Support Current Fayetteville Downtown Master Plan

Signatures 19 total

Page: 1

1. 1
   Name: Tom Overbey on Mar 9, 2007

   Comments:

   Flag
2. 2
   Name: Paul Heck on Mar 9, 2007

   Comments: I feel that the current DMP heights are restrictive enough, will enhance the beauty of Fayetteville through allowing a variety in buildings and will assist in bringing more economic value to the city....but we have to stop changing the rules as development will not chase a moving target...it is way too expensive design a project in the "hopes" that a varience will be allowed. Please make a decision on this soon - we have enough information on this to decide what to do...which is leave the DMP as it stands!

   Flag
3. 3
   Name: Helena & Tony Gadison on Mar 10, 2007

   Comments: Dear Mayor Coody and City Council Members- Please do not set a standard & protocol of "going backwards" on behalf of the great city of Fayetteville! With the substantial investment we're making in placing our business in Fayetteville, we're counting on progressive-forward looking improvements to take shape in Fayetteville that benefits it's current & new citizens, business owners & visitors. There is so much more work needed in the Downtown area to takes things "to the next level". I was so pleased & impressed with the passing of the DMP, but am now seriously discouraged to hear that it's being potential re-thought/re-done after so much planning & due diligence had been done & being supported so greatly by it's citizens. Please do not take us backwards...stick with your decision, move forward & let's show the region that Fayetteville is taking shape & staying relevant & will be able compete with any great city in this Nation!

   Flag
4. 4
   Name: Anonymous on Mar 10, 2007

   Comments: Dear Mayor Coody and City Council Members-Please do not set a standard & protocol of "going backwards" on behalf of the great city of Fayetteville! With the substantial investment we're making in placing our business in Fayetteville, we're counting on progressive-forward looking improvements to take shape in Fayetteville that benefits it's current & new citizens, business owners & visitors. There is so much more work needed in the Downtown area to takes things "to the next level". I was so pleased & impressed with the passing of the DMP, but am now seriously discouraged to hear that it's being potential re-thought/re-done after so much planning & due diligence had been done & being supported so greatly by it's citizens.Please do not take us backwards...stick with your decision, move forward & let's show the region that Fayetteville is taking shape & staying relevant & will be able compete with any great city in this Nation!

   Flag
5. 5
   Name: Justin Long on Mar 12, 2007

   Comments:

   Flag
6. 6
   Name: Jeffery Collins on Mar 12, 2007

   Comments: As someone who has worked for years to help build the economic strength and diversity of the Fayetteville economy I am overwhelmingly dissappointed by current efforts to amend the DMP. Arguments that downtown development based on the current DMP would harm the economic viability of Fayetteville are not substantiated by evidence or sound economic reasoning and in my opinion are simply wrong.

   Flag
7. 7
   Name: Colby Ward on Mar 12, 2007

   Comments: The current building heights are too low, making them lower is a joke.

   Flag
8. 8
   Name: Linda Ward on Mar 12, 2007

   Comments: The current building hights are way too low. Making them lower would make drives up property costs downtown and lead to urban sprawl.

   Flag
9. 9
   Name: Jamie Terminella on Mar 12, 2007

   Comments:

   Flag
10. 10
    Name: Leslie Manning on Mar 12, 2007

    Comments: Please do not change the current height limitations in the Downtown's Master Plan. Changing the limitations would indicate that the public input was not considered.

    Flag
11. 11
    Name: Mike Henry on Mar 12, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
12. 12
    Name: Morgan Hooker on Mar 13, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
13. 13
    Name: Stephen Cosby on Mar 13, 2007

    Comments: The height limitations are just fine where they are. This accomplishes the goal of densification.

    Flag
14. 14
    Name: Anonymous on Mar 14, 2007

    Comments: I don't understand why this issue has come up again, when it has already been decided and approved.

    Flag
15. 15
    Name: Donald Brown on Mar 15, 2007

    Comments: The current ordinance is a well balanced, comprehensive and fair to all. It does not pander to one segment of our community over the other and therefore should be defended.

    Flag
16. 16
    Name: Michael Andrews on Mar 15, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
17. 17
    Name: Tommy L. Lonon on Mar 16, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
18. 18
    Name: Tommy L. Lonon on Mar 16, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag
19. 19
    Name: Tommy L. Lonon on Mar 16, 2007

    Comments:

    Flag

Page: 1