Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1212 Duplex Quarters 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1202 Storehouse and Garage Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1201 Laundry Building 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1200 Boiler Plant 1100 N College Ave No Style WA1199 I Seamstress Building 1100 N College Ave No Style N/A I Flag pole 1100 N College Ave N/A WA1204 I Garage 1100 N College Ave No Style WA1206 Gatehouse 1100 N College Ave Colonial Revival WA1193 Connecting Corridor (Res 1 to 3) 1100 N College Ave N/A N/A Front Gateposts 1100 N College Ave N/A WA1059 Elliptical Lawn and Main Drive 1100 N College Ave N/A :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPage"4�8 of 524 Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0195 Vest, John S House N/A 21 N West Ave Gothic Revival/ Carpenter WA0122 Thomsen, Fred, House N/A 202 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional WA0137 Hanks, Otto B., House N/A 314 W Spring St Craftsman WA1260 Hillcrest Towers N/A 1 N School Ave Brutalist WA1547 Apartment Complex At Mullis Apartment 201 N Locust St Contemporary 201 N. Locust WA1555 Building At 203 W. Spring NWA Center For Equality 203 W Spring St Contemporary Street WA1556 Doctor's Building Mid -South Training 241 W Spring St Century Standard Academy/W-R Hair Salon/ Commercial Shin Dig Papiere WA1558 Brown, Oliver, House N/A 309 W Spring St Folk Victorian WA1559 Shook, Earl, House Therapy Tree 311 W Spring St Craftsman WA1567 Hansard, John C., House N/A 103 N School Ave Plain/Traditional WA1568 Feathers, John, House Apartments At 109 N. 109 N School Ave Folk Victorian School Avenue WA1570 House At 116 N. School N/A 116 N School Ave Folk Victorian Avenue WA1571 Apartments At 110 N. N/A 110 N School Ave Contemporary School Avenue WA1573 House At 322 W. Meadow Vacant Lot 322 W Meadow St N/A Street WA1574 House At 320 W. Meadow N/A 320 W Meadow St Craftsman Street WA1575 Workshop At Shipley Tanner McGinty Workshop 101-B N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Alley WA1576 House At 304 W. Meadow Bill D. Stiles House 304 W Meadow St Queen Anne/ Street Eastlake WA1577 Farmer, Elizabeth, House Tanner Mcginty House 101 N Locust Ave Craftsman WA1579 Harris Dental Clinic Ross Dental Clinic 106 N Locust Ave Century Standard Commercial WA1582 Head, James A., House Apartments At 202 W. 202 W Meadow St Contemporary Meadow Street WA1595 Apartments At 309-311 W. N/A 309-311 W Meadow St Contemporary Meadow Street WA1596 House At 327 W. Meadow N/A 327 W Meadow St Contemporary Street WA1601 Mitchell, Owen C., House Austin, Brenda H., House 413 W Center St Folk Victorian WA1602 House At 415 W. Center N/A 415 W Center St Other Street WA1605 Briggans, Williams, House Satkarm & Teresa Pictor 16 S West Ave Craftsman House, The Mystic Melon WA1607 Andy's Drive -In Lynn & Joel Carver Center 9 S School Ave Contemporary Restaurant For Public Radio (Kuaf) WA1613 Apartment Complex At Feather's Cottage 109 N School Ave Contemporary 109 N. School Avenue Apartments :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPage"4�9 of524 Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA1614 House At 224 W. Meadow Parking Lot 224 W Meadow St N/A Street WA1620 House At 10 N. School N/A 10 N School Ave Other Avenue WA1621 House At 314 W. Center N/A 314 W Center St Other Street WA1622 House At 320 W. Center N/A 320 W Center St Other Street WA1623 House At 5 S. School N/A 5 S School Ave Other Avenue WA1624 House At 402 W. Parking Lot 400 W Mountain St N/A Mountain Street WA0054 Tharp, Moses B., House Besom, Robert B., 15 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake House WA0055 House At 11 N. West Tolley & Brooks Law 11 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake Avenue Firm WA0056 Simpson, William W„ N/A 5 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake House WA0123 Alvin Jones House N/A 206 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional WA0124 House At 210 N, Locust N/A 210 N Locust Ave Craftsman Avenue WA0125 House At 212 N. Locust N/A 212 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Avenue WA0126 House At 216 N. Locust N/A 216 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Avenue WA0127 House At 224 N. Locust N/A 224 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional Avenue WA0135 Cook, Jacob M., House N/A 207 N Locust Ave Bungalow WA0136 Bell, John P., House N/A 201 N Locust Dy Craftsman WA0138 Clarence Marshall House N/A 318 W Spring St Craftsman WA0167 Marshall's Grocery The High Roller 322 W Spring St 20th Century Standard Cyclery Commercial WA1237 House At 315 West N/A 315 W Center St Folk Victorian Center Street WA1238 House At 321 West N/A 321 W Center St American Foursquare Center Street WA1242 House At 50 South N/A 50 S School Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake School Street WA1243 Roberts, John C„ House N/A 320 W Mountain St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA1554 Warbritton, Othel, House Boyd Law Firm 121 W Spring St Plain/Traditional WA1557 House At 301 W. Spring N/A 301 W Spring St Craftsman Street WA1560 Jeffries, Paul, House Apartments At 313 313 W Spring St Craftsman W. Spring Street WA1561 Bond, Samford H., House Aspire Solutions 323 W Spring St Prairie Style WA1562 Alburty, Ada, House Doss Law Firm 121 N East Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake WA1564 House At 418 W. Meadow Lushbaugh Law 418 W Meadow St Folk Victorian Street Firm :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRage4iO 0F524 Meadow Spring NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address I Style WA1565 House At 416 W. Meadow Street N/A 416 W Meadow St Craftsman WA1566 House At 414 W. Meadow Street Steven Flemming Tax Service 414 W Meadow St Plain/Traditional WA1572 House At 102 N. School Avenue N/A 102 N School Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA1578 Couch, Fred T, House The Bungalow Salon 115 N Locust Ave Plain/Traditional WA1580 House At 230 W. Meadow Street Juli Dorrough House 230 W Meadow St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA1581 Hays House Meadow Street Suites 204 W Meadow St Plain/Traditional WA1583 Putman, W. B., House Lisa Lashley Higgins, CPA - Lashley Building 111 N Church Ave Spanish/Mission Revival WA1584 Faller, John W., House N/A 117 N Church Ave Craftsman WA1585 Smiley, Frank, House N/A 114 N Church Ave Craftsman WA1586 Mintun, Arthur R., House N/A 110 N Church Ave Minimal Traditional WA1587 Dr. David C. Roberts House N/A 124 W Meadow St Colonial Revival WA1588 Read Apartments N/A 110 W Meadow St Art Moderne WA1589 Whiddon, William T, House N/A 215 W Meadow St Shingle Style WA1590 Chandler, James, House N/A 217 W Meadow St Praire Style WA1591 Meadow Apartments N/A 219 W Meadow St Art Moderne WA1592 House At 24 N. Locust Avenue N/A 24 N Locust Ave Folk Victorian WA1593 House At 20 N. Locust Avenue I N/A 20 N Locust Ave I Folk Victorian WA1594 Peel, Frank W., House N/A 21 N Locust Ave I Craftsman WA1597 House At 14 N. School Avenue Klinger, Timothy C., House 14 N School Ave Craftsman WA1598 Harris, Sarah H., House N/A 21 N West Ave Italianate/Italianate Villa WA1599 Walkers Cleaners N/A 20 N School Ave Century Standard Commercial WA1600 Rushing Plumbing & Heating N/A 16 N School Ave Century Standard Commercial WA1603 House At 419 W. Center Street Gary Fast & Michael Hill House 419 W Center St Craftsman WA1606 Busey, Ethel L., House Joetta Harriman House 414 W Mountain St Craftsman WA1608 Fayetteville Floor Co. Gary's Hairbenders 7 S School Ave 20th Century Standard Commercial WA1612 Apartment Complex At 164 N. Shipley Alley Phelan Apartments 164 N Shipley Alley Contemporary WA1551 Weber, Nora, House N/A 226 N Locust Ave I English Revival WA1569 House At 115 N. School Avenue I N/A 115 N School Ave Plain/Traditional WA1604 Keller, Frank M., House I N/A 12 S West Ave Craftsman WA0196 Stapleton, Orin, House N/A 216 W Spring St Plain/Traditional :rrW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPage4J31 0P524 Mount Nord NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0404 Pritchard House Triangle House 1 W Mt Nord St Neoclassical WA0406 Bohart-Huntington House Huntington House 2 W Mt Nord St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA0407 Gulley House Harrison House 3 W Mt Nord St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA0408 Lawsen House Block House 4 W Mt Nord St Colonial Revival WA0405 Mock-Fulbright House Hall House 5 W Mt Nord St Neoclassical Mount Nord NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA1131 N/A Cottage #1 1810 E Skyline Dr No style WA1132 N/A Cottage #2 808 E Skyline Dr No style North Gavin NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name I Address Style Unknown N/A House at 15 N Gavin Dr 15 N Gavin Dr Contemporary Unknown Preston Magruder House #1 House at 37 N Gavin Dr 37 N Gavin Dr Contemporary Unknown Cole House House at 49 N Gavin Dr 49 N Gavin Dr Contemporary Unknown Cole House Carport Carport at 49 N Gavin Dr 49 N Gavin Dr Contemporary University of Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0001 Old Main, U of A University Hall 459 N Campus Walk Second Empire WA0031 Vol Walker Hall University Library 459 N Campus Walk Classical Revival WA0038 Geology Building (razed ca. 2011) Old Geology Building; Ordark Building 902 W Dickson St Art Deco WA0058 Carnall, Ella Hall Inn at Carnall Hall 465 Arkansas Ave Colonial Revival WA0059 Agri Hall; Home EC. Building; Univ Infirmary Agri Engineering Agricultural Annex 935 W Maple St Colonial Revival WA0081 Engineering Hall John White Jr. Hall 770 W Dickson St Collegiate Gothic WA0084 Agriculture Building I N/A 475 N Campus Walk Collegiate Gothic WA0086 Peabody Hall N/A 763 W Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0087 Army ROTC Building Women's Gymnasium 775 W Maple St Classical Revival WA0117 Home Economics Building Human Environmental Sciences Building 987 W Maple St Collegiate Gothic WA0141 Student Union Memorial Hall; Futrell Hall 480 N Campus Walk Collegiate Gothic WA0347 Ozark Hall; Classroom Building Business Admin Bldg, Gearhart Hall; Graduate School 340 N Campus Dr Other WA0348 Chi Omega Greek Theatre Greek Theatre 980 W Dickson St Classical Revival WA0349 Chemistry Building Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry 345 N Campus Dr Collegiate Gothic WA0350 Men's Gymnasium; Field House Jim & Joyce Faulkner Performing Arts Center 453 Garland Ave Collegiate Gothic WA0930 Fine Arts Building Fine Arts Center 340 Garland Ave International :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPa'gge 412 of 524 University of Arkansas Campus NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0931 Sigma Nu Fraternity House Phoenix House 348 Arkansas Ave International WA0984 Chemistry Building; Psychology & Geography Building Academic Support Building 470 N Campus Walk Italianate WA0985 Razorback Hall Gibson Hall 1050 W Dickson St Collegiate Gothic WA0986 Razorback Annex Gibson Annex 300 N Mcllroy Ave Collegiate Gothic WA0987 Delta Gamma Sorority House University House; Phi Mu Sorority House 1002 W Maple St Other WA0988 Davis Hall Law Center Annex; Phi Mu Sorority House 1030 W Maple St Colonial Revival WA0989 Gregson Hall CLASS+ 301 Garland Ave Collegiate Gothic WA0990 Holcombe Hall Holcombe Hall Dormitory 550 Garland Ave Colonial Revival WA0991 Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity House Pike House 320 N Arkansas Ave Century Modern WA0992 Science Engineering Auditorium -Hillside Auditorium 902 W Dickson St Other WA0993 Science Building Science D Building; Discovery Hall 435 Garland Ave New Formalism WA0994 Graduate Education Building College of Education and Health Professions 751 W Maple St Mid-20th Century Modern WA0995 Mullins Library David W. Mullins Library 365 N Mcllroy Ave Other WA1169 Arkansas Union (East Half Of Building) Union Building 435 Garland Ave Other WA1170 George & Boyce Billingsly Music Building Billingsly Building 377 N Mcllroy Ave Other WA1172 Daniel E. Ferritor Hall Ferritor Hall 319 N Campus Walk Other WA1173 Science Engineering Building Science and Engineering Hall 850 W Dickson St Other WA1174 Bell Engineering Center Bell Center 800 W Dickson St Brutalism WA1175 Plant Science Building Plant Sciences 475 N Campus Walk Brutalism WA1176 Rosen, Harry R., Alternative Pest Control Center Rosen Center 979 W Maple St Other WA1177 Watermann Hall Leflar Law Center 1045 W Maple St International/ Other �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPa'gge 413 Of 524 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0468 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Edmiston House 309-311 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0467 Harris House Koeppe House 305 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0469 Connor -Hight House Thompson House 315 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0470 Cravens -Lewis House Lewis House 327 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0471 Stringfellow -Read House Long House 329 N Washington Ave Colonial Revival WA0472 Bozarth House McNair House 339 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0473 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hiemenez House 347 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0474 Harding House Newbern House 357 N Washington Ave I Greek Revival WA0475 Harding House Newbern House 403 N Washington Ave I Other WA0476 Albright -Conner- Winchester House Hoffman House 409 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0477 Earle-Wiggans-Wilkinson House Owings House 415 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0480 McChesney House Jones House 429 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0490 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Suttle House 504 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0492 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hunt House 432 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0495 Sherman -Hook -Douglas House Daniel House 416 N Washington Ave Bungalow WA0478 McConnell House Owings House 419 N Washington Ave I Craftsman WA0479 Pierce House Bunch House 427 N Washington Ave I Bungalow WA0481 Mayes -Lewis House Bumpass House 435 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0482 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Jenkins House 503 N Washington Ave I Plain/Traditional WA0483 Simmons House Stanberry House 505 N Washington Ave Bungalow WA0484 Lang House Lunsford House 513 N Washington Ave Other WA0485 Davies House Shea House 523 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0486 Cravens -Pearson House Thomas House 525 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0487 Mayes -Carlisle House Rhodes House 531 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0488 Perry -Davidson House Reis House 530 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0489 Finch -Stone House Hunnicutt House 520 N Washington Ave Italianate Villa WA0491 Norman House Herriman House 502 N Washington Ave I Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0493 Perkins House Newbern House 428 N Washington Ave Bungalow WA0494 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Murray House 422 N Washington Ave Greek Revival WA0498 Frost House Lesh House 356 N Washington Ave Greek Revival :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa°ge 414 011524 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0502 Collier House Smith House 326 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0507 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Harrington House 315 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0510 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Patrick House 309-311 N Washington Ave Plain/Traditional WA0512 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Alexander House 409 N Willow Ave Other WA0496 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Newbern House 410 N Washington Ave Craftsman WA0499 Williams House Mathias House 348 N Washington Ave Greek Revival WA0501 Mcllroy House Patrick House 322 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0503 Williams House Nickell House 310 N Washington Ave I Other WA0504 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Banks House 308 N Washington Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0505 Wood House Banks House 306 N Washington Ave Greek Revival WA0506 Greer House Greer House 309 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0508 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Kost House 325 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0509 Davies House McNair House 341 N Willow Ave Craftsman WA0511 Walker House Adams House 347 N Willow Ave Greek Revival WA0513 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Trumbo House 413 N Willow Ave Plain/Traditional WA0514 Rollins House Phillips House 421 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0515 Cravens House Stone House 427 N Willow Ave I Greek Revival WA0516 Nix House Skillern House 433 N Willow Ave I Craftsman WA0517 White -Shultz House Hall House 503 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0518 Trahin House Phillips House 511 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0497 Hathcock House Havers House 400 N Washington Ave English Revival WA0531 Mitchell House Morrison House 432 N Willow Ave Plain/Traditional WA0534 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Blair House 420 N Willow Ave Other WA0519 England -White House Maxfield House # 1 523 N Willow Ave Other WA0520 Baker -Bush House Maxfield House # 2 533 N Willow Ave I Craftsman WA0521 Goforth -Tucker House Lighten House 603 N Willow Ave I Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0522 McRoy House McRoy House 613 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0523 Walker House Phillip House 610 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0524 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Benner House 608 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0525 Parker House Lewis House 534 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa'gge 415 0?524 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0526 Rosser House Harrison House 528 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0527 Hansard House Kennedy House 520 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0528 Lewis House Foster House 514 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0529 Hill House Hill House 506 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0530 Milburn House Lewis House 504 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0532 Polk House Connors House 428 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0533 Askew House Alter House 424 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0536 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Parker House 346 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0537 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Baxter House 312 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0535 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Fletcher House 354 N Willow Ave English Revival WA0543 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Clock House 228 E Dickson St Other WA0546 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Stapleton House 218 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0547 Ripley House Logue House 210 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0552 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Gosnell House 220 E Sutton St Plain/Traditional WA0553 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Fletcher House 304 E Sutton St Bungalow WA0555 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Bowman House 217 E Lafayette St Bungalow WA0558 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Morgan House 225 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0564 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Walker House 220 E Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0565 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Kirby House 224 E Maple St Other WA0566 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Serebreni House 223 E Maple St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0394 Headquarters House Washington County Historical Society 118 E Dickson St Greek Revival WA0538 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Lea House 310 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0539 Williams House Harding House 308 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0540 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Charlton House 306 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0541 Osborn House Gayer House 304 N Willow Ave Bungalow WA0542 Lemke House 0 Cormack House 231 E Dickson St Craftsman WA0544 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Allred House 222 E Dickson St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0545 McConnell House Yates House 220 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0548 Wade House Phillips House 216 E Sutton St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0549 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Thompson House 218 E Sutton St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0550 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Zisner House 217 E Sutton St Colonial Revival :rW HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa'gge 416 01 524 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0551 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Reif House 219 E Sutton St Bungalow WA0554 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Lockhart House 303 E Sutton St Plain/Traditional WA0556 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hine House 221 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0557 Lotspeich House Woodley & Wilson House 223 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0560 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hannold House 220 E Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0561 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Guisinger House 214 E Lafayette St Bungalow WA0567 Bossmeyer House Fonte House 219 E Maple St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0569 Davidson House Roe House 128 E Davidson St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0559 Stone House Stone -Hilton House 306 E Lafayette St Greek Revival WA0562 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Gammil House 118 E Lafayette St Craftsman WA0568 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hickson House 117 E Davidson St Craftsman WA0563 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington January House 116 E Maple St Craftsman WA0570 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Walker House 218 E Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0638 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Guadalajara House 312 Lafayette St Bungalow WA0639 Simco House Gessler House 318 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0640 Guisinger House Mace House 322 Lafayette St Greek Revival WA0641 Reed House Dana House 404 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0642 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Trumbo House 408 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0644 Harlan House Haj House 416 Lafayette St Plain/Traditional WA0647 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Crouch House 426 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0655 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Ewen House 425 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0656 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Briggs House 423 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0657 Howell House Scism House 417 Lafayette St Colonial Revival WA0659 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington January House 407 Lafayette St Craftsman WA0660 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington McCartney House 403 E Lafayette St Craftsman WA0665 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Gibson House 314 Sutton St Craftsman WA0667 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Hammond House 345 Walnut Ave Craftsman WA0669 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Rothrock House 307 Sutton St Plain/Traditional WA0673 Mcllroy House Dalton House 319 Sutton St Bungalow WA0690 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Jenkins House 415 Spring St Craftsman WA0395 Wilson -Pittman -Campbell- Gregory House Meldrum House 405 E Dickson St Other WA0683 Both meyer- Fraser House Brewer House 318 E Dickson St Craftsman WA0684 Campbell House Heerwagen House 401 E Dickson St Plain/Traditional WA0685 Ramsay -Faust House Faust House 402 Spring St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0689 Conner-Lesh House Bryan House 423 Spring St Plain/Traditional WA0691 Sanders -Crouch -Dailey House Cully House 307 Spring St Plain/Traditional WA0694 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Jones House 429 N Walnut Ave Other WA0695 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Galbraith House 327 E Maple St Craftsman :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa'gge 417 0t524 Washington -Willow NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0696 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Schumacher House 501 N Walnut Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0697 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Schirmer House 400 E Maple St Craftsman WA0706 Johnson House Galbraith House 321 E Maple St Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0708 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington McAllister House #1 202 E Davidson St Plain/Traditional WA0709 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington McAllister House #2 204 E Davidson St Plain/Traditional WA0710 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Boyd House 206 E Davidson St Craftsman WA0714 Ramay House Sutton House 618 N Willow Ave Craftsman WA0719 Duplex at 309-311 N Washington Block House 631 N Willow Ave Queen Anne/ Eastlake WA0724 Renner House Chase House 731 N Willow Ave Colonial Revival WA0726 Lewis House Hilker House 311 Prospect St Plain/Traditional West Dickson NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0004 The Ice House Building Building At 339 N West 339 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Avenue Commercial WA0005 The Ice House Building Berqueist's & On The 329 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Rocks Commercial WA0006 House At 354 N West N/A 354 N West Ave Queen Anne/Eastlake Avenue WA0033 Citizen's Cleaners Tony C's Building 326 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0034 Waters -Pierce Oil 327 N West Avenue 327 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Company Building Site Parking Lot Commercial WA0035 Apartment Building Hog Haus Brewery 430A W Dickson St Italianate/Italianate Villa WA0036 Randall, JW Grocery Common Grounds 412 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0037 House At 301 Dickson Sexton Law Firm 301 W Dickson St Queen Anne/Eastlake WA0092 Dairy Bottling Plant Magnolia Company 359 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Building Commercial WA0094 Oberman Shirt Factory West Avenue Annex 346 N West Ave 19th Century Standard Commercial WA0095 Dever Cash Grocery Building At 352 N West 352 N West Ave 20th Century Standard Avenue Commercial WA0128 Fayetteville Business Emelia's Mediterranean 309 A-B W Dickson St 20th Century Standard College Kitchen Commercial WA0140 Vickers Laundry Dickson Street 323 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Bookshop Commercial WA0143 Bates Brothers Grocery Building at 430B W 430B W Dickson St Italia nate/Italianate Villa Dickson St WA0148 George's Majestic Building At 519 W 519 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Building Dickson Commercial WA0163 Sherwood, Bill Property Building at 205 W 205 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Dickson St Commercial �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa'gge 418 01 524 West Dickson NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name I Address Style WA0170 Shipley Holsum Baking Building At 313 W Dickson 313 W Dickson St 20th Century Company Street Standard Commercial WA0171 Shipley Holsum Baking Building At 311 W Dickson 311 W Dickson St 20th Century Company Standard Commercial WA0172 Keeton's Conoco Station Bill's Dickson Street Liquor 241 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0173 Sine's Body Shop Dickson's Theater 227 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0175 Collier Drug Building Building At 100 W Dickson St 100 W Dickson St Art Moderne WA0176 Coca Cola Bottling French Metro Antiques 200 W Dickson St Art Deco Company Building WA0177 House At 206 W Dickson N/A 206 W Dickson St Queen Anne/Eastlake Street WA0178 Needham's Food Market 1936 Club Building East 302-304 W 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0179 D-Lux Eat Shop 1936 Club Building West 306 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0181 Star Grocery Doe's Restaurant 318 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0183 Fashion Shop Gypsy Building 402 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0184 Christman Plumbers Gypsy Building 404 W Dickson St Italianate/Italianate Building Villa WA0185 Roger's Bar & Building at 406 W Dickson St 406 W Dickson St 20th Century Recreation Standard Commercial WA0186 Dowell Meat Market Brewsky's 408 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0187 Building At 410 W N/A 410 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0188 Citizens Bank Club 4-14 414 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0189 Taylor Building Lilly's Restaurant W Dickson St 20th Century 1416 Standard Commercial WA0190 Hodge's Cafe Condom Sense 418 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0191 McAdam's Drug Store Buster Belly's 420 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0192 Bates Brothers General Stir 422 W Dickson St 20th Century Mercantile 0 Standard Commercial WA0212 Frisco Depot Building At 550 W Dickson 550 W Dickson St Spanish/Mission St Revival WA0213 Uncle Sam's Store Jimmy John's 518 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0214 Building At 522 W The Rice Village 522 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0215 Flying Possum Leather Building At 526 W Dickson 526 W Dickson St 20th Century Store St Standard Commercial WA0216 Building At 540 W Kosmos Greek Kafe 540 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial �W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa°ge 419 101f 524 West Dickson NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0218 Building At 626-648 W Sonneman Building 1 626-648 W Dickson St Plain/Traditional Dickson St WA0225 Ozark McCord Qdoba Grill Building 603 W Dickson St 20th Century Wholesale Grocery Standard Commercial WA0227 The Courts Building At 623-641 W 623-641 W Dickson St Art Deco Dickson St WA0228 Sonneman Building li Building At 643-653 W 643-653 W Dickson St Art Deco U-Ark Theatre Dickson St WA0233 U-Ark Bowl U-Ark Events 622 W Dickson St Art Deco WA0867 Underwood Building Building At 611 W 611 W Dickson St Other Dickson St WA0946 U S Pizza Parking Lot Parking Lot At 202 W 202 W Dickson St Not Applicable Dickson St WA0947 Three Sisters Building Building At 212-248 West 212-248 W Dickson St French Colonial Dickson St. WA0948 Specialty Shop, The Crown Pub Building 303 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0949 Bordinos Building Building At 310 W 310 W Dickson St Plain/Traditional Dickson Street WA0950 Minute Man Restaurant Jose's & Toothpick's 324 W Dickson St 20th Century Standard Commercial WA0951 Frisco Train Train car at 542 W 542 W Dickson St N/A Dickson St WA0952 Parking Lot At SW N/A 507 W Dickson St N/A Corner Of Dickson St & West Ave. WA0953 Frisco Warehouse Building at 548 W 548 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0954 Building At 604-624 W N/A 604-624 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0955 Lofts Site, The I N/A 607 W Dickson St N/A WA0956 Mr. Tux Building at 608 W 608 W Dickson St 20th Century Dickson St Standard Commercial WA0957 Bank Building Building at 703 W 703 W Dickson St Mid-20th Century Dickson St Modern WA0958 St. John Lutheran Christ On Campus 310 N Arkansas Ave Mid-20th Century Church Modern WA0959 Stevens Organ Repair Building at 330 N West 330 N West Ave 20th Century Shop Ave Standard Commercial :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPa°ge 4 0 0Y524 Wilson Park NRHP Historic District SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0580 Sanford House Stephens House 320 Ila St Bungalow WA0601 Duplex At 113-115 Ila St Young Duplex 113-115 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0603 House At 201 Ila St Trice House 201 Ila St Craftsman WA0604 House At 205 Ila St Scott House 205 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0605 House At 207 Ila St Glover House 207 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0130 Walker House #1 Walker House 25 Davidson St Bungalow WA0243 Drake -Wade House #1 Drake -Wade House #1 603 Park Ave Bungalow WA0356 House At 605 Park Ave White House 605 Park Ave Bungalow WA0571 House At 202 Ila St Miller House 202 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0599 House At 607 Park Ave Drake -Wade House 607 Park Ave Craftsman WA0600 Wiggles House Schreibman House 601 Park Ave Craftsman WA0602 House At 111 Ila St Cole House 111 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0578 House At 525 Shady Ave Rahtz House 525 Shady Ave Plain/Traditional WA0579 House At 318 Ila St Stephens House 318 Ila St Other WA0581 House At 506 Vandeventer Ave Green House 506 Vandeventer Ave Plain/Traditional WA0582 House At 504 Vandeventer Ave Newby House 504 Vandeventer Ave Plain/Traditional WA0586 House At 421 Ila St Putnam House 421 Ila St Other WA0593 House At 503 Forest Ave January Apartments 503 Forest Ave Colonial Revival WA0596 House At 505 Forest Ave House At 506 Forest Ave 506 Forest Ave Plain/Traditional WA0577 House At 302 Ila St Douglas House 302 Ila St Colonial Revival WA0584 House At 525 Va n d eve nte r Ave Law House 525 Vandeventer Ave Plain/Traditional WA0587 House At 412 Ila St Thompson House 412 Ila St Not Applicable WA0588 House At 409 Ila St Risk House 409 Ila St Other WA0589 House At 414 Ila St West House 414 Ila St Bungalow WA0592 House At 501 Forest Ave Wade House 501 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0594 Rosen House Watts House 509 Forest Ave Plain/Traditional WA0595 House At 16 Maple St Fowler House 16 Maple St Craftsman WA0597 House At 508 Forest Ave Candido House 508 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0614 House At 14 W Davidson St Drake House #2 14 Davidson St Craftsman WA0608 House At 511 Forest Ave Adams House 511 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0612 House At 601 Forest Ave Brezeale House 601 Forest Ave Craftsman WA0620 Duplex At 558-560 Highland Ave Wilkins Duplex 560 & 558 Highland Ave Plain/Traditional WA0621 House At 513 Highland Ave Rudolph House 513 Highland Ave Craftsman WA0622 House At 512-512B Highland Ave Kinzer House 512-512B Highland Ave Craftsman WA0625 House At 14 W Maple St Russum House I 14 W Maple St Craftsman WA0609 House At 515 Forest Ave Walker House #2 515 Forest Ave Craftsman Al!—" Q HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPRa°ge 4 1 101f 524 Wilson Park NRHP Historic District continued SHPO Site ID Historic Name Alternate Name Address Style WA0610 Drake House #4 House At Ne Corner Of 98 Park Ave Craftsman Park Ave. & Maple St. WA0613 House At 16 W Davidson Drake House #1 16 W Davidson St Craftsman St WA0615 House At 9 W Davidson Feinstein House 9 W Davidson St Craftsman St WA0616 House At 601 Highland Drake House #3 601 Highland Ave Craftsman Ave WA0617 House At 521 Highland Tepfer House 521 Highland Ave Craftsman Ave WA0618 House At 526 Highland Garriss House 526 Highland Ave Plain/Traditional Ave WA0619 House At 517 Highland Goza House 517 Highland Ave Craftsman Ave WA0623 House At 12 W Maple St Standrod House 12 W Maple St Craftsman WA0624 House At 516 Highland Comstock House 516 Highland Ave Other Ave WA0626 House At 319 Ila St Hanna House #2 319 Ila St Other WA0627 House At 112 W Maple St Horan House 112 W Maple St Plain/Traditional WA0628 House At 202 W Maple Allen House 202 W Maple St Other St WA0629 House At 206 W Maple Frick House 200 W Maple St Other St WA0611 House At 15 W Davidson Long House 15 Davidson St Craftsman St WA0633 Building At 316 W Maple Hanna Apartments 316 W Maple St Plain/Traditional St WA0632 House At 505 Shady Ave Wolf House 505 Shady Ave Italianate/Italianate Villa WA0634 House At 326-328 W Hanna House #1 326-328 W Maple St Craftsman Maple St WA0635 House At 500 Cummings House 500 Vandeventer Ave Craftsman Vandeventer Ave WA0427 House At 515 Park Ave Ross House 515 Park Ave Plain/Traditional WA0447 Smith House Jordan House 126 Ila St Plain/Traditional WA0574 House At 276 Ila St Frakes House 276 Ila St Other WA0636 House At 502 Purette House 502 Vandeventer Ave Craftsman Vandeventer Ave :W HERITAGE & HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPage"4 2 01 524 Individual Properties Individual ARHP Properties Name SHPO Site ID Year Listed or Determined Eligible Status Drake Field White Hangar WA0792 2008 Listed in the ARHP House at 1638 Price Avenue WA1063 2009 Listed in the ARHP Oaks Cemetery WA1234 2014 Listed in the ARHP First Christian Church WA1228 2014 Eligible for the ARHP Thomas -Tharp House WA1682 2018 Eligible for the ARHP Heffelfinger-Freund House WA1683 2018 Eligible for the ARHP De Weese House WA1684 2018 Eligible for the ARHP Holland - Bowen House I WA1690 12018 Eligible for the ARHP Lea House I WA1789 1 2021 Eligible for the ARHP Note; Properties listed in the NRHP are automatically listed in the ARHP Individual NRHP Properties Name SHPO Site ID Year [I- Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Anderson-Tayloristed House WA1747 2021 C Architecture Local Bank Of Fayetteville Building, Old WA0771 1994 C Architecture Local Business Administration Building - WA0347 1992 A, C Architecture, Education, Local University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Social History Chemistry Building, University of WA0349 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Arkansas Chi Omega Greek Theatre, University WA0348 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local of Arkansas Chi Omega Sorority Chapter House WA0780 1995 C Architecture Local Clack House WA0937 2006 C Architecture Local Clark, Joe Marsh House WA0869 2020 C Architecture Local Clinton House/Clinton House Museum WA0979 2010 B, C Architecture, Politics/ State, Local Government, Law Durst House WA0899 2015 C Architecture State Ella Carnell Hall, University of WA086 1982 A, C Architecture, Education Not provided Arkansas Ellis Building WA1675 2019 A, C Architecture, Local Commerce, Transportation Evergreen Cemetery WA0153 1997 A Exploration/Settlement, Local Politics/Government Fayetteville Confederate Cemetery WA0425 1993 A Conservation, Military Local Fayetteville Fire Department Fire WA1244 2015 A, C Architecture, Social Local Station 3 History Fayetteville Fire Department Fire WA1225 2015 A Social History Local Station 1 Fayetteville National Cemetery WA0859 1999 A Military Local Fayetteville Veterans Hospital WA1059 2011 A, C Architecture, Health/ State Medicine, Politics/ Government :� HERITAGE &HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPaDge 4 3 02f524 Individual NRHP Properties continued Name SHPO Site ID Year Listed Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Fitzhugh, Vernon, House WA1300 2017 C Architecture Local Fletcher, Adrian House WA0834 2013 C Architecture State Frisco Depot WA0212 1988 A, C Architecture, Transportation Local Goff Farm Stone Bridge WA0964 2010 A, C Engineering, Transportation Local Gordon, Troy House WA0417 1978 C Architecture Local Gregg House WA0002 1974 A, C Architecture, Education Not provided Guisinger Building WA0460 1984 A Commerce, Urban Design Local Hantz House WA0896 2001 C Architecture State Happy Hollow Farm WA0461 1986 A Literature Not provided Headquarters House WA0394 1971 A Military Local Hemingway House & Barn WA0430 1982 C Architecture Not provided Home Economics Building, University of Arkansas WA0119 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Jackson House WA0418 1982 C Architecture Not provided John Williams House No. 2 WA1669 2020 C Architecture Local Jones, Euine Fay House WA0830 2000 C Architecture State Lafayette Street Overpass WA0239 1995 C Engineering Local Lewis Brothers Building WA0384 1987 A, C Architecture, Commerce Not provided Magnolia Company Filling Station WA0089 1978 A, C Architecture, Commerce Not provided Maple Street Overpass WA0795 1995 C Engineering Local McNair, Wiley P., House WA1241 2016 C Architecture Local Men's Gymnasium, University of Arkansas WA0350 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Noll, Willis House WA0928 2005 C Architecture State Old Main, University of Arkansas WA0001 1970 A, C Architecture, Education Not provided Old Post Office, The WA0431 1974 A, C Architecture, Urban Planning Not provided Patrick, Dr. James House WA1283 2017 C Architecture Local Presbyterian Student Center WA1247 2022 A, C Architecture, Social History Local Ridge House WA0387 1972 I A, C Architecture, Education, Environmental Not provided Rieff's Chapel Cemetery WA1738 2020 I A Exploration/Settlement National Routh -Bailey House WA0341 1989 C Architecture Local Segraves, Warren, House WA1284 2017 C Architecture Local Shelton, Lynn American Legion Post #27 WA0786 1996 A, C Architecture, Social History Local Skillern House WA1020 2015 C Architecture Local Smyth, Peter House WA0728 2002 C Architecture State :r� HERITAGE &HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN APPPa°ge 444 61524 Individual NRHP Properties continued Name SHPO Site ID Year Listed Criteria Area of Significance Level of Significance Son's Chapel WA909 2003 A, C Architecture, Religion Local Strengthening The Arm of Liberty Monument WA0731 2000 A Social History State Student Union, University of Arkansas WA0141 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Tharp, Moses B. House WA0054 2004 C Architecture Local Vernon & Moore-Mcllroy Produce Warehouse WA0147 2020 A, C Architecture, Commerce State Vest, John S. House WA0195 1979 C Architecture Not provided Villa Rosa WA0073 1990 C, D Architecture, Archaeology, Literature State Vol Walker Library WA0031 1992 A, C Architecture, Education Local Wade-Heerwagen House WA0429 1978 A, C Architecture, Education, Local History Not provided Walker Family Plot WA1188 2012 A Exploration/Settlement, Politics/Government, Social History State Walker-Knerr-Williams House WA0413 1975 C Architecture Not provided Walker -Stone House WA0388 1970 C Architecture Not provided Washington County Courthouse WA0392 1972 A, C Architecture, Politics/ Government Not provided Washington County Jail WA0393 1978 A, C Architecture, Politics/ Government Not provided Waterman -Archer House WA0842 1999 C Architecture Local Wilson -Pittman -Campbell -Gregory House WA0395 1980 C Architecture Not provided Woolsey Farmstead Cemetery WA1731 2020 I A Exploration/Settlement Local Young, Mrs. Building WA0385 1999 C Architecture Local :� HERITAGE &HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLAN A11Page"4 5 02f524 Fayetteville Historic Resources Survey Plan Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan May 2023 ,� ..a -_.mil^_. �_- _.- •' 1 Swimming pool of the Robert and Alice Alexander House also known as "Raheen" Fay Jones (1978), Fayetteville, AR Source; University of Arkansas Fay Jones Collection." Appendix I Contents 1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................125 2 Background Information and Analysis..................................................................................125 Washington County Assessor Construction Date Analysis..................................................125 PriorSurvey Analysis..........................................................................................................128 Need for a Comprehensive and Thematic Historic Context Statement.............................131 ExistingDesignations..........................................................................................................131 Limited Windshield Survey..................................................................................................131 Threats................................................................................................................................132 CommunityInput.................................................................................................................134 3 Survey Plan.........................................................................................................................134 PreparatoryWork................................................................................................................135 Phase 1. Thematic Historic Context Statement....................................................................136 Tasks...............................................................................................................................136 Phase 2. Citywide Windshield Survey..................................................................................137 Tasks...............................................................................................................................137 Phase 3. Reconnaissance -Level Documentation.................................................................140 Tasks...............................................................................................................................140 Repeat the Process Every 10 Years....................................................................................142 APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 124 Page 447 of 524 1 Introduction Stantec developed a historic resources survey plan as part of this historic preservation plan. The recommended phased approach includes project preparation, developing a historic context statement to guide survey work, conducting a citywide windshield survey, and documenting select properties at the reconnaissance level. Very few of Fayetteville's historic -age properties have been surveyed, undocumented and undesignated historic properties and areas appear to exist, the city is experiencing development pressures, and there is public support for the identification and designation of historic places. This methodology allows for an expeditious, comprehensive, and cost-effective assessment of the city's resources and documentation of its most important places. This document begins with a presentation of the analysis conducted to inform the survey plan methodology. Next, the survey plan is presented with cost estimates for each phase and identification of responsible parties. Potential funding sources for conducting historic resources surveys are presented in Appendix D. 2 Background Information and Analysis Stantec conducted background analysis to inform the development of the survey plan presented in Section 3. This analysis included review of Washington County Assessor (WCA) construction dates, prior surveys, existing designations, a limited windshield survey, threats to historic resources, and community input. Washington County Assessor Construction Date Analysis WCA construction dates were analyzed to identify the number and geographic distribution of historic -age parcels.' For the purposes of this analysis, historic -age was defined as 1978 or earlier, 45 years prior to the current year.2 Of the city's 30,973 parcels, 6,664 or 22% have a 1978 or earlier WCA construction date, 16,459 or 53% have a 1979 or later construction date, and 7,850 or 25% have no construction date (Chart 1). Most historic -age properties were built in ' County assessors maintain construction date data for each parcel in the county to inform property valuations. These construction dates are generally relatively reliable but are sometimes missing or inaccurate. Absence of a construction date does not necessarily mean that there are no built resources on a property. Regardless of its limitations, assessor data can be a valuable tool for survey analysis and fieldwork. 2 Forty-five years was used to calculate the historic -age cut-off for this analysis because historic resources surveys typically document properties 45 years old or older. Resources typically have to be at least 50 years old to be eligible for listing in the NRHP so surveys with a 45-year cut-off date allow for identification of resources that may soon be eligible for designation. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 125 Page 448 of 524 the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s during Fayetteville's post -World War II construction boom (Chart 2). As depicted in Figure 1, the oldest properties in the city are concentrated in central Fayetteville, and post -World War II development radiates outward. A large percentage of properties do not have WCA construction data; however, a comparison with historical aerial imagery indicates that many of these properties are developed with historic -age resources. Chart 1. Washington County Assessor Construction Dates for Properties in Fayetteville" No D ' 250 Historic -Age (1978 or earlier) 22% Not Historic -Age (1979 or later) 53% "Chart categorizes properties by their earliest WCA construction date. Properties without a construction date may be undeveloped, untaxed, or developed but missing property improvement information. Chart 2. Decade in which Historic -Age (Pre-1979) Properties were Built* 2500 2110 2000 1639 1500 1135 1000 613 467 500 296 1- 1 178 0- , 1 "Chart data is limited to parcels with a construction date noted in WCA records; the data reflects the earliest improvement date on each parcel. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 126 Page 449 of 524 61 Harmon m y a Fayetteville Construction Date 1940-1949 o City Limits Pre-1900 1950-1959 Arbor -Acres -Rd .;o 1900-1909 1960-1969 1428 R a 1910-1919 — 1970-1978 Johnson / , 1 1920-1929 Post-1978 WL 1930-1939 No Data Wheeler N o zMiles m N N lir k� t� V- 71111 z 11 jilo!4 L'e"" � I` , ,'■ 'fir 1t- ' r ill t IIL f t�=i'L�a"I r II t w_ �y 'ti I i 1! .IEit6V llle E.1A ir Farmington Fajeaefr fjjlC r �• �� t. �I '1fR Harris r. 1 �leby 1889ft r Z 6 ,t4 Walnut Grove MILLER t ) MOUNTAIN G Elkin it Black Oak e l 1 i Figure 1. Map of Parcels by Earliest WCA Construction Date. Much of the city's post -World War 11 development, which radiates outward from central Fayetteville, has not been surveyed. A comparison of this map with historical and current aerials revealed that many properties that do not have accessor construction dates have historic -age buildings. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 127 Page 450 of 524 Prior Survey Analysis In total, 1,032 Fayetteville resources on 770 parcels have been documented as part of 19 historic resources surveys.3 These projects represent an important investment in historic preservation and have led to the creation of numerous NRHP properties and districts; however, only a small percentage of the city has been surveyed. In total, 2% of Fayetteville's 30,973 parcels have been documented (Table 1). In consideration of just those properties with historic - age WCA construction dates and no WCA construction date, 5% have been documented. As depicted in Figure 2, surveyed resources are concentrated in central Fayetteville where the city's oldest resources are located. Few properties outside the historical core have been documented. Table 1. Number and Percent of Surveyed Properties in Fayetteville % of Total % of Historic-Age/No Date Properties Properties* (n=14,514) n=30,973 Surveyed properties 2% 5% n=700 *Defined as properties with a 1978 or earlier WCA construction date and properties without a WCA construction date. A primary goal of a historic resources survey is to evaluate each documented resource for eligibility for local, state, and/or federal historic designations. However, of the 1,032 surveyed resources in Fayetteville, nearly one-third were not evaluated for historic significance (Chart 3, Figure 3). Further, many were surveyed more than 15 years ago, and their documentation is outdated (Figure 2). Properties previously considered not eligible for historic designation may now be considered eligible. Chart 3. Historic Evaluation Status of Surveyed Resources* NRHP Listed: Individual Property, Delisted, 0.2% 0.3% ARHP Eligible, 0.6% *Data compiled from the eligibility field of the Arkansas SHPO survey form. NRHP Eligible: Individual Property, 3.8% NRHP Eligible: Contributing to a potential NRHP District, 4.8% 3 The 1,032 resources are documented in the Arkansas SHPO's GIS-based survey database. Additional resources have been documented as part of regulatory projects; however, the survey documentation was not available for this analysis. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 128 Page 451 of 524 �0 r-W=�IVeII?�S.—' :�� 'INN—,1LJ`.`��'���L-1L_mJUY^/�Ju`������� lu.. U Fee Ir z —f � I • z E1 �M1\ r • I Z L.L • D yJw�❑�a E-Igockwooil �o �—�r a FF--7JJ7 Li �-�='WMaple_Sty��ii� �� [�• �� MOUNT 7•-ee��S Irk`• • ♦ • • • I� ,� 1 r Z •—�� N •• •• (. • �F "'I' 1� i SEQ'uOYAH �, • • LJ i� • • �W Lafayette St Wit— ���� • nrl =l �r -h—d`•T W�Dirkson'tSt ti�J�JIM•r��� �� • • •�/� U!—•I • ,:ll ,"R • .� 7� E-Qiokso-n StIF 61 AN • �J J� • a. _ ❑ • •� • 1719 ft • ��LJC7 !` �n �Faytltv lellle •»{.=.r••� t ry�l '1 I'� •' w`cI IC�1L�� I �w Tontitown upset Ave - hwa7 E�tabtason A� So In � N O armon s o Arbor Acres Rd a Fayetteville City Limits 112 Johnson -:,Park c 31 'UY r111 d_ m Wheeler Mud Creek Trail a Corridor • Habberton • M� • v yj amestring d q a • eek Trail v • •' o id • 2 • •- • rr White ock W We -n ton Dr• C •� • • • 20 9 S • • • . 646 • � .w � • 3ose Creeµ• aRe Sequoy � Xe. McNair • Pa,k • Farmington Fayeq Junction • Kessler Mountain Harris Appleby opal Par 2 n P Walnut Grove Greenl n Year Recorded • 2000-2009 1970-1979 • 2010-2019 1980-1989 • 2020-2022 1990-1999 • Unknown 0 2 � Miles Figure 2. Map of Previously Surveyed Properties in Fayetteville by Year Surveyed. Previously surveyed propert are concentrated in central Fayetteville, and most were documented more than 10 years ago. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 129 Page 452 of 524 .'I� .v�elaiid-Sl--e 1j I� ° h 2,i)oo I lI v`u hr O Feet O Ib i ❑ �a��J�L` it �E O o �Do ° o � ���i E-- odkwood1x. u 'r iq •QS} jc • b CP n o• {{���}y O U N 7 �6•.,. ° O'O •• ��ri SEQ'UOYAH� t p' C� • e V o n • $Hen n °o° 8 g QQQ' - %?0 o0 o®r o I. I� ❑ °f7 s,l �I�Io o ;0 01 Fayetteville o ° 0 ToI � jL�JL LIJ���� - itcheSt._ f -- ;I �I _i �� m� ❑�I i����%��C� • - -o Arbor Acres Rd z a Fayetteville ° o City Limits ttz Johnson Fayettev0e Park 31 heeler r s Mud Creek Trail +' o Habberton • • _ o � z O ��, • Q ariamestring Q a ❑ Creek Trail c ❑ cC1 Corridor - = _ ° ❑0 • White ock N o 9 b • • m2gton Dr O � S • O ❑ O • O eµ 648 0 mm ODO • Goose Ore • ° O • o `so McNair 0 • Farmington Fa' tte • Junction 0 o A Kessler o i5 Mountain Harris Appleby ional Par Walnut Grove Greenl n Historic Evaluation/Designation Status ° 5-ARHP Listed rove 0 1-NRHP Eligible n 6-Eligible in a District I- 2-Not Eligible 8-Eligible in a Potential District • 3-NRHP Listed ° 9-Unknown \ ° 4-Delisted 10-ARHP Eligible H N 0 4 za Miles Figure 3. Map of Previously Surveyed Properties Categorized by Designation Status and Current Historic Evaluation. Nearly one-third of surveyed properties have not been evaluated for historic significance. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 130 Page 453 of 524 Need for a Comprehensive and Thematic Historic Context Statement Historic context statements are written documents that describe the major historical trends, events, people, and architecture important to the physical development of a community. They are a critical component of historic resources surveys because they provide a framework for evaluating which resources are historically significant and which are not. Most of the City's prior survey projects did not include a historic context specific to the survey area, and a citywide and thematic historic context statement, the current industry standard, does not exist. A thematic historic context statement provides a broad understanding of the patterns and events that have shaped the history of an area. Historic resources may share a common theme, like a similar period of construction, cultural or historical association, architectural style or type, or another historical trend. Following the development of a historic context, a survey is conducted to identify resources with significant ties to important themes in history and evaluate them for NRHP, ARHP, and local historic designation eligibility. In Arkansas, local historic districts provide the best protections for historic properties, and they can comprise contiguous or noncontiguous properties connected thematically. Many opportunities exist to establish noncontiguous historic districts in Fayetteville. For example, a collection of noncontiguous post -World War II Modernistic residences could be a local historic district. Noncontiguous resources associated with Black ethnic heritage could be another local historic district. For this reason, a historic context that identifies the themes and subthemes that have significantly shaped Fayetteville's history is a critical need. Existing Designations As described in the historic preservation plan, Fayetteville has one local historic district comprising one building, three ARHP properties, 69 NRHP properties, and 11 NRHP historic districts. The number of NRHP designations is commendable; however, the lack of local historic districts is a missed opportunity. Most designated resources are in central Fayetteville and there may be historically significant properties outside the historical core not yet documented. Lastly, most properties are designated for their architectural significance. A survey could lead to the identification of more properties important for their historical or cultural significance, providing a richer understanding of Fayetteville's history. Limited Windshield Survey Stantec completed a limited windshield survey of Fayetteville in October 2022 to understand the city's broad patterns of development and building stock. The purpose of the survey was to drive select areas of Fayetteville noting the character and the predominance and general location of resources or groups of resources that may be historic. Surveyors noted Fayetteville's vibrant downtown; unsurveyed areas with pockets of mid -twentieth century resources that appeared to have potential to be historic districts; and infill development, particularly student housing, that does not reflect surrounding historical resources. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 131 Page 454 of 524 Threats Historic places can be threatened by social, political, economic, natural, and other forces. In Fayetteville, key threats appear to be development and a lack of understanding of historic preservation processes and regulations.' Development Historic preservation is about managing development in a responsible way, not stopping it. During times of economic growth and development, it is critical for cities to operate with this mindset. The demolition of older buildings to make way for new ones, incompatible new development on formerly empty lots, infrastructure improvement projects that may affect nearby properties, inappropriate exterior alterations, and gentrification are issues associated with development pressures. A comprehensive historic resources survey can provide a roadmap for which properties or areas could be preserved through adaptive reuse, historically sensitive infill, design review, and other strategies, and which areas are better suited for development. The survey can also be designed to more intensely study and document areas experiencing rapid change to ensure that historic places that matter to people are part of development decisions and anti -gentrification efforts like aged -in housing, community organization, and affordable housing programs. City staff and Planning Commissioners utilize an infill suitability map to help guide development decisions, particularly related to properties proposed for rezoning. Properties that are closer to services, public safety, schools, utilities, and other public amenities were rated as being more suitable for infill development. Higher scoring areas are typically near transportation corridors and the city's older and historic neighborhoods (Figure 4), creating the potential for conflict with the City's goal to promote historic preservation. Staff and commissioners would be able to make better informed development decisions if the results of a comprehensive survey of historic resources were available to them in addition to other planning tools like the infill suitability score and a map of historical demolition data. ' According to FEMA's National Risk Index, Fayetteville is at low risk for natural hazards like extreme storms or flooding (https://hazards.fema.gov/nri/map). APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 132 Page 455 of 524 i 1 I ,-W�-H.enri=de--T:onti=B.lvd T�ntitow w Y Harmon I � ---Arbor Acres -Rd-- Q rl � i Wheeler i Ja r 1324 ft ILI White R• ek Farmington Appleby 1'81 aA 3 .A Walnut Grove Z__ Oak Grove Springdale \ I W„S:unset_A:me 1 i v E=Robinson sonera�9hW ¢ I e � 1 A � � N N .� o Fayetteville City Limits Johnson Z \ E -ion Rd Guy Ter y Rd.. o c e Blvd�o'. � d u a Habberlon '.o O ° M\SS'oo y� O U Z ti20 O O O adington Dr O r0 O [, O Q tt6ville 0 0 McNa rB as&in Jurictiori� O e � Harris 1889ft C 0 Designated Greenland h• In Figure 4. Map of the City's infill development scores with designated historic properties and districts. Many of the city's older and historic areas are rated as highly suited for development creating the potential for conflict with the City's goal to promote historic preservation. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 133 Page 456 of 524 Lack of Understanding of Historic Preservation Processes and Regulations The way in which historic preservation is structured in the U.S. can be confusing to the general public. Misunderstandings about the system of federal, state, and local laws and processes are common and can result in fear and distrust of historic preservation initiatives, like surveys, historic designations, and design review. For example, it is not uncommon for property owners to think that inclusion of their property in a survey means that the property is historic and therefore subject to regulations. Or, that if their house is listed in the NRHP, they cannot make interior changes. These kinds of misunderstandings can thwart preservation initiatives despite otherwise broad community support. Public outreach throughout the course of a survey project can clarify misconceptions, as well as inform the public about the purpose of the project and how the survey data could be used by private property owners and the City. It can also lead to historical information about properties not documented in traditional sources and foster enthusiasm and support for historic preservation and future initiatives, making public outreach a critical component of a survey plan. Community Input Members of the community who participated in the public engagement for this project overwhelmingly support historic preservation in Fayetteville and ranked identifying more historic properties, formally designating more historic properties and districts, developing history -related educational content, and getting young people excited about Fayetteville history and historic preservation as important activities. They also identified over 100 places that they would like to see preserved in locations all over the city, including many properties with social, ethnic, or other associations not evident from the exterior. This lends support for an investment in a thematic study and comprehensive survey that can serve as the foundation for identification and designation, interesting new educational content, and topics and ways to engage young members of the community. 3 Survey Plan Very few of Fayetteville's historic -age properties have been surveyed and the city is experiencing development pressures. Survey efforts to date have not fully reflected the social and cultural history of the community and there may be additional resources associated with the city's Modernistic architecture heritage that are not yet documented and evaluated. A comprehensive thematic historic context statement has not yet been developed, and opportunities exist for contiguous and noncontiguous local historic districts connected thematically. Lastly, members of the public have indicated that historic preservation is important to them, and they want more historic properties identified and designated as well as public engagement that can stem from a historic resources survey. For these reasons, a comprehensive yet expeditious survey approach is recommended for Fayetteville to meet its preservation goals and make the most of its budget. The recommended survey methodology is a phased approach involving preparatory work, development of a historic context statement, public involvement, and a citywide windshield survey to identify properties, districts, and landscapes with potential historic significance, followed by reconnaissance -level research and documentation. Rather than documenting every resource within a survey area —a task that requires considerable time and labor expenses —this approach allows for coverage of a broad geographic region in a short amount of time and the identification and documentation of the city's most important resources. As a result, time and APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 134 Page 457 of 524 money are not expended on resources that have low potential to be eligible historic properties. Of note, this survey plan does not include evaluation and documentation of the University of Arkansas campus. Due to the complexity of the campus, ownership considerations, and funding opportunities, a separate evaluation of the campus (or portions thereof), should be pursued in collaboration with the school. The result of a windshield survey is a list of properties for which additional research and documentation is recommended. For example, surveyors may review over 3,000 properties during one day of windshield survey fieldwork (depending on conditions such as street grid, parcel size, and number of historic -age resources) and determine that, of those properties, 10 individual resources and 1 district have potential historical significance and should be documented and evaluated for local, state, and national eligibility. A windshield survey can also be used to identify properties for which right -of -entry is needed to view and assess historic -age built resources not visible from the right-of-way. Funding can be allocated in phases: • Preparatory Work (Ongoing, FY 2023-2033) • Phase 1. Historic Context Statement (FY 2024) • Phase 2. Windshield Survey (FY 2025) • Phase 3. Reconnaissance Survey (FY 2026, potentially recurring) Work recommended to complete this approach is outlined below, along with survey -related tasks, cost estimates, and timeline recommendations. Preparatory Work Performed by City staff As part of preparations for a historic resources survey, the City must implement ordinances and processes regarding local designation, identify funding, and prepare a request for qualifications (RFQ). The grant application and RFQ process may be repeated for subsequent phases. The main goal of a survey is to identify resources eligible for local, state, and NRHP historic designation. The City does not currently have criteria for local designation, which is necessary for surveyors to evaluate resources for eligibility for local listing. Before initiating survey work, the City must adopt via ordinance criteria for local designation and a process the public may use to apply for local designation (Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Master Plan, Goal 1, Action Item 1.1). This information should be made publicly accessible on the historic preservation program's website (Goal 4, Action Item 4.1). A combination of City funding and grants is recommended to complete the historic resources survey plan for Fayetteville. A windshield survey followed by custom reconnaissance -level documentation of select properties is a highly effective means for evaluating large land areas in a cost -effect manner; however, CLG grant funding may not be the best fit for funding these tasks since the CLG program typically requires a higher degree of documentation. If the CLG program is unable to fund the windshield and reconnaissance -level tasks, grants can be obtained from other federal, state, and local agencies and foundations (provided in Appendix D). Review and careful consideration of grant opportunities, available City funding, and survey needs, followed by completion of applications is a recommended first step to prepare for the upcoming survey efforts. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 135 Page 458 of 524 Historic resources surveys are labor intensive projects that require specialized experience and technologies. The City should prepare an RFQ for consultants to perform the work, leveraging the content in the following survey plan. Because the phases and tasks in the plan build upon each other, the work would be best executed by the same consulting team. The retained consultant's staff should meet the SOI professional qualification standards for history or architectural history, and have demonstrated experience in the following: • writing historic context statements developed in preparation for comprehensive historic resources survey efforts; • developing custom GIS-based data collection platforms for surveys; • engaging the public during the survey process; • conducting a comprehensive windshield survey using GIS-based technologies; and • documenting and evaluating resources for historic significance at the reconnaissance - level under a range of historical themes using GIS-based technologies. Phase 1. Thematic Historic Context Statement Performed by consultants; Estimated cost: $50, 000 Consultant fee assumes approximately 50 pages of text; secondary source research Phase 1 consists of preparing a citywide historic context to provide a framework for evaluating properties for historic significance. Following industry standards, the context should be organized thematically by broad areas of significance such as community planning and development, economic development, public and private institutional development, and ethnic heritage, then by themes and subthemes. Given the predominance of post -World War II development in Fayetteville and lack of existing documentation of all but the most architecturally outstanding resources from this era, trends from the mid -twentieth century through the survey cut-off date (45 years prior to the survey date), should be of particular focus. Underrepresented histories should also be incorporated into the narrative. The historic context is intended to be a tool for surveyors rather than a comprehensive community history. It should be concise, to the point, and easily understood, with graphics to illustrate key concepts. In total, approximately 50 pages of text is preliminarily assumed for the document. Tasks 1. Research Design The research design should define the outline for the context, estimated page lengths for each section, research questions, anticipated sources, and a preliminary bibliography. 2. Research Research should be conducted according to the City -approved research design. Research is anticipated to be limited to secondary sources, focusing on prior cultural resource management documents, such as prior survey contexts and NRHP nominations, and published books, papers, and digitized newspaper articles. 3. Complete a Draft Historic Context Statement The draft historic context should follow the outline approved in the research design, synthesizing research findings from Task 2. The overall intent of the context should be to guide evaluation of historic resources during subsequent survey phases. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 136 Page 459 of 524 4. Finalize the Historic Context Statement The consultant should address one round of consolidated comments from the City, as well as any grant funding stakeholders, to finalize the context. Phase 2. Citywide Windshield Survey Performed by consultants with support from City staff for Tasks 1 and 2; Estimated consultant cost: $40, 000—$60, 000 Phase 2 consists of preparatory data management work, community input, and the windshield survey fieldwork. Tasks 1. Data Management and Windshield Survey Preparation Completed by City staff and consultants Consultant scope assumes coordination with City to develop a list of survey items, development of a GIS-based data collection platform, creation of a digitized survey form, and development of GIS-based survey map Historic resources surveys result in a large amount of data that is most useful to planning department staff when it is readily accessible and when it can be searched, sorted, filtered, and updated, as well as viewed on a GIS-based map. During this task, the City should collaborate with the consultant to identify relevant survey fields for the reconnaissance -level documentation that meet the City's needs. This may include address, latitude and longitude, year built, architecture style(s), use, materials, height, ancillary resources, historical information, existing designation status, recommendation, and/or other items. The field formats should be defined (e.g., multiple choice vs. open text) and value lists should be created, such as a list of architecture styles. The consultant should also create a survey form that presents the collected data with the survey photographs. A PDF copy of each property's survey form would be provided by the consultant as a deliverable in addition to GIS-based survey data. This work is recommended at this stage to allow for sufficient time for the consultant to develop a GIS-based data collection system and survey form before reconnaissance -level documentation begins and to ensure that the City has a way to integrate the collected survey data into an existing internal system or adopt a new data management platform for the survey data. The consultant should also prepare the GIS-based map that will be used during the windshield survey. It should include the following layers: - High resolution current aerial background - Georeferenced historical aerial imagery and topographic maps - Points and polygons showing the properties and areas that members of the public identified as important in the community opinion survey (Section 4.3.1 of the historic preservation plan). This layer should include relevant notes from the community. - The most current WCA parcel data, color -coded by parcels with a historic -age WCA construction date (defined as 45 years prior to the survey date), no construction date, or a non -historic -age construction date - Previously surveyed resources from the AHPP GIS data, categorized by the evaluation field (i.e., not evaluated for historic significance, determined eligible, and designated) - Designated properties and districts. District polygons should include the data of designation, the date of the last survey, and the period of significance. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 137 Page 460 of 524 Properties identified during contextual development that may have the potential for historic significance The map should be set up for tablet -based data collection and allow fieldworkers to take photographs and record data about each surveyed property using the finalized list of fields and data lists. The photographs and data should be automatically linked in GIS to the WCA parcel. During this task, the City should work to develop a website where the results of the survey can be posted with a GIS-based map of properties recommended eligible for local, state, and national designations as a result of the reconnaissance -level survey. 2. Community Input Completed by City staff and consultants Consultant scope assumes development of the public engagement plan, a presentation at one public meeting; and limited public engagement content (e.g., draft website content explaining the project). City staff responsible for additional public outreach including meeting planning and attendance, social media posts, public notices, press releases, etc. Public outreach is an incredibly valuable tool for historic resources survey projects and surveys provide an opportunity to engage members of the community in local history and historic preservation. The foundation for community -supported preservation efforts are residents who are well-informed and who are provided with the opportunity to participate in the process. A public engagement plan should be developed to identify opportunities to distribute information about the upcoming survey tasks and the project's goals, gather information about resources, and promote an appreciation for the historic built environment. Community involvement should involve regular interaction with the public using a variety of platforms and engagement opportunities, such as website content, social media posts, public meetings, press releases, email listservs, mailings, and other strategies. 3. Windshield Survey Completed by consultants A comprehensive windshield of Fayetteville is recommended with targeted review of properties with higher potential to have historic resources. The survey would consist of methodologically driving all publicly accessible streets in Fayetteville and noting those properties with the most potential to have historic significance, the boundaries of potential districts, and properties for which right -of -entry would be needed to complete an assessment. Driving should be conducted at a slow enough speed that surveyors can view resources visible from the right-of-way and categorize each property as reconnaissance documentation recommended, reconnaissance documentation not recommended, or right -of -entry needed for assessment. The survey should include targeted review of properties with higher potential to have historic resources. Surveyors should pay special attention to the types of properties listed below by driving by these properties more slowly and more carefully looking at the property's built resources: - Properties with historic -age WCA construction dates or no construction date APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 138 Page 461 of 524 Properties and areas identified by members of the public during the community opinion survey Previously surveyed resources that were not evaluated for historic significance Previously surveyed resources that were determined eligible by the SHPO but have not been designated Properties identified during contextual development that may have the potential for historic significance Historic districts documented more than 10 years ago The city should be divided into geographic zones to facilitate the survey process and survey teams should complete one zone entirely before moving on to the next zone. Teams of fieldworkers who meet the SOI professional qualification standards for history or architectural history and who are familiar with the historic context statement developed during Phase 1 would drive each zone, referring to GIS-based field maps on a tablet computer displaying the earliest WCA date of each parcel, resources identified by members of the public, previously surveyed resources categorized by eligibility status, properties identified during contextual development, and currently designated resources and districts. Fieldwork teams should comprise two to three people per vehicle, including a driver and a navigator/notetaker recording in the GIS field map which parcels should be revisited and documented at the reconnaissance phase, which parcels need right -of -entry to complete an assessment, and which parcels do not need to be revisited. Surveyors should record the potential area or areas of significance and provide field notes, as needed, for properties identified for reconnaissance -level documentation. Potential new historic districts should be recorded in the map as polygons. Notes should be taken regarding existing historic districts more than 10 years old that appear to warrant updated documentation, an expanded boundary, and/or have potential for an expanded period of significance. All work should be completed from vehicles. At least one person in each vehicle should be a senior historian/architectural historian who exceeds the SOI professional qualification standards. The GIS field map should be set to automatically save progress to the consultant's web -based GIS account. 4. Produce Draft Windshield Survey Results Completed by consultants The consultant should review and refine the windshield survey data and prepare the following deliverables: - A table of properties with potential for significance to be revisited during the reconnaissance survey phase (Phase 3) of the project, including the following fields: parcel number, address, location (latitude and longitude), potential area(s) of significance, and surveyor notes. - A table of potential new historic districts with a description of potential boundaries and potential area(s) of significance. - A table of existing historic districts warranting updated documentation. - A table of properties for which right -of -entry is required to evaluate significance. - A geodatabase with the above information joined to parcels for individual properties and polygons for districts. To minimize costs for this phase, a written report would not be prepared. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 139 Page 462 of 524 5. Produce Final Windshield Survey Results Completed by consultants As necessary, incorporate one round of consolidated comments from City staff and relevant stakeholders to finalize the list of properties recommended for reconnaissance -level documentation. Phase 3. Reconnaissance -Level Documentation Completed by consultants and City, Estimated consultant fee: $50, 000 Consultant fee assumes pre -field review of up to 50 properties not visible from the right-of-way; reconnaissance -level documentation of up to 200 properties total, including up to 20 properties requiring right -of -entry; a survey form with limited fields, no site plan, no property map, no incorporation or review of prior survey data, and reconnaissance -level research for only those properties with potential historic significance; and a presentation at one public meeting. Phase 3 consists of additional public engagement, preparatory work for the reconnaissance survey, and the reconnaissance survey fieldwork. The goal of the reconnaissance survey is to document potentially historic properties and districts identified during the windshield survey and properties for which right -of -entry is desired to assess historic significance. For budgetary reasons, this phase may be broken up into increments and repeated as necessary until all resources identified during the windshield survey have been documented at a reconnaissance level. Tasks 1. Continue to Engage the Public Completed by City The City should continue to keep the public appraised of the survey timeline and project status through press releases, website updates, social media posts, and other means. Communications should explain that some property owners may receive letters requesting right of -entry so surveyors can assess historic -age resources not visible from the right-of-way. 2. Refine List of Properties for Which Right -of -Entry is Desired and Request Right -of -Entry Completed by consultant and City If many properties are not visible from the right-of-way, the consultant should coordinate with City staff to refine the list to include only those for which right -of -entry is desired. The consultant should review historical aerial imagery and topographic maps to identify those with historic -age resources. Next, they should identify those with highest potential to be historically significant by comparing current and aerial imagery, the age of the historic -age resources, and the character of surrounding contemporaneous properties. This list should be reviewed and finalized with the City. The City should request right -of -entry for the selected properties. The letters should be sent to property owners on City letterhead explaining the project and its goals and soliciting access to photograph and document historic -age built resources. The letters should provide a form that property owners can complete and return to grant or deny access, and to provide additional information about access or coordinating access during fieldwork. The consultant would be responsible for following up with property owners who requested advance notification of fieldwork or who wanted to be present during fieldwork. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 140 Page 463 of 524 3. Conduct Reconnaissance -Level Field Documentation Completed by consultant Reconnaissance -level field documentation would involve documenting individual properties identified during the windshield survey for their potential historic significance and properties for which right -of -entry is desired to assess historic significance. The GIS-based data collection system developed in Phase 2, Task 2 would be used to photograph and record information about each property. The camera should be set to capture photographs at the highest resolution (no less than 1200 x 1600 pixels). For cost efficiency, fieldworkers should document the primary historic -age resource on each property on the survey form; ancillary resources should be photographed and included on the form for the primary resource. A minimum of two photographs taken from different angles, when possible, should be required for each property. Historic -age resources on properties identified during reconnaissance -level field documentation with potential for historic significance would be documented from the public right-of-way. Surveyors may determine that properties for which right -of -entry was obtained may not possess potential historic significance, but since access was granted, all right -of -entry properties should be documented to provide a record for the City. For potential historic districts, the boundaries should be confirmed, all properties in the boundary should be documented, and representative photographs should be taken showing the general character of the area. 4. Produce a Draft Reconnaissance Survey Report Completed by consultant After fieldwork, reconnaissance -level research should be conducted on individual properties and districts with potential historic significance to inform eligibility recommendations. The level of research necessary would vary by resource, but may include review of historical aerial images, maps, and local history publications, archival newspaper research, review of digitized archives, and review of other sources that may provide information about a property's history or the people or groups associated with the property. Each resource and potential district should be evaluated for historic significance according to the themes and subthemes outlined in the historic context developed in Phase 1. The results of the research and a recommendation regarding eligibility for historic designation should be provided in the survey form for individual resources. Individual properties recommended eligible for designation should include a description of significance, applicable eligibility criteria, the identified area(s) and period(s) of significance, a boundary recommendation, and contributing and noncontributing resources. A PDF of each property's survey form should be generated that includes a minimum of two photographs and the required survey data. For new districts recommended eligible, the consultant should prepare a summary of the district and its historic significance, applicable eligibility criteria, the identified area(s) and period(s) of significance, a boundary recommendation, a list of contributing and noncontributing resources, and representative photographs. For existing districts in which changes are recommended, the changes should be summarized and an updated listed of contributing and noncontributing resources prepared, if applicable. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 141 Page 464 of 524 A draft reconnaissance survey report should be prepared with an executive summary, a description of the methodology, key findings, survey forms, and results figures. The digital survey photographs and a geodatabase with the survey results should accompany the report. 5. Share Results with the Public Consultant scope assumes a presentation at one public meeting. City staff responsible for additional public outreach including meeting planning and attendance, sharing the draft report online, social media posts, public notices, press releases, etc. The draft survey results should be shared with the public via a public meeting and other means. At the meeting, City staff should explain the purpose of the project, the City's goals, the benefits of historic preservation, and next steps for owners of properties interested in pursuing historic designations. Consultants should present the survey findings and solicit feedback. 6. Finalize the Reconnaissance Survey Report As necessary, incorporate one round of consolidated comments from the City, other relevant stakeholders, and input from the public to finalize the reconnaissance survey report. Repeat the Process Every 10 Years Historic resources surveys are recommended every 10 years to ensure the survey provides an accurate record of a community's historic resources and serves as a useful tool for planners. The City should plan to repeat the survey plan described above every 10 years, building upon the findings of the past 10 years, and focusing on newly historic -age properties, newly recognized historical themes, and recent period(s) of significance. APPENDIX I Historic Resources Survey Plan 1 142 Page 465 of 524 _ CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANS ARKANSAS Copyright 2023 Page 466 of 524 CA Fayetteville Heritage & Historic Preservation Plan Item Approvals Name: Britin Bostick Jonathan Curth Susan Norton Lioneld Jordan Date: a10(-) Page 467 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-834 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: Chris Brown, Public Works Director FROM: Byron Humphry, Parks Maintenance Superintendent DATE: June 14, 2023 SUBJECT: CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 WITH CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS FOR LAKE FAYETTEVILLE SOFTBALL RENOVATION PROJECT. RECOMMENDATION: PUBLIC WORKS STAFF REQUESTS MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 WITH CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS FOR THE LAKE FAYETTEVILLE SOFTBALL COMPLEX CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK TO ESTABLISH THE GUARENTEED MAXIMUM PRICE FOR CONSTRUCTION. BACKGROUND: THE 2019 PARKS BOND CONSTRUCTION FUNDS WERE ANTICIPATED TO PROVIDE SYNTHETIC TURF INFIELDS, IMPROVE STORM DRAINAGE, NEW DUGOUTS, FENCING AND IMPROVE SPECTATOR AREAS AT THE LAKE FAYETTEVILLE SOFTBALL FIELDS. DISCUSSION: BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: ATTACHMENTS: Item C.2 Approval Signatures, SRM Lake Fay Softball Crossland C01, SRF Lake Fay Softball Crossland C01, BA Lake Fay Softball Crossland C01, Change Order No 1 - GMP proposal Crossland Heavy Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 468 of 524 == City of Fayetteville, Arkansas y 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479)575-8323 - Legislation Text File #: 2023-834 CHANGE ORDER NUMBER 1 WITH CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS FOR LAKE FAYETTEVILLE SOFTBALL RENOVATION PROJECT. A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #1 TO THE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT RISK CONTRACT WITH CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS FOR THE LAKE FAYETTEVILLE SOFTBALL RENOVATION PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,702,903.00, TO ESTABLISH A GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,702,903.00, TO APPROVE A PROJECT CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $93,500.00, AND TO APPROVE A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT - 2019 PARK IMPROVEMENT BOND PROJECT WHEREAS, on March 21, 2023, the City Council approved Resolution 75-23 and authorized a contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors to serve as the construction manager at risk for the Lake Fayetteville Softball Renovation Project; and WHEREAS, Change Order #1 will provide for synthetic turf infields, improved storm drainage, new dugouts and fencing, and improved spectator areas. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign Change Order #1 to the construction manager at risk contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution, for the Lake Fayetteville Softball Renovation Project in the amount of $2,702,903.00, and further approves a project contingency in the amount of $93,500.00 . Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the Guaranteed Maximum Price for construction of the Lake Fayetteville Softball Renovation Project in the amount of $2,702,903.00. Section 3: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves a budget adjustment, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution. Page 1 Page 469 of 524 C.2 Crossland Heavy Contractors (Change Order #1) Item Approvals Name: Chris Brown Kevin Springer Les McGaugh rr ua:? Paul Becker Susan Norton Lioneld Jordan Date: � 2�3 6 1 t-4 1 -2-613 (, 11`4/a0-a,3 Page 470 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE 1PO-W ARKANSAS MEETING OF JULY 6, 2023 TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Chris Brown, Public Works Director Terry Gulley, Assistant Public Works Director FROM: Byron Humphry, Park Operations Director DATE: 6/23/23 CITY COUNCIL MEMO SUBJECT: A Resolution to approve Change Order No. 1 to the Construction Manager at Risk Contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors in the amount of $2,702,903.00 for the Construction Phase of the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvements Project, to approve a Project Contingency in the amount of $93,500, to recognize Parkland Dedication revenue, and to approve a Budget Adjustment — Park Improvements Bond Project RECOMMENDATION: A Resolution to approve Change Order No. 1 to the Construction Manager at Risk Contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors in the amount of $2,702,903.00 for the Construction Phase of the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvements Project, to approve a Project Contingency in the amount of $93,500, to recognize Parkland Dedication revenue, and to approve a Budget Adjustment — Park Improvements Bond Project BACKGROUND: On October 4, 2022, City Council approved Resolution 224-22 to enter a contract with Crafton Tull & Associates, Inc. to provide professional architectural and engineering service associated with the design of the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvement project. On January 22, 2023, the City of Fayetteville advertised RFQ 23-02 and accepted requests for qualifications from construction management companies to provide CMAR services for the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvement project. On February 23, 2023 a selection committee made up of City staff and elected officials reviewed submittals from four construction management professionals that responded to the request for qualifications and short listed the applicants to two companies. On March 9, 2023, the selection committee interviewed the two companies. The committee selected and negotiated a contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors, Inc. to complete this task. On March 21, 2023, City Council approved Resolution 75-23 to authorize a Construction Manager at Risk Services Contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors, Inc., for the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvement Project for pre -construction services. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 471 of 524 DISCUSSION: Crossland Heavy worked with City Staff and Crafton Tull Associates in the pre -construction phase to shape the design and plan development to conform to project needs and available funds. Upon final design, the project was advertised and bid by Crossland Heavy in accordance to City and State procurement policies and based on the design documents provided by Crafton & Tull Associates. The scope of work includes improvements to the field and site drainage and storm water infrastructure, new fencing, dugouts, and bleachers, artificial turf infields, and improved accessibility. The GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price) document submitted by Crossland Heavy outlines the bid tabulations of the selected bidders, the allowances, and a signed affidavit that the GMP complies with Arkansas State procurement laws. This change order will approve the GMP as submitted and initiate the construction phase of the project. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: The cost of this Change Order as detailed in the GMP document is $2,702,903. A project contingency of $93,500 will also be funded. Funding sources are as follows: Purchase Order Details: G/L ACCT PROJECT AMOUNT 4705.860.7505-5806.00 46050.7505.1000 2,532,903.00 4470.520.8520-5806.00 46050.7505.1000 100,000.00 2250.520.9256-5806.00 46050.7505.1000 70,000.00 TOTAL 2,702,903.00 Attachments: Change Order #1 — GMP Submittal Page 472 o?524 Byron Humphry Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2023-834 Item ID 7/6/2023 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item 6/23/2023 PARKS & RECREATION (520) Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: A Resolution to approve Change Order No. 1 to the Construction Manager at Risk Contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors in the amount of $2,702,903.00 for the Construction Phase of the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvements Project, to approve a Project Contingency in the amount of $93,500, to recognize Parkland Dedication revenue, and to approve a Budget Adjustment — Park Improvements Bond Project 4705.860.7505-5806.00 4470.520.8520-5806.00 2250.520.9256-5806.00 Account Number 46050.7505.1000 Project Number Budgeted Item? Yes Does item have a direct cost? Yes Is a Budget Adjustment attached? Yes Budget Impact: Parks Projects 2022 Bonds Sales Tax Capital Impr Parks Development Fund Lake Fayetteville Improvements, Softball Fields Total Amended Budget Expenses (Actual+Encum) Available Budget Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Project Title $ 173,520.00 $ 166,180.00 Is 7,340.00 1 $ 2,702,903.00 $ 2,796,403.00 Is lUU'04U.UU V20221130 Purchase Order Number: 2023-467 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # 75-23 Change Order Number: #1 Original Contract Number: 2023-23 Approval Date: Comments: Item cost does not include project contingency of $93,500. 3/21/2023 Page 473 of 524 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment (Agenda) Budget Year Division Adjustment Number PARKS &RECREATION (520) /Org2 2023 Requestor: Byron Humphry BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION: A Resolution to approve Change Order No. 1 to the Construction Manager at Risk Contract with Crossland Heavy Contractors in the amount of $2,702,903.00 for the Construction Phase of the Lake Fayetteville Softball Improvements Project, to approve a Project Contingency in the amount of $93,500, to recognize Parkland Dedication revenue, and to approve a Budget Adjustment — Park Improvements Bond Project COUNCIL DATE: ITEM ID#: 7/6/2023 2023-834 Holly Black 612312023 10:35 6M RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE Budget Division Date TYPE: D - (City Council) JOURNAL#: GLDATE: CHKD/POSTED: TOTAL Account Number 70,000 70,000 Increase / (Decrease) Expense Revenue Project.Sub# Project Sub.Detl AT v.2023530 Account Name 4705.860.7505-5806.00 2,532,903 - 46050 7505.1000 EX Improvements - Park 4705.860.7505-5911.99 4705.860.7999-5899.00 93,500 - (2,626,403) - 46050 46050 7505.1000 EX 7999 EX Contingency - Capital Project Unallocated - Budget 4470.520.8520-5806.00 100,000 - 46050 7505.1000 EX Improvements - Park 4470.520.8520-5806.00 (100,000) - 19007 1 EX Improvements - Park 2250.520.9256-4419.01 2250.520.9256-5806.00 - 70,000 70,000 - 46050 46050 7505.1000 RE 7505.1000 EX Greenspace Fees - NE Improvements - Park 1 of 1 Page 474 of 524 �I idr TiC 1.7 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex GMP Submittal #1: City of Fayetteville, AR CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS ���^ ~»���~U��� �� n�D. � �x nK�s � CoverLetter ................................................................................. 3 1 Statement ofEstimated Cost ................................................... 4-7 vU Allowances................................................................................... 8-9 2 qt8H;OO Matrix and Project gSOUi[SOOSOtS.—'_—_--- 10-12 3 Assumptions and Clarifications .............................................. 13-14 2 CP[NSchedule ............................................................................... 15-17 3 Scope Document Log Index ..................................................... 18-20 3 Methods OfMeasurement and AddSOd8.--'—'—'_—. 21-36 16 Page 476 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS 501 South East Ave. Columbus, KS 66725 Tel: 620.429.1410 June 21, 2023 Byron Humphry Park Operations Director Public Works Department City of Fayetteville RE: Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex—GMP 41 Mr. Humphry, Crossland Heavy Contractors is pleased to present to you the GMP for the Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex Project based on design documents provided by Crafton & Tull Associates. The basis of the GMP as presented has been developed based on the following documents being submitted within the GMP. Below is the summary of costs for consideration of approval with a GMP amount post bid of $2,702,903. Total Cost of Work = $2,457,867.00 Construction Managers Fee = $147,472.00 Contingency Including 6.0% Fee = $97,564.00 GMP Total = $2,702,903.00 Please call or email with questions or concerns regarding the Guaranteed Maximum Price Proposal. Respectfully, Garrett Street Pre -Construction Manager 620-202-1834 astreet(@crossland.com Crossland Heavy Contractors Page 477 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Statement of Estimated Cost Page 478 of 524 Pre -Construction Manager: GARRETT STREET CROSSLAND 6/22/2023 Estimator: BRANDON BENTLEY Project: LAKE FAYETTEVILLE BALL PARK RENOVATIONS HEAVY CONTRACTORS LAKE FAYETTEVILLE BALLPARK RENOVATIONS GMP AS BID 90% DESIGN REV.1 90% DESIGN PRELIMINARY ITEM SOV/BID ITEM SUMMARY TOTAL COST TOTAL COST A GENERAL CONDITIONS $ 436,053.50 $ 437,245.16 $ 564,294.56 B DEMOLITION $ 55,508.00 $ 30,443.00 $ 139,841.50 C GENERAL SITEWORK $ 84,502.10 $ 170,600.00 $ 534,112.85 D SITE CONCRETE $ 129,947.00 $ 323,033.00 $ 562,279.00 E ELECTRICAL $ 46,500.00 $ 40,000.00 $ 113,300.00 F FENCING & GATES $ 784,527.97 $ 395,441.00 $ 853,562.00 G LANDSCAPING $ 112,312.00 $ 98,402.75 $ 390,230.75 H INFIELD FEATURES $ 681,000.23 $ 706,038.00 $ 728,197.00 1 SITE IMPROVEMENTS $ 12,928.90 $ 7,750.00 $ 47,187.50 J WATER/ STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS $ 81,098.00 $ 189,462.00 $ 211,222.00 K Bonding $ 33,489.82 $ 107,701.44 $ 168,130.44 TOTAL COST OF WORK = $ 2,457,867.52 $ 2,506,116 $ 41312,358 CM FEE (6% OF COST OF WORK) = $ 147,472 $ 150,367 $ 258,741 CONTINGENCY INCLUDING 6% FEE = $ 97,564 $ - $ 272,615 TOTAL BASE BID = $ 2,702,903 $ 2,656,483 $ 4,843,714 VARIANCE FROM 90% TARGET PRICE $ (2,140,811) $ (2,187,230) $ VARIANCE -80.59% -45.16% 0% Page 479 of 524 6/22/2023 CROSSLAND PROJECT: LAKE FAYETTEVILLE BALLPARK RENOVATIONS ESTIMATE NUMBER: PRE -CON MANAGER: GARRETT STREET ESTIMATOR:BRANDON BENTLEY HEAVY CONTRACTORS FINAL PRICING BREAKDOWN (GMP) Costing Tvpe/Origin Leqend: CM - Construction Manager (GC's & PR's) SP - Self -Perform S - Sub EMS - Equipment/Material Supplier P - Plug A - Allowance SCHEDULE OF VALUES BASE CONTINGENCY ITEM COST TYPE/ ORIGIN Division I BP DESCRIPTION CONTRACT ITEMS % Contingency Contingency $ Total Price QTY/ UOM UNIT PRICE Neatline Subtotal A GENERAL CONDITIONS $436,053.50 $8,721.07 $4",774.57 Al CM 1000 CM BONDS & INSURANCE 1 LS $33,573.00 $33,573 2% $671 $34,244 A2 CM 1000 1 CM CM STAFFING 1 LS $271,177.50 $271,178 2% $5,424 $276,601 A3 CM 1001 CM CM PROJECT REQUIREMENTS 1 LS $131,303.00 $131,303 2% $2,626 $133,929 B DEMOLITION $55,508.00 B1 SP 2000 01 DEMOLISH/REMOVE EXISTING STORM SEWER - S&K 590 LF $23.00 $13,570 7% $950 $14,520 B2 SP 2000 01 REMOVE EXISTING SIDEWALK -S&K 1670 SY $18.00 $30,060 7% $2,104 $32,164 B3 SP 2000 01 REMOVE EXISTING HYDRANT -S&K 1 EA 1 $1,800.00 $1,800 7% $126 $1,926 B4 SP 2000 01 DEMOLISH EXISTING SIDEWALK FOR BACKSTOP RETAINING WALL - S&K 1 LS $3,100.00 $3,100 7% $217 $3,317 B5 SP 2000 01 REMOVE EXISTING RETAINING WALL - S&K 82 LF $19.00 $1,558 7% $109 $1,667 B6 SP 2000 01 REMOVE EXISTING DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, WOOD FENCING & SURFACE - S&K 1 LS $2,300.00 $2,300 7% $161 $2,461 B7 SP 2000 1 01 IREMOV EXISTING SITE CHAINLINK FENCEING - S&K 390 LF $8.00 $3,120 7% $218 $3,338 C GENERAL SITEWORK $84,502.10 M $4,513.00 1 $89,015.10 C1 S 2000 01 CLEARING & GRUBBING - S&K 1 LS $6,200.00 $6,200 7% $434 $6,634 C2 S 2000 01 CUT TO GRADE EXPORT -S&K 1,550 CY $9.10 $14,105 10% $1,411 $15,516 C3 S 2000 01 EMBANKMENT IMPORT - S&K 750 CY $7.80 $5,850 10% $585 $6,435 C4 S 2000 01 UNDERCUT & BACKFILL - S&K 1 CY 1 $27.10 $27 7% $2 $29 C5 S 2000 01 ROCK EXCAVATION - S&K 1 CY 1 $300.00 $300 7% $21 $321 C6 S 2000 01 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES - S&K 2 EA $4,000.00 $8,000 7% $560 $8,560 C7 S 2000 01 EROSION CONTROL - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE 1 LS $14,500.00 $14,500 3% $435 $14,935 C8 S 2000 01 TOPSOIL PLACEMENT - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE 8,000 SY $4.44 $35,520 3% $1,066 $36,586 D I a I I ISITE CONCRETMEEM- $129,947.00 $9,096.29 $139,043.29 D1 SP 3000 02 CONCRETE SIDEWALK - S&K 1,440 SY $63.00 $90,720 7% $6,350 $97,070 D2 SP 3000 02 CONCRETE HD DUMPSTER PAD - S&K 75 SY $72.00 $5,400 7% $378 $5,778 D3 SP 3000 02 DUGOUT CONCRETE - S&K 115 SY $63.00 $7,245 7% $507 $7,752 D4 SP 3000 02 CAST -IN -PLACE DETECTABLE WARNING PANEL - S&K 18 SF 1 $33.50 $603 7% 1 $42 $645 D5 SP 3000 02 FIELD 1 BACKSTOP RETAINING WALL - S&K 118 LF $28.00 $3,304 7% $231 $3,535 D6 I SP 3000 1 02 4" OVERLAY SIDEWALK FIELD 1 - S&K 325 SY $63.00 $20,475 7% $1,433 $21,908 D8 SP 3000 02 DUMPSTER BOLLARDS - S&K 8 EA $275.00 $2,200 7% $154 $2,354 E ELECTRICAL $46,500.00 111V $9,300.00 $55,800.00 E1 S 16000 03 ELECTRICAL - INCLUDES DEMO ITEMS - ELECTRICAL RESOURCES 1 LS $46,500.00 $46,500 20% $9,300 $55,800 F FENCING & GATES $784,527.97 $17,070.09 $801,598.06 F1 S 10000 04 SITE ELEMENT - BLEACHERS 5 ROW SUPPLY & INSTALLED - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 3 EA $10,821.16 $32,463 3% $974 $33,437 F2 S 10000 04 SITE ELEMENT - BLEACHERS 3 ROW SUPPLY & INSTALLED - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 6 EA $4,602.77 $27,617 3% $828 $28,445 F3 S 10000 04 SITE ELEMENT - SHADE STRUCTURES SUPPLY & INSTALLED - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 1 EA $23,362.69 $23,363 3% $701 $24,064 F4 S 10000 04 SITE ELEMENT - DUGOUT BENCHES SUPPLY & INSTALLED - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 6 EA $2,476.25 $14,858 3% $446 $15,303 F5 S 10000 1 04 SITE ELEMENT- MANUFACTURED DUGOUTS SUPPLY & INSTALLED -SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 6 EA $22,958.78 $137,753 3% $4,133 $141,885 F6 S 13000 05 6' TALL CHAINLINK FENCE - ROBINSON FENCE 410 LF $45.00 $18,450 3% $554 $19,004 F6.5 S 13000 05 6' TALL CHAINLINK FENCE -ALLOWANCE 1005 LF $45.00 $45,225 0% $0 $45,225 F7 S 13000 05 10' TALL CHAINLINK FENCE -ROBINSON FENCE 775 LF $130.00 $100,750 3% $3,023 $103,773 F7.5 S 13000 05 10' TALL CHAINLINK FENCE -ALLOWANCE 1300 LF $131.00 $170,300 0% $0 $170,300 F8 S 13000 05 BACKSTOP NETTING - ROBINSON FENCE 3 EA $28,200.00 $84,600 3% $2,538 $87,138 F9 S 13000 05 BACKSTOP NETTING BETWEEN FIELDS - ROBINSON FENCE 1 LS $105,750.00 $105,750 3% $3,173 $108,923 F10 S 13000 05 REMOVABLE INFIELD FENCING & ANCHOR SYSTEM - ROBINSON FENCE 600 LF $39.00 $23,400 3% $702 $24,102 LANDSCAPING $112,312.00 Ir $11,286.00 $123,598.00 G1 S 2000 06 IRRIGATION - OUTFIELDS AND LANDSCAPE AREAS - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE ALLOWANCE 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 10% $2,500 $27,500 G2 P 2000 1 06 ISEEDING AND MULCHING - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE 2 AC $4,356.00 $8,712 25% 1 $2,178 $10,890 G3 S 2000 06 SOLID SOD SOLID BERMUDA SOD - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE 10000 SY $6.50 $65,000 10% $6,500 $71,500 G4 P 2000 1 06 TREE PROTECTION FENCING - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE 1 LS $3,600.00 $3,600 3% $108 1 $3,708 G5 P 2000 1 06 TIMBER EDGING -ALLOWANCE 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000 0% $0 $10,000 Page 1 Page 480 of 524 6/22/2023 CROSSLAND PROJECT: LAKE FAYETTEVILLE BALLPARK RENOVATIONS ESTIMATE NUMBER: PRE -CON MANAGER: GARRETT STREET ESTIMATOR:BRANDON BENTLEY H I INFIELD FEATURES $681,000.23 $20,430.01 $701,430.23 H1 S 13000 07 ARTIFICIAL TURF SURFACE FOR INFIELDS INCLUDES UNDERDRAIN SYSTEM - UNITED TURF & TRACK 46896 SF $13.77 $645,601 3% $19,368 $664,969 H2 S 13000 04 BASES WITH ANCHORS - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 3 EA $5,030.10 $15,090 3% $453 $15,543 H3 S 10000 08 FIELD SIGNAGE - OUTFIELD - CUSTOM PAVEMENT & MARKINGS 9 EA $125.00 $1,125 3% $34 $1,159 H4 S 10000 08 FIELD SIGNAGE - OTHER - CUSTOM PAVEMENT & MARKINGS 15 EA 1 $85.001 $1,275 3% 1 $38 $1,313 H5 S 10000 04 SITE ELEMENT - PORTABLE PITCHING MOUNDS - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 3 EA $5,969.64 $17,909 3% $537 $18,446 SITE IMPROVEMENTS $12,928.90 $387.87 $13,316.77 17 S 4000 08 PARK SIGNAGE - CUSTOM PAVEMENT & MARKINGS 1 LS $600.00 $600 3% $18 $618 18 S 4000 08 STRIPING -CUSTOM PAVEMENT & MARKINGS 1 LS $1,330.00 $1,330 3% $40 $1,370 19 S 4000 09 NEW WOOD FENCE - ROBINSON FENCE 330 LF $33.33 $10,999 3% $330 $11,329 J UTILITY/ STORMWATER IMPROVEMENTS $81,098.00 $5,676.86 $86,774.86 J1 SP 2000 01 18" HDPE W/FES - S&K 22 LF $109.00 $2,398 7% $168 $2,566 J2 SP 2000 01 24" HDPE W/FES - S&K 400 LF $78.00 $31,200 7% $2,184 $33,384 J3 SP 2000 01 8"PVC -S&K 36 LF $40.00 $1,440 7% 101 $1,541 J4 I SP 2000 1 01 122 x 13 RCHEAP - S&K 185 LF 1 $76.00 $14,060 7% 1 $984 $15,044 J5 SP 2000 01 4'X4'GRATEINLET -S&K 3 EA $5,800.00 $17,400 7% $1,218 $18,618 J6 SP 2000 01 4' X 4' JUNCTION BOX - S&K 1 EA $5,200.00 $5,200 7% $364 $5,564 J7 SP 2000 01 4' X 4' AREA INLET - S&K 1 EA $5,500.00 $5,500 7% $385 $5,885 J8 SP 2000 01 FRENCH DRAIN SYSTEM - S&K 130 LF $30.00 $3,900 7% $273 $4,173 K BONDING $33,489.82 $1,674.49 $35,164.31 K1 O 2000 00 SITEWORK- S&K DIRTWORKS 1 LS $9,100.00 $9,100 $455 $9,555 K2 O 2000 00 ELECTRICAL - ELECTRICAL RESOURCES 1 LS $930.00 $930 M5% $47 $977 K3 O 2000 00 SITE ELEMENTS SUB - SCHOOL & OFFICE PRODUCTS 1 LS $3,190.52 $3,191 $160 $3,350 K4 O 2000 00 FIELD FENCING SUB BONDING 1 LS $6,660.00 $6,660 $333 $6,993 K5 O 2000 00 LANDSCAPING SUB BONDING - SECOND NATURE LANDSCAPE 1 LS $3,183.30 $3,183 5% $159 $3,342 K6 O 2000 00 FIELD TURF SUB BONDING - UNITED TURF & TRACK 1 LS $9,956.00 $9,956 5% $4981 $10,454 K7 O 2000 00 PARK SIGNAGE - CUSTOM PAVEMENT & MARKINGS 1 LS $250.00 $250 5% $13 $263 K8 O 2000 00 WOOD FENCING - ROBINSON FENCING 1 LS $220.00 $220 5% $11 $231 COST OF WORK TOTAL $ CONSTRUCTION MANAGERS FEE (6.0% OF COST OF WORK) $ 2,457,868 147,472 PROJECT TOTAL LESS CONTINGENCY $ 2,605,340 TOTAL CONTINGENCY WITH 6.0% FEE $ TOTAL % CONTINGENCY 97,564 3.97% PROJECT TOTAL INCLUDING CONTINGENCY $ 2,702,903 TORS Page 2 Page 481 of 524 Allowances CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Page 482 of 524 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex — Allowance Items Allow. #: Allowance Descriptions Unit Cost 1 G1— Irrigation Repair LS $25,000.00 2 G5 — Replacement Timber Edging LS $10,000.00 3 F6.5 — 6' Tall Chainlink Fence (Supply & Install) LS $45,225.00 4 F7.5 —10' Tall Chainlink Fence (Supply & Install) LS $170,300.00 Description and Recommendation of Allowance Items: 1. Irrigation Repair a. This allowance item is to be utilized for incidental repair or replacement for irrigation supply lines, or irrigation components, that could be damaged during construction. 2. Replacement Timber Edging a. This allowance item is to be utilized for incidental repair or replacement for existing timber edging that could be damaged during construction. 3. 6' Tall Chainlink Fence (Supply & Install) a. This allowance item is to be utilized for additional chainlink fencing installation per the Owners' request. 4. 10' Tall Chainlink Fence (Supply & Install) a. This allowance item is to be utilized for additional chainlink fencing installation per the Owners' request. Page 483 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Staffing Matrix & Project Requirements Page 484 of 524 CROSS LAND GENERAL CONDITIONS ESTSIMATE HEAVY CONTRACTORS CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATED DURATION 9 MONTHS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES QTY UNIT AMOUNT TOTAL NOTES FOR CLARITY CDC OFFICE EXPENSE 1 Job Sign 1.0 LS $ 600 $ 600 Project Job Sign 2 CM Field Office 9.0 MO $ 800 $ 7,200 Office Trailer Rental, Mobilization and Demobilization 3 Field Office Furniture & Furnishings 1.0 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Storage, File Cabinets, Desks, Chairs 4 Office Supplies 9.0 MO $ 200 $ 1,800 Paper, Pens, White Boards, Digital Display, & Misc. 5 Field Office Maintenance & Repairs 4.5 MO $ 150 $ 675 Projected, minor repairs for the project office trailer 6 Copier Rental - MO $ 300 $ Average monthly rental cost 7 Small Tools / Small Tool Rental 1.0 LS $ 1,750 $ 1,750 Misc. ST&S for Mobilization Assistance 8 Jobsite Radios 1.0 LS $ 600 $ 600 Site Communications, Purchase and Repairs 9 Cell Phones & Internet 9.0 MO $ 330 $ 2,970 Total of 3 Management Personel 10 Water and Ice 9.0 MO $ 200 $ 1,800 Bottle Water and Ice for the Duration I 1 Mobilization / Demobilization CHC Labor 1.0 LS $ 1,750 $ 1,750 Labor Assist for Mobilization and De -Mobilization 12 lConstruction Photo's & Supplies 1.0 LS $ 500 $ 500 Progress Photos, Finish Photos & Drone Footage ENGINEERS OFFICE EXPENSE TEMP CONSTRUCTION, SECURITY & SAFETY 18 Temporary Fencing/Barriers (1,500 If @ 9 months) 1.0 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Required Temporary Fencing and Barricades 19 Temporary Laydown, Storage and Maintenance 1.0 LS $ 3,000 $ 3,000 Required Laydown, Storage and Maintenance 20 Safety Material 9.0 MO $ 400 $ 3,600 Visitor Hard Hats, Safety Glasses, and Misc. 21 Temp Signage 1.0 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Temporary Construction Signage 22 Cleanup & Dumpsters 9.0 MO $ 650.00 $ 5,850 CM Required Service (Site Dumpsters) VEHICLES & UTV'S 23 ITruck Expenses 18.5 MO $ 750 $ 13,875 Total of 2 Management Personel (Super/FE 9 moths, PM 4.5 mnths) 24 IFuct Expenses 18.0 MO $ 500 $ 9,000 Total of Management Personel (18 months) 25 JUTV -I MO I $ 800 $ Site Access and Mobility SITE SURVEY & CONTROL 26 Survey Sub (Initial Control) - LS $ - $ Establishment of Initial Control 27 GPS Earthwork Model 1.0 LS $ 1,500 $ 1,500 Earthwork Model for Layout 28 Base Station, Rover, Data Collector (SERVICE) 9.0 MO $ 1,250 $ 11,250 QA/QC and Layout 29 Survey Supplies 9.0 MO $ 150 $ 1,350 Anticipated Survey Supplies TEMP UTILITIES 30 Temporary Electric Service - MO $ 450.00 $ Local Utility Company 31 Temporary Water - MO $ 750.00 $ Local Utility Company (water tightness testing) 32 Temporary Power / Heat & Ventilation - LS $ - $ Climate Control Structures 33 Temporary Toilets 18.0 MO $ 125 $ 2,250 CM Required Service 2 Units for the Durations 34 Temp Sanitary Sewer Tanks (Office Trailers x 1) - MO $ 125 $ One Unit for the Duration MATERIAL HANDLING & STORAGE 35 Telehandler Rental 3.0 MO $ 2,800.00 $ 8,400 Equipment loading and unloading 36 Skidsteer 3.0 MO $ 2,320 $ 6,960 Clean up and maintenance 37 Mobilization / Demobilization Equipment 2.0 EA $ 675 $ 1,350 Tellehandler, Skidsteer, & Tool Vans 38 Material Handling Labor (Equipment Unloading) - LS $ 2,500 $ CHC Labor for Unloading and Handling Equipment 39 Tool Vans (12 Months x 2 Connexes) 18.0 MO $ 150 $ 2,700 CM Required Storage STAYOUT, PER -DIEM, ADD-ONS 40 Management Per -diem ($30 Rate/Day) - Day $ 30 $ Super 24 months / 104 wks / 384 days 41 Management Per -diem ($60 Rate/Day) - Day $ 60 $ 42 Management Travel Add -On Incentive - WE $ 400 $ 43 Labor Per -diem ($30 Rate/Day) - Day $ 30 $ 44 Labor Per -diem ($60 Rate/Day) - Day $ 60 $ 45 Travel Time - LS $ - $ 46 Hotel Stay - Day $ 100 $ MISC. PROJECT MANAGEMENT EXPENSES 47 jProject Control Software - MO $ 200 $ TOTAL CONSTRUCTION SERVICES EXPENSE _ $ 97,730 OTHER SERVICES QTY I UNIT I AMOUNT I TOTAL NOTES FOR CLARITY SPECIALTY FEES 48 Building/Gmding Permit - LS $ - $ 49 Special Permits, Licenses, & Fees - LS $ - $ 50 Utility Connection Permits - LS $ - $ 51 Impact Fees - LS $ - $ 52 Testing Laboratory Services - LS $ - $ - 53 Soils Testing & Inspections - LS $ - $ - 54 Concrete Testing & Inspections - LS $ - $ - 55 Operational Permits - LS $ - $ - 56 Easements - LS $ - $ - 57 Site Surveys & Soils Reports - LS $ - $ - TOTAL OTHER SERVICES EXPENSE _ $ BONDS & INSURANCE QTY UNIT AMOUNT TOTAL NOTES FOR CLARITY PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS 58 Bonds 0.00611 Factor $ 3,000,000 $ 18,333 Bonds and insurance provided based on CM services. 59 General Liability 0.00350 Factor $ 3,000,000 $ 10,500 60 Owners & Contractors Protective Liability - Factor $ 3,000,000 1 $ 61 Builders Risk 0.00158 Factor $ 3,000,000 $ 4,740 TOTAL BONDS & INSURANCE EXPENSE = $ 33,573 TOTAL PROJECT REQUIREMENTS = $ 131,303 Page 485 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS PROJECT STAFFING MATRIX PROJECT: Lake Fayetteville Ballpark ROLE PROJECT TIMELINE TEAM MEMBER BILLING RATE ($/HR) STAFFING REQUIREMENTS N N N N N N N N ti N N N N d N N N N O N N z N N A M N ti M N w M N M N da M N M N ti M N M N i2 7 C ,O x � c 0 >11 ►+ H f0 u° v' m F PRECONSTRUCTION SERVICES PRE -CONSTRUCTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Dan Thompson $ 125 Project Principle 0 0 0 0 0 0 Garrett Street $ 110 Pre -Construction Manager 10 40 30 40 120 13200 Bill Hagenburger $ 115 Design Manager 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ron Edmond $ 110 Project Manager 0 15 0 15 30 3300 Jared Cox $ 105 Superintendent 0 101 0 101 1 1 20 2100 Brandon Bentley $ 90 1 Lead Estimator 10 40 20 20 90 8100 TBD 1 $ 75 ICivil Sitework Estimator 0 15 0 15 30 2250 TOTAL BASE STAFF HOURS BY MONTH = 20 120 50 100 290 $ 28,950.00 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES CONSTRUCTION PHASE TOTAL DURATION FULL DURATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Dan Thompson $ 125 Project Principle 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ - Garrett Street $ 110 Pre -Construction Manager 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ Bill Hagenburger $ 115 Design Manager 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ - Ron Edmond $ 110 Project Manager 43.25 43.25 43.25 43.25 43.25 43.25 43.25 43.25 43.25 0 0 0 0 0 389.25 $ 42,818 Jared Cox $ 105 Superintendent 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 1 173 173 0 0 0 1 0 0 1557 $ 163,485 Brandon Bentley $ 90 Lead Estimator 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0$ - TBD $ 75 Civil Sitework Estimator 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0$ - TBD $ 75 Field Engineer 0 0 0 0 173 173 173 173 173 0 0 0 0 0 865 $ 64,875 TOTAL BASE STAFF HOURS BY MONTH = 0 0 0 0 216.25 216.25 216.25 216.25 389.25 389.25 389.25 389.25 389.25 0 0 0 0 0 2811.25 $ 271,177.50 CROSSLAND -HEAVY CONTRACTORS PROJECT STAFFING MATRIX - MONTHLY BILLING (Assuming 9-Month Duration) PROJECT: Lake Fayetteville Ballpark ROLE PROJECT TIMELINE TEAM MEMBER BILLING RATE ($/HR) STAFFING REQUIREMENTS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES N N N N N ti N ti N N N O N z N A N N w N N N N ti N ti N ¢ O 7 :° F . c CONSTRUCTION PHASE TOTAL DURATION Dan Thompson $ 125 Project Principle $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Garrett Street $ 110 Pre -Construction Manager $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Bill Hagenburger $ 115 Design Manager $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - Ron Edmond $ 110 Project Manager $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ 4,758 $ $ $ $ $ $ 42,818 Jared Cox $ 105 Superintendent $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ 18,165 $ $ $ $ $ $ 163,485 Brandon Bentley $ 90 Lead Estimator $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ $ - $ $ - $ $ $ $ $ $ - TBD $ 75 Civil Sitework Estimator $ $ $ $ $ - $ - $ $ - $ - $ $ $ $ $ $ - TBD $ 75 Field Engineer $ $ $ $ $ 12,975 $ 12,975 $ 12,975 $ 12,975 $ 12,975 $ $ $ $ $ $ 64,875 TOTAL BASE STAFF COST BY MONTH = $ $ $ $ $ 22,923 $ 22,923 $ 22,923 $ 22,923 $ 35,898 $ 35,898 $ 35,898 $ 35,898 $ 35,898 $ $ $ $ $ $ 271,177.50 Page 486 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Assumptions & Clarfications Page 487 of 524 City of Fayetteville — Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex General Clarifications & Assumptions: 1) All bidders' mobilizations have been included in the GMP price. 2) CHC has captured cost of temporary fencing & signage to protect the public from the work area during construction in Project Requirements. 3) This project has been priced without consideration of Domestic and AIS requirements. 4) The GMP does not include re -location of the existing sanitary sewer line depicted in the drawings. 5) This GMP does not include labor, equipment, or materials for demolition of existing dugouts, scorekeepers' huts, field fencing, benches, or bleachers. This work is to be provided by the City of Fayetteville prior to, or during, construction. 6) The GMP does not include trucking costs for haul off & removal of infield clay mixture. The City is to provide trucking for removal of existing infield clay soil mixture. 7) The GMP includes one (1) unit for Rock Excavation and one (1) unit for Undercut & Backfill to be paid by the unit of work performed by the Contractor. Additional work performed under these two (2) items shall be paid for using project contingency. 8) This GMP includes use of "Type S" detail (sheet C-504) for all concrete joints in sidewalks, slabs, topping slabs, curbs, or other flatwork concrete items. 9) This GMP includes 18 SF of detectable warning panels. Additional square footage of this item shall be compensated using project contingency. 10) This GMP does not include any modifications to existing light poles beyond what's specified in the construction documents. 11) This GMP includes the cost of the product proposed only by Forever Lawn. 12) This GMP does not include any costs for jobsite trailer or Contractor personnel office space. The CM shall utilize the existing concession stand and restroom facilities. The CM shall clean the spaces utilized prior to demobilization. 13) The CM shall have liberty to utilize the entire parking area for laydown, storage & equipment off- loading for the duration of the project. Page 488 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS CPM Schedule Page 489 of 524 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex - GMP Schedule Classic Schedule Layout 20-Jun-23 13:56 Activity ID Activity Name Original Duration Remaining Schedule % Start Finish Total Float Qtr2, 2023 Qtr3,2023 Qtr4, 2023 Qtr 1, 2024 Duration Complete MarI Apr I May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan I Feb COF CMAR 2.1 Project Milesto = A1000 Notice to Proceed A1010 Substantial Completion 244 1 1 168 1 1 0% 15-Mar-23, 0% 24-Jul-23A 0% 10-Jan-24 08-Feb-24 10-Jul-23 10-Jan-24 A1020 Punchlist 20 20 0% 11-Jan-24 07-Feb-24 A1030 Final Completion 1 1 0% 08-Feb-24 08-Feb-24 A1200 1 Project Design & Bidding Ph; 63 0 100% 1 15-Mar-23, 30-May-Z A1400 I GMP Development 20 14 0% 1 29-May-23 I 07-Jul-23 a A1040 Electrical Components 60 60 0% 11-Jul-23 02-0ct23 A1050 Misc.Metals 60 60 0% 11-Jul-23 02-W23 A1060 Turf& Field Accessories 60 60 0% 11-Jul-23 02-0ct-23 A1070 Pipe Materials 15 15 0% 11-Jul-23 31-Jul-23 A1080 Storm Drain Materials 15 15 0% 11-Jul-23 31-Jul-23 COF CMAR 2.3 Construction P r� COF CMAR-2.3.1 Earthwork A1090 Clear&Grub A1100 Site Grading 5 5 0% 3 11,Ju1-23 -Jan-24 03-Jan-24 17-Jul-23 8 8 0% 18-Jul-23 27-Jul-23 A1110 Site Restoration Irk COF CMAR 2.3.2 Site Utiliti i o A1120 , Stormdrain Upgrades 4 4 0% 29-Dec-23 03-Jan-24 0% 28-Jul-23 28-Dec-23 0%1 28-Jul-23 1 31 Aug-23 i 251 25 0 08-Feb4 0 0 Completion0fiiii�Su�bstanlal Punchlist --Final Col i Project sign Bidding Phase GMP Development 02-Oct-23,COFCMAR-2.2 Procurement Electrical Components ---------'--------------------- Misc. Metal Turf & Field Accessories Pipe Materials Storm Drain Materials --------------------- -- L Clear&Grub Site Grading I-------------- ------- ----------- - � Stormdrain Upgrades Misc. Site Utility Work V 10-Nov23, COF CMAR 0 Re -Grade Infield 0 Install New drainage System Dugout;Upgrades Bleacher Upgrades Turf Installation Fence $� Hardware Upgl ---------- -------------------------- ----------------- ----- 29-Nov-23, COF Re -Grade Infield Install New Drainage System Dugout Upgrades Bleacher ---------------------------------------------------;----- Bleache Upgrades Turf Installation Fence & Hard 18- Re -Grade Infield Install New Drainage Sys --------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- Dugout Upgrades Bleacher Upgra( Turf Installatip Fen' �► I27-Nov-23, COF ---------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------- ------Demolish Existing Dum ---------- 09- Jan-JanCOF CMAR4 03tilan-24,------------ r COF CMAR 2.. Site Restoration -Dec-23, COF CMAR 2.32 ghting/Eleclrieal Upgrades .3.3 Norih Feld es ---------------- CMAR2.3.4' SW Feld re Upgrades -23, COF CMAR-2.3.5 SE 0 m -------------- es & Hardware UJpgrades MAR 2.3.6 Parking Lot lmr ste--------------------- 0 93 93 93 138 138 126 0 0 26 64 0 0 64 64 64 64 51 0 0 51 51 51 51 38 0 0 38 38 38 38 0 A1130 Misc. SiteUtlityWork 101 10 0% 01Sep-23 14Sep-23 A1210 LightingiElecbical Upgrades 75 75 0% 15Sep-23 28-Dec-23 1h COF CMAR2.3.3 North Field % 15Sep-Sep 10-Nov-23 A1140 Re -Grade Infield 5 5 0% 15Sep-Sep 21Sep-Sep A1150 Install New Drainage System 8 8 0% 22Sep-Sep 03-W23 A1160 Dugout Upgrades 6 6 0% 04-Oct 11-W23 A1170 Bleacher Upgrades 7 7 0% 12-Oct23 20-W23 A1180 Turf Installation 4 4 0% 23-Oct23 26-W23 A1190 Fence & Hardware Upgrade: 11 11 0% 27-Oct 23 10-Nov-23 COF CMAR2.3.4 SW Fiel 41 41 0% 04-Oct 23 29-Nov-23 A1220 Re -Grade Infield 5 5 0% 04-Oct 23 10-W-23 A1230 Install New Drainage System 8 8 0% 11-Oct23 20-W23 A1240 Dugout Upgrades 6 6 0% 23-Oct 30-W23 A1250 Bleacher Upgrades 7 7 0% 31-Oct23 08-Nov-23 A1260 Turf Installation 4 4 0% 09-Nov-23 14-Nov-23 A1270 Fence & Hardware Upgrade: 11 11 0% 15-Nov-23 29-Nov-23 SCOF CMAR2.3.5 SE Field 41 41 0% 23-Oct 23 18-Deo-23 A1280 Re -Grade Infield 5 5 0% 23-Oct 27-W23 A1290 Install New Drainage System 8 8 0% 30-Oct 23 08-Nov-23 A1300 Dugout Upgrades 6 6 0% 09-Nov-23 16-Nov-23 A1310 Bleacher Upgrades 7 7 0% 17-Nov-23 27-Nov-23 A1320 Turf Installation 4 4 0% 28-Nov-23 01-Deo-23 A1330 Fence & Hardware Upgrade: rJ COF CMAR-2.3.6 Parking Lot Improw A1340 Demolish Existing Dumpster, 11 11 0% 04-Dec23 0% 09-Nov-23 0%i 09-Nov-23 18-Deo-23 13 13-Nov-23 3 3 Actual Level of Effort Remaining Work ♦ ♦ Milestone I Page 1 of 2 I TASK filter: All Activities Actual Work Critical Remaining Work V111 summary © Oracle Corporation Page 490 of 524 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex - GMP Schedule Classic Schedule Layout 20-Jun-23 13:56 Activity ID Activity Name Original Duration Remaining Duration Schedule % Complete Start Finish Total Float Qtr2, 2023 Q1r3,2023 Qtr4, 2023 Qtr 1, 2024 Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb A1350 ConstructHDDumpsterPad 9 1 9 1 0% 0% 14-Nov-23 24-Nov-23 0 ConstructHDDu psterPad Install NewWood Fence OV 09- Jan-24, COF CMAR- Demolipt i Existing Un-even Concrete; ------------ -------------- Re' rade CommonArea Commo,i A1360 Install New Wood Fence 27-Nov-23 27-Nov-23 0 COF CMAR 2.3.7 Common Area Impn 31 31 AL 0% 28-Nov-23 09- Jan-24 A1370 Demolish Existing Un-Even ( 11 11 0% 28-Nov-23 12-Dec-23 0 A1380 Re -Grade Common Area 6 6 ° 0% 13-Dec-23 20-Dec-23 0 A1390 FiPiF Concrete Common Are 141 14 0% 121-Dec 23 I 09tiJan-24 0Concrete Actual Level of Effort 0 Remaining Work Actual Work Critical Remaining Work ♦ ♦ Milestone VwwmmwV summary Page 2 of 2 TASK filter: All Activities © Oracle Corporation Page 491 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Scope Document Log Index Page 492 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Exhibit D — Project Bidding Documents List Specification List Division 01. General Requirements Specification No. Description 012500 Abbreviations 014000 Testing Laboratory Services Division Architectural Specification No. Description 033000 Cast -in -Place Concrete 099113 Exterior Painting 116800 Play Field Equipment & Structures Division 30 — Earthwork Specification No. Description 310000 Site Demolition 311000 Site Clearing 312000 Earthwork 312600 Aggregate Materials 312700 Soil Stabilization 312800 Erosion and Sedimentation Control (Including SWPPP) Division 32 — Exterior Improvements Specification No. Description 321313 Portland Cement Concrete Paving 321323 Pavement Markings 321333 Curbs & Sidewalks 323113 Chain Link Fences and Gates (Site) 328400 Landscape Irrigation System 329200!Turf and Grasses Division 33 — Utilities Specification No. Description 330800 Sewer Manholes, Frames, and Covers 334100 Storm Drainage Special Privisions Artificial Turf OSHA Trench Safet Specifications City of Fayetteville Standard Specifications Page 493 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Project Drawing List Index of Sheets Drawing No. Description C-001 Cover Sheet C-002 Project Control Sheet C-003 Demolition Plan C-101 Site Plan C-102 Overall Grading Plan C-103 Field 1 Grading Plan C-104 Field 2 Grading Plan C-105 Field 3 Grading Plan C-106 Erosion Control Phase I C-107 Erosion Control Phase II C-201 Storm Sewer Line 1 C-202 Storm Sewer Line 2 C-401 Lighting & Camera Plan C-402 Infield Layout C-501 Turf Underdrain Detail C-502 Special Details C-503 Fence Details C-504 Site Details (1) C-505 Site Details (2) C-506 Drainage Details C-507 Erosion Control Details (1) C-508 Erosion Control Details (2) C-509 Tree Preservation Details -101 Typical Infield & Details -102 Site Furnishing Details & Schedules ESL-101 Electrical Plan Page 494 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Methods of Measurements N Addendums 1-3 Page 495 of 524 Page I 1 Exhibit E — Methods of Measurement Table of Contents Terms of Payment & Compensation Type: ................................................................................................... I GeneralClarifications: ................................................................................................................................... 2 Methods of Measurement Bid Packages (000-011).....................................................................................3 BidPackage 01— Sitework........................................................................................................................ 3 BidPackage 02 — Site Concrete................................................................................................................. 6 BidPackage 003 - Electrical......................................................................................................................8 BidPackage 004 — Site Elements.............................................................................................................. 8 Bid Package 005 — Field Fencing, Gates & Accessories............................................................................. 9 BidPackage 006 — Landscaping..............................................................................................................10 Bid Package 007 — Infield Turf & Accessories.........................................................................................11 Bid Package 008 — Park Signage..............................................................................................................11 Bid Package 009 —Wood Fencing...........................................................................................................12 Terms of Payment & Compensation Type: Type 1 - Lump Sum: Payment for lump sum work shall be inclusive of all labor, equipment, materials, overhead and profit for all items associated with the defined work. The work shall be paid for on an agreed upon percent complete within a given billing cycle and verified by the Construction Manager. Type 2 - Unit Price: Payment for unit cost work shall be inclusive of all labor, equipment, materials, and OHP for all items associated with the defined work. The work shall be paid for by the unit put in place within a given billing cycle. The units shall be verified by the Construction Manager prior to billing for the work. Over and Underruns shall be allowed for Type 2 compensation. Type 3 — Unit Cost not to Exceed Plan QTY: Payment for unit cost work shall be inclusive of all labor, equipment, materials, and OHP for all items associated with the defined work. The work shall be paid for by the unit put in place within a given billing cycle. The units shall be verified by the Construction Manager prior to billing for the work. Overruns shall not be allowed. Type 4 - Allowance: Allowance bid items shall be carried in the bidding subcontractor's scope of work. Allowances are owned by the project and managed by the Construction Manager. Allowance bid items may or may not be utilized depending on field conditions and the project requirements. Page 496 of 524 Page 12 General Clarifications: All work shall be completed in accordance with the contract documents, plans, and specifications. Bid Price shall cover all items of work reasonably implied or inferred. Rain and Flood Events: All work areas shall be free of debris, materials, tools, and equipment at the end of each workday. Neither the construction manager nor the owner shall be liable for loss of materials, tools, or equipment in the event of a flood or major rain events. All work shall be bid accordingly based upon the site conditions. Bidding Instructions: All bidders are to evaluate and bid each bid package in its entirety unless otherwise stated in the bid package. Mobilization: Mobilization shall be included within the bid items as seen fit by the bidding subcontractor. Additional mobilizations shall be included as seen fit to perform the work unless specifically stated within the individual bid package's methods of measurement. On Site Power. On site power will be limited. The bidding subcontractor should plan to provide their own power. Schedule of Values: The bidding subcontractor's schedule of values shall match the individual bid items exactly. Bid Bond: A bid bond shall not be required for this project. Protection of Existing Work: Bidders shall take precaution to protect all existing structures and appurtenances during construction. In the event of damage to surrounding items the Bidder shall be held responsible and liable for repairs. Open Excavations: Unattended open excavations shall be protected in accordance with OSHA standards. Clean Up and Disposal of Debris: Cleanup and disposal of debris is the responsibility of the individual bidders and shall be performed at the end of each work period. Existing Fencing: Areas of work that cross existing field fencing are present on the project. It's the responsibility of the Contractor to install the work without damaging the existing fencing. Page 497 of 524 Page 13 Methods of Measurement Bid Packages (000-011) Bid Package 01— Sitework 1. 131— Demolish Existing Storm Sewer The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of existing storm sewer piping & structures as shown on the plans. Items to be hauled off -site as part of the overall scope of the sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 2. 132 — Remove Existing Sidewalk The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of existing sidewalk & asphalt as shown on the plans. Item includes demolition of existing dugout concrete slab. Items to be hauled off -site as part of the overall scope of the sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 3. 133 — Remove Existing Hydrant The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of an existing hydrant as shown on the plans. The existing hydrant should be removed below frost line, and closed using a new compression -style ball valve. New ball valve & line shall be installed in a standard adjustable valve can at final grade. Items to be hauled off -site as part of the overall scope of the sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 4. 134 — Demolish Existing Sidewalk for Backstop Retaining Wall The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of existing sidewalk as shown on the plans. Clean & accurate saw cutting is required prior to demolition. Contractor should coordinate with the Construction Manager prior to commencement of activity 65. Items to be hauled off -site as part of the overall scope of the sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 5. 135 — Remove Existing Retaining Wall The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of an existing retaining wall as shown on the plans. Items to be hauled off -site as part of the overall scope of sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Page 498 of 524 Page 14 6. B6 — Remove Existing Dumpster Enclosure & Surface The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of the existing dumpster enclosure & solid surface as shown on the plans. Items to be hauled off - site as part of the overall scope of sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 7. B7 — Remove Existing Site Chain -link Fencing The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for demolition of the existing chain -link fencing as shown on the plans. Items to be hauled off -site as part of the overall scope of sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 8. C1— Clearing & Grubbing The price bid shall include full compensation for labor, equipment, and material to clear and grub as part of the overall scope of sitework. BURNING ONSITE WILL NOT BE ALLOWED. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 9. C2 — Cut to Grade The price bid shall include full compensation for labor, equipment, and material for cut and fill to grade as part of the overall scope of the earthwork. Item includes, but is not limited to, site grading, infield excavation, swales, paving areas, etc. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Contractor to save & protect infield clay mix. Contractor to load out Owner supplied dump trucks. Compensation Type 1 10. C3 - Embankment The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for placement and compaction of any fill areas on site per contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 11. C4 — Undercut & Backfill The price bid shall include full compensation for labor, equipment, and material to perform a 12" undercut and select backfill of the entrance road as part of the overall scope of sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 2 12. C5 —Rock Excavation The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for any rock excavation necessary for completion of the work as described in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 2 Page 499 of 524 Page I5 13. C6 — Construction Entrances The price bid shall include full compensation for labor, equipment, and material for the installation and routine maintenance for the duration of earthwork package as part of the overall scope of sitework. A temporary storm culvert shall be installed as part of the construction entrance if required. Construction of the said item shall be per the plans and specifications. Maintenance of the said item shall be directed by the Construction Manager. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 14. J1-18" HDPE W/FES The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to install proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. This includes but is not limited to potholing of existing utilities, full depth backfill, blocking, haul off, traffic control and testing of the proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 15. J2 — 24" HDPE W/FES The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to install proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. This includes but is not limited to potholing of existing utilities, full depth backfill, blocking, haul off, traffic control and testing of the proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 16. J3 — 8" PVC The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to install proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. This includes but is not limited to potholing of existing utilities, full depth backfill, blocking, haul off, traffic control and testing of the proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 17. J4 — 22"x13" RCHEAP The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to install proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. This includes but is not limited to potholing of existing utilities, manholes, casing, full depth backfill, blocking, haul off, traffic control and testing of the proposed piping as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 18. J5 — 4' x 4' Grate Inlet The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of grated inlets as defined in the contract documents. Contractor is to take special care when grouting inverts to ensure appropriate drainage and water direction. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Page 500 of 524 Page 16 19. J6 — 4' x 4' Junction Box The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of junction boxes as defined in the contract documents. Contractor is to take special care when grouting inverts to ensure appropriate drainage and water direction. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 20. J7 — 4' x 4' Area Inlet The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of area inlets as defined in the contract documents. Contractor is to take special care when grouting inverts to ensure appropriate drainage and water direction. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 21. J8 — French Drainage System The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of the specified French drainage system as defined in the contract documents. Contractor is to take special care when grouting inverts to ensure appropriate drainage and water direction. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 02 — Site Concrete General Requirements: - Cold and Hot Weather Protection shall be included within the individual bid items. - Surrounding areas shall be protected from concrete splatters as necessary. Cleaning of concrete splatter shall be at the expense of the bidding contractor. - Installation of all concrete embedded items including but not limited to embeds, sleeves, pipe, anchors, etc. shall be included within this bid package. - Package includes construction & removal of concrete washout per construction documents. 1. D1— Concrete Sidewalk The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to completely construct the cast in -place concrete. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to placement of aggregate base course, fine grading, cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, and curing methods as well as installing any required embeds supplied by others. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 2. D2 — Concrete Heavy Duty Dumpster Pad The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to completely construct the cast in -place concrete. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to fine placement of aggregate base course, grading, cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw Page 501 of 524 Page 17 cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, and curing methods as well as installing any required embeds supplied by others. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 3. D3 — Dugout Concrete The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to completely construct the cast in -place concrete. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to placement of aggregate base course, fine grading, cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, and curing methods as well as installing any required embeds supplied by others. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 4. D4 — Cast -in -Place Detectable Warning Panel The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to provide and install cast -in -place detectable warning panels at the specified locations provided in the construction documents. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, and curing methods. The work shall be cleaned & protective film shall be removed once construction of the surrounding concrete appurtenances is complete. Damage to the detectable panels is the responsibility of the installer. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 5. D5 — Field 1 Backstop Retaining Wall The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to completely construct the cast in -place concrete. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to placement of aggregate base course, fine grading, cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, and curing methods as well as installing any required embeds supplied by others. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 6. D6 — Sidewalk Overlay The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to completely construct the cast in -place concrete. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to preparatory work to the existing slab, cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, bonding and/or bond breaker, and curing methods as well as installing any required embeds supplied by others. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 7. D7 — Dumpster Bollards The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to completely construct the dumpster bollards. This bid item shall be all-inclusive of but not limited to preparatory work to existing slabs, cold weather protection, reinforcement, saw cutting, expansion/isolation joint treatment, bonding and/or bond breaker, and curing methods as well as Page 502 of 524 Page 18 installing any required embeds supplied by others if necessary. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 003 - Electrical 1. E1— Site Electrical The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of electrical components and systems as defined in the contract documents. Work installed that is intended for future use by the Owner, shall be installed with watertight caps, tracing wire or tape, & pull string for future identification and use. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 004 — Site Elements 1. F1— Bleachers 5 Row (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for supply and installation of the site furnishing 5 Row Bleachers as defined in the contract documents. Bleachers shall be installed plumb and true, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges, or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 2. F2 — Bleachers 3 Row (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for supply and installation of the site furnishing 3 Row Bleachers as defined in the contract documents. Bleachers shall be installed plumb and true, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges, or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 3. F3 — Shade Structures (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for supply and installation of the site furnishing Shade Structures as defined in the contract documents. Shade Structures shall be installed plumb and true, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges, or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 4. F4 — Dugout Benches (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for installation and materials for the site furnishing dugout benches as shown in the plans and specifications. Benches shall be installed plumb and true, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's Page 503 of 524 Page 19 labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 S. F5 — Manufactured Dugouts (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for installation and materials for the site furnishing Manufactured Dugouts as shown in the plans and specifications. Dugouts shall be installed plumb and true, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges, or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 6. H2 — Field Bases with Anchors (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for installation and materials for the site furnishing Field Bases with Anchors as shown in the plans and specifications. Bases shall be installed plumb and true, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges, or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 7. H5 — Portable Pitching Mounds (Supply) The price bid shall include full compensation for supply of materials for the site furnishing Portable Pitching Mounds as shown in the plans and specifications. Pitching Mounds shall be delivered in good condition, free of burrs, cuts, sharp edges, or unnecessary holes. Cost shall include the contractor's material, shipping, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 005 — Field Fencing, Gates & Accessories 1. F6— 6' Tall Chainlink Fence (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of 6' fencing, fence signage, and gates with closure systems as defined in the contract documents. Includes installation of new 12' gate & infill fencing at Field 1 right field line. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 2. F7 —10' Tall Chainlink Fence (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of 10' fencing, fence signage, and gates with closure systems as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 3. F8 — Backstop Netting & Accessories (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of backstop netting, netting signage, and netting fastening systems as Page 504 of 524 Page 1 10 defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 4. F9 — Backstop Netting Between Fields 2 & 3 (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of backstop netting, netting signage, and netting fastening systems as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 5. F10 — Removable Infield Fence & Anchor System (Supply & Install) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of temporary infield fencing & anchor systems as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 006 —Landscaping 1. C7 — Erosion Control The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to erosion control devices as shown in the contract. This bid item does not include concrete washout or construction entrance. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 2. G1— Irrigation in Outfields & landscape Areas This bid item is an allowance that shall be carried in the bid package as part of the bidding subcontractors' scope for installation, maintenance, and repair of Irrigation items. This allowance shall not be used for any other purpose. Compensation Type 4 3. G2 — Seeding & Mulching The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for furnishing, installation, and watering of seeding as defined in the contract documents. It should be expected that (2) two mowing's will be required post establishment of vegetation. Seeding cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 4. G3 — Solid Sod (Bermuda Sod) The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for furnishing, installation, and watering of sodding as defined in the contract documents. It should be expected that (2) two mowing's will be required post establishment of vegetation. Sodding cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Page 505 of 524 Page 1 11 5. G4 —Tree Protection Fencing The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material to install tree protection as shown in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 22. C8 —Topsoil Placement The price bid shall include full compensation for labor, equipment, and materials for placement of topsoil and fine -grading within a tolerance of +/- .10" as part of the overall scope of sitework. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 007 — Infield Turf & Accessories 1. H1— Artificial Turf Surface for Infields — Complete in Place The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for installation of the Artificial Turf Surface for Infields. Bid Item H1 includes but is not limited to, aggregate subbase, concrete headers, nailer boards, anchors, and subdrain system in accordance with the type, location, and details in the plans, or as directed by the Engineer. Contractor is to carry field drainage piping and appurtenances to within 5' of termination point depicted on the drawings. Final playing surface is to be free of deviation, consistent in texture and color, uniform in appearance, and free of any sharp edges, burs, or abrasive surfaces. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 008 — Park Signage 1. H3 -Signage in Outfield — Complete in Place The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of outfield signage as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 2. H4 — Field Signage — Complete in Place The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of field signage as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 3. 17 — Park Signage — Complete in Place The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of signage, adhesive labelling, handicap notations, or any other labelling devices found outside of the field fencing area as defined in the contract documents. Page 506 of 524 Page 1 12 Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 4. 18 — Striping — Complete in Place The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of striping for parking areas and ballpark facilities as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Bid Package 009 —Wood Fencing 1. 19 —New Wood Fence — Complete in Place The price bid shall include full compensation for the labor, equipment, and material for the furnishing and installation of wooden privacy fencing, and gates with closure systems, as defined in the contract documents. Cost shall include the contractor's labor, material, equipment, and overhead and profit as defined to complete the work. Compensation Type 1 Page 507 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS ADDENDUM NO. 1 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex City of Fayetteville Dated: June 7, 2023 This Addendum shall be a part of the Plans and Contract Documents and Specifications to the same extent as though it were originally included therein, and it shall supersede anything contained in the Plans and Contract Documents and Specifications with which it might conflict. A. GENERAL CLARIFICATIONS 1. Proiect Bid Due Date The project bid due date for all bidders shall be changed to 6/15/2023 @2:00 PM CST B. SPECIFICATIONS 1. Additions Made to the Following Specification Sections a. 013300 —Submittal Procedures b. 016600 — Product Requirements c. 017300 — Execution d. 017700 — Closeout Procedures e. 017900 — Demonstration and Trainin f. 099113 — Exterior Painting g. 033000 — Cast -in -Place Concrete h. 116800 — Play Field Equipment & Structures 2. Changes Made to the Specifications a. Revised Table of Contents to include added specification sections. b. Revised Section 312800 Erosion Sedimentation Control to include SWPPP. C. C. DRAWINGS 1. Changes Made to Project Drawings a. Sheet A-102: Revised Site Furnishings Schedule June 7th, 2023_Crossland Heavy Contractors Page 508 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS ADDENDUM NO. 2 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex City of Fayetteville Dated: June 9, 2023 This Addendum shall be a part of the Plans and Contract Documents and Specifications to the same extent as though it were originally included therein, and it shall supersede anything contained in the Plans and Contract Documents and Specifications with which it might conflict. A. GENERAL CLARIFICATIONS 1. Clarifications for Bid Package #003 a. Placement of new 120/240V panel shall be on the south side of the maintenance structure. Underground conduit(s) shall be installed after demolition of the existing wooden privacy fence (by others). b. Per the Owner, all lamp bulbs shall be replaced. Nighttime illumination test & head adjustment is still applicable per the detail found on sheet C-101. c. Construction of light pole base(s) shall be the responsibility of the bidder of bid package #003. 2. Clarifications for Bid Package #002 a. Removal and Replacement of sidewalk for electrical trenches shall be the responsibility of the bidder of bid package #002. This includes, but is not limited to, all conduit routing found on sheet C-401. B. SPECIFICATIONS 1. Changes Made to the Specifications a. None C. DRAWINGS 1. Changes Made to Project Drawings a. None June 9th, 2023_Crossland Heavy Contractors Page 509 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS ADDENDUM NO. 3 Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex City of Fayetteville Dated: June 14, 2023 This Addendum shall be a part of the Plans and Contract Documents and Specifications to the same extent as though it were originally included therein, and it shall supersede anything contained in the Plans and Contract Documents and Specifications with which it might conflict. A. GENERAL CLARIFICATIONS 1. Backstop Desien a. There is no dedicated spectator protection on this project. Bidders are to provide backstops per the contract drawings, sheet C-503. 11 �z�=�ri�►t.�r.,z.7..r.��.r�.ti+.rr�,.�.�•r.1T3�Trrl� A. Safety netting system attached to vertical poles. see Drawings for configuration. Product standard shall be Sportsfield Specialties Ball Safety Netting System, or approved equal. Provide a complete system at each field. Components shall include: les 20' hi h lame er a uminum poles, 25' Phi a a er oles) at ��a�r�-. (Fields 2 & 3). 3. Ground sleeves and caps for setting and finishing poles. 4. Heavy duty black #36 Nylon 1 3/4" square mesh net. Vertical at backstop and overhead at bleacher protection. 5. Block pulley and tether system to raise and lower nets. 6. Manufacturer's cables, ties, and hardware for a complete and operational system. B. SPECIFICATIONS 1. Changes Made to the Specifications a. Removal of item 1 & 2. (See above) C. DRAWINGS 1. Changes Made to Project Drawings a. None June 14th, 2023_Crossland Heavy Contractors Page 510 of 524 CROSSLAND HEAVY CONTRACTORS Construction Manager at Risk Affidavit Page 511 of 524 AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE CONSTRUCTION MANAGER -AT -RISK PROJECT: Lake Fayetteville Softball Complex I, ( eya0 / 'v !'er ), having been first duly sworn and authorized, provide this Affidavit for and on behalf of (Firm Name) and state the following in reference to the project solicited and Contracted under RFQ 23-02 and applicable to Change Order # ( ): 1. My name is L/ao /) le* and I am the lbirfC'or Qf PW-CorUirLACt OOL, for (Crossland Heavy Contractors Inc.). I am qualified and authorized to execute this affidavit. 2. (Crossland Heavy Contractors Inc.), pursuant to its contract with the City of Fayetteville, hereby certifies that it has reviewed the provisions set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 14-58-1001 and verifies that it has complied with that statute and all other applicable rules and regulations, whether recited in §14-58-1001 or elsewhere in Arkansas law, for the above -identified project. 3. The City of Fayetteville shall be held harmless and indemnified for any disputes that arise regarding the procurement and bidding processes performed by (Crossland Heavy Contractors Inc.). FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Signed this Gnj� _ day -of __7rjyt,0, , 2023. PRINTED NAME 6kcivs, of Are- Co ldrvGtiOh TITLE STATE OF vl 1Q�Fi'�CXyD COUNTY OF� ) SIG TURE Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, this C�-oc day of (�(� , 2023. DENISE LUCIAN Notary Public • ate o K s , MyAppt. Expires IQV_ Notary Public SEAL My Commission Expires: 19'a (-Cq5 Page 512 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-838 FROM: Blake Pennington, Assistant City Attorney DATE: June 21, 2023 SUBJECT: Amendment to Section 118.01(E) to reduce the city-wide cap on short term rentals. RECOMMENDATION: The Ordinance Review Committee recommends approval of an amendment to Section 118.01 reducing the cap on Type 2 short term rentals from 2% of all housing units in the City to a maximum of 475. The proposed amendment also removes a provision that exempts Type 2 STRs located in zoning districts allowing hotel/motel uses by right from counting toward the cap. BACKGROUND: DISCUSSION: BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: ATTACHMENTS: Agenda Request - Amend 118.01 - Reduce STIR Cap to 475 - Ordinance Review Committee Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 513 of 524 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479) 575-8323 Legislation Text File #: 2023-838 Amendment to Section 118.01(E) to reduce the city-wide cap on short term rentals. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND § 118.01 APPLICABILITY OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE CITYWIDE DENSITY CAP FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS TO 475, AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY WHEREAS, the Development Services Department has issued 392 licenses for Type 2 short term rentals, 341 of which contribute to the current 2% citywide cap because they are not located in zoning districts that permit hotel and motel uses by right; and WHEREAS, the City Council Ordinance Review Committee has recommended that the citywide density cap for Type 2 short term rentals be reduced from 2% of all dwelling units to a set cap of 475 and recommends that all Type 2 short term rentals be counted toward that cap. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals the introductory paragraph of subsection (E)(16) and subsection (E)(16)(a) in §118.01 Applicability of the Fayetteville City Code and enacts replacement language as follows: "(16) Density For Type 2 Short -Term Rentals. A city-wide density cap of 475 dwelling units may be Type 2 rentals. A conditional use permit may not permit: (a) More Type 2 short-term rentals than what is allowed by the city-wide density cap." Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that this ordinance should become effective without delay because reducing the number of available short term rental permits in the City of Fayetteville is necessary for the public peace as well as the health and safety of Fayetteville residents. Therefore, the City Council hereby declares an emergency exists such that this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. Page 1 Page 514 of 524 CivicClerk fD No.: 2023-838 AGENDA REQUEST FORM FOR: Council Meeting of July 6, 2023 FROM: Council NIcmbers lloll.V Hertzberg, Sarah Moore, and Scott Berna ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION TITLE AND SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND §118.01 APPLICABILITY OF THE FAYE7TEVILLECITY CODE TO REDUCE THE CITYWIDE DENSITY CAP FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS TO 475 APPROVED FOR AGENDA: 6 W Z3 Cou it ember Holly He berg Date Council Member Sarah Moore Council Member Scott Berna Sr. Asst. City Attorney Blake Pennington Approved as to form Date 6•�'Z� Date Date Page 515 of 524 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND § 118.01 APPLICABILITY OF THE FAYETTEVILLE CITY CODE TO REDUCE THE CITYWIDE DENSITY CAP FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS TO 475 WHEREAS, the Development Services Department has issued 392 licenses for Type 2 short term rentals, 341 of which contribute to the current 2% citywide cap because they are not located in zoning districts that permit hotel and motel uses by right; and WHEREAS, the City Council Ordinance Review Committee has recommended that the citywide density cap for Type 2 short term rentals be reduced from 2% of all dwelling units to a set cap of 475 and recommends that all Type 2 short term rentals be counted toward that cap. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby repeals the introductory paragraph of subsection (E)(18) and subsection (E)(18)(a) in § 118.01 Applicability of the Fayetteville City Code and enacts replacement language as follows: "(E) Short -Term Rentals (18) Density For Type 2 Short -Term Rentals. A city-wide density cap of 475 dwelling units may be Type 2 rentals. Total dwelling units are determined from current United States Census Bureau and/or American Community Survey numbers, whichever number is higher. A conditional use permit may not permit: (a) More Type 2 short-term rentals than what is allowed by the city-wide density cap." Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that this ordinance should become effective without delay because reducing the number of available short term rental permits in the City of Fayetteville is necessary for the public peace as well as the health and safety of Fayetteville residents. Therefore, the City Council hereby declares an emergency exists such that this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval. Page 516 of 524 118.01- Applicability (E) Short -Term Rentals. (18) Density For Type 2 Short -Term Rentals. A city-wide density cap of = of all wef4Ag ee+t� to Fayet.teuiffe��iy limit{ s3�ay be utilized as475 dwelling units may be Type 2 rentals. Total dwelling units are determined from current United States Census Bureau and/or American Community Survey numbers, whichever number is higher. A conditional use permit may not permit: (a) More Type 2 short-term rentals than what is allowed by the city-wide density cap. (b) More than 10% or a single unit whichever is greater; of total dwelling units as Type 2 rentals within a multi -family dwelling complex. (c) Individual 2-, 3- and 4-family buildings that are owned by the same person or entity and are not a part of a multi -family complex shall have no more than one (1) Type 2 short-term rental unit per building complex. (d) Where attached residential units are held separately through condominium association, horizontal property regime, fee simple, or similar ownership structure, no cap shall be applied to buildings with attached residential dwellings. Structures of attached residential dwellings where applicants seek more than 10% of total units for licensing as Type 2 rentals shall be evaluated by the Building Safety Director and/or Fire Marshal for adequate fire protection as defined by the adopted Arkansas Fire Prevention Code. Where inadequate fire protection is identified, improvements may be required prior to issuance of a business license. Page 517 of 524 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ARKANSAS MEETING OF JUNE 27, 2023 TO: Mayor Jordan and City Council THRU: CITY COUNCIL MEMO 2023-874 FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney DATE: June 27, 2023 SUBJECT: Resolution to Fill Vacancy in the Office of the City Council Member for Ward One, Position One RECOMMENDATION: BACKGROUND: DISCUSSION: BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: ATTACHMENTS: City Attorney Memo - Filling Vacancy in Ward One, Position One, Agenda Request Form Mailing address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov Page 518 of 524 == City of Fayetteville, Arkansas y 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 (479)575-8323 - Legislation Text File #: 2023-874 Resolution to Fill Vacancy in the Office of the City Council Member for Ward One, Position One A RESOLUTION TO CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 14, 2023 TO FILL A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR WARD ONE, POSITION ONE OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE WHEREAS, a vacancy in the office of the Council Member of Ward One, Position One occurred on July 1, 2023, in the City of Fayetteville; and WHEREAS, pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-43-41 l(b) the Fayetteville City Council has voted to call a special election to fill this vacancy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby calls a special election to fill the vacancy for a Council Member in Ward One, Position One of the City of Fayetteville for November 14, 2023. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that the circulation period for petitions of candidacy shall begin on July 11, 2023 and end at noon on July 25, 2023 when all official petitions for municipal candidates shall be provided by any person seeking to be a candidate to the Washington County Clerk's Office. The ballot position drawing shall be conducted on or before August 1, 2023, at the place, date and time selected by the Washington County Election Commission. Page 1 Page 519 of 524 IRI OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE Kit Williams City Attorney TO: Mayor Jordan Blake Pennington City Council Assistant City Attorney Jodi Batker CC: Susan Norton, Chief of Staff Paralegal FROM: Kit Williams, City Attorney DATE: June 1, 2023 RE: Motion and Resolutions for Council Member Harvey's Upcoming Vacancy To facilitate the parliamentary procedure for the City Council to address the vacancy because of Council Member Sonia Harvey's resignation of her Ward 1 position, I have attached two Resolutions to be decided upon at the July 6`11 City Council meeting. One Resolution would elect a replacement Council Member by City Council vote on July 6th. The other option would be a Resolution to call for a Special Election to elect a new Council Member on November 14, 2023, which is the only legal date to schedule this Special Election this year. A.C.A. § 7-11-105(A) states: "(A)11 special elections to fill vacancies in office ... shall be held on the second Tuesday of: February, May, August or November...." Subsection (d) states: "A special election to fill a vacancy in office shall be held not less than seventy (70) days following the date ... for drawing ballot position." Allowing the couple of weeks needed to circulate election petitions prior to drawing for ballot positions would leave less than a month prior to the August election date rather than the required 70 day minimum. Therefore, the earliest allowable legal date for the Special Election is November 14, 2023. The first issue that should be addressed is the City Council's choice between electing a replacement Council Member themselves or referring the decision to a Special Election so that Ward One voters could elect their Council Member. This should be done by a City Council Member moving either: (1) To elect a Council Member by the City Council to serve the unexpired term of former Council Member Sonia Harvey; or (2) To call for a special election to elect a new council member to replace former Council Member Sonia Harvey. Page 520 of 524 This initial motion is an internal motion such as a motion to table and is dependent upon the number of Council Members present and voting. The Mayor may as usual vote if "the Mayor's vote is needed to pass any ordinance, by-law, resolution, order or motion." A.C.A. § 14-43-501(b). If any Council Member is absent on July 6th, then only four votes would be needed to pass this motion as the members in attendance (including Mayor Jordan) would total only seven for this internal motion. Either Resolution, however, shall continue to require five affirmative votes to pass pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-55-203 Voting requirements for passage. "To pass any by-law, ordinance or resolution... , a concurrence of majority of the whole number of members elected to the council shall be required." This is slightly altered by A.C.A. § 14-43-411(b)(1) which requires a "majority vote of the remaining members elected to the council.... " As "this language would include the Mayor since he is an ex officio member of the council," Gibson v. City of Trumann, 311 Ark 561, 562, 845 S.W.2d 515, 516 (1993); the Mayor must also be counted when determining the number of "remaining members elected to the council" which would be eight. Thus, five affirmative votes (which could include a vote by Mayor Jordan) would be needed to pass either Resolution. Please keep in mind that the state statute says: "at the first regular meeting after the occurrence of the vacancy, the city council shall proceed to either elect by majority vote of the remaining members elected to the council a council member to serve for the unexpired term or call for a special election ...." A.C.A. § 14-43-411(b)(1) (emphasis added). Therefore, the City Council has a mandatory duty to either elect a new council member or call a special election at the July 6, 2023 meeting. 2 Page 521 of 524 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION TO ELECT AS CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR WARD ONE, POSITION ONE OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE WHEREAS, a vacancy in the office of the Council Member of Ward One, Position One occurred on July 1, 2023 in the City of Fayetteville; and WHEREAS, the City Council pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-43-411(b) has voted to elect as the replacement City Council Member for Ward One, Position One. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby elects to the office of City Council Member of Ward One, Position One in the City of Fayetteville pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-43-411(b) to serve the remainder of the previous Council Member's term. PASSED and APPROVED this 6th day of July 2023. APPROVED: al ATTEST: By: LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor KARA PAXTON, City Clerk/Treasurer Page 522 of 524 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION TO CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 14, 2023 TO FILL A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBER FOR WARD ONE, POSITION ONE OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE WHEREAS, a vacancy in the office of the Council Member of Ward One, Position One occurred on July 1, 2023, in the City of Fayetteville; and WHEREAS, pursuant to A.C.A. § 14-43-411(b) the Fayetteville City Council has voted to call a special election to fill this vacancy. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby calls a special election to fill the vacancy for a Council Member in Ward One, Position One of the City of Fayetteville for November 14, 2023. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that the circulation period for petitions of candidacy shall begin on July 11, 2023 and end at noon on July 25, 2023 when all official petitions for municipal candidates shall be provided by any person seeking to be a candidate to the Washington County Clerk's Office. The ballot position drawing shall be conducted on or before August 1, 2023, at the place, date and time selected by the Washington County Election Commission. PASSED and APPROVED this 6t" day of July, 2023. APPROVED: ATTEST: I0 By: LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor KARA PAXTON, City Clerk/Treasurer Page 523 of 524 Legistar ID No.: 2021-0836 AGENDA REQUEST FORM FOR: Council Meeting of July 6, 2023 FROM: Mayor Lioneld Jordan ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION TITLE AND SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION TO DECLARE A VACANCY IN WARD ONE, POSITION TWO AND TO DETERMINE HOW THE VACANCY SHALL BE FILLED APPROVED FORAGENQA: ayor Lio ordan City Attorney Kit Williams Da Date Page 524 of 524