Issuu

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2 0 2 2 U P D AT E

SEPTEMBER 15, 2022

Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPC) Mayor & City Council

Steering Committee

Edward Johnson, Mayor

Sarah Murphy, Local Resident/Planning Commission Chair /Downtown Development Authority (DDA)

Joe Clark, Mayor Pro-Tem Kenneth Collins, Local Resident/Planning Commission Vice-Chairman Rich Hoffman, Council Member Darryl Langford, Council Member

Debi Renfroe , Local Resident/Planning Commission

Scott Stacy, Council Member

Toby Spencer , Local Resident/Teacher/Planning Commission

Niyah Glover, Council Member

City Staff

David Hilderbrandt, Local Resident/Planning Commission Jamie Wyatt, Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Dan Vano, Downtown Development Authority (DDA) /Business Community

Ray Gibson, City Manager David Rast, Director of Community Development Brian Wismer, Director of Economic Development Denise Brookins, Director, Planning and Zoning Julie Brown, Senior Planner

Sam Burch, Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Historian/Local Resident/Business Owner Nancy Musselwhite, Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Business Community Brandon Sherman, Downtown Development Authority (DDA)/Business Community

Nicole Gilbert, Planning Specialist Katherine Prickett, Planning Specialist Tony Whitley, GIS Analyst

City of Fayetteville Thank you to the residents of Fayetteville that provided input the throughout the planning process.

Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION PURPOSE OF THE PLAN

PLANNING HISTORY

CHAPTER 2: FAYETTEVILLE TODAY COMMUNITY PROFILE

DENSITY AND GROWTH

GROWTH AND DIVERSITY

REGIONAL COMPARISON

EDUCATION

TENURE AND HOUSING

TRANSPORTATION

FISCAL OUTLOOK

HOUSEHOLDS AND ECONOMIC MOBILITY

HOME VALUES

MAJOR INDUSTRIES AND OPTIMAL BUSINESS TARGETS

BROADBAND ELEMENT

CHAPTER 3: FAYETTEVILLE TOMORROW PUBLIC INPUT

VISION

GOALS AND POLICIES

COMMUNITY WORK PLAN AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS

CHAPTER 3: INTEGRATED LAND USE FRAMEWORK

LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDIX LEGAL NOTICE AND COMMUNITY SIGN IN SHEET

118

2022 HOUSING STUDY

128

2022 DOWNTOWN VISIONING STUDY

228

2021 LCI STUDY

249

FAYETTEVILLE’S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT

408

Transmittal Resolution

1 INTRODUCTION

About Fayetteville Today, more than 19,000 people call the City of Fayetteville “home”, and many thousands more shop, dine and work here. We are known for our overall high quality of life with high educational standards, low crime rate, and a great sense of community. As Fayetteville grows, and as more people desire to live, work, shop and play here, we are presented with the challenge of maintaining the high quality of life generations of families have come to expect. In response to this challenge, we will encourage smart, collaborative, and managed growth.

Work effectively

Purpose of the Plan The Comprehensive Plan is a community-based vision for future growth and development within the City of Fayetteville. The plan addresses land use, housing, economic development, transportation, parks and recreation, and natural resources, with a strong focus on how land is used, developed, and/or conserved. The City’s current Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2017 and since that time, Fayetteville has experienced significant population growth and economic development. The 2022 Update builds on the previous plan and provides a five-year update as required by Georgia’s local planning rules centered around reevaluating key elements.

Planning History Implementation Plan The 2022 Update includes a review of the Community Work Program, which identifies projects and initiatives to assist in implementing the Community Goals. While the Comprehensive Plan as a whole incorporates policies and strategies for a 20-year planning period, the Community Work Program outlines specific implementation strategies in a 5-year timeframe. The Capital Improvements Element identifies capital investments the city intends to make in the next five years to facilitate achieving the city’s goals. Previous Plans

2017 Comprehensive Plan The 2017 Comprehensive Plan provided a road map for the city as it continues to grow and evolve. The comprehensive plan used different forms of public engagement and reflects the ideas, values, and desires of the community, aligning these with a range of plans, policies, and initiatives in place or underway in both Fayetteville and the wider region. Strategic Plan The Strategic Plan serves as a tool to help guide the community toward its desired outcomes. The plan is intended to be a living document, meaning it will be updated and amended as needed to reflect progress made, changing conditions in Fayetteville and the region, and the evolving needs of the community. The updated plan serves as a reinvigorated foundation for the city, establishing a comprehensive vision for the future, refreshed land use recommendations, and implementation recommendations to guide the city moving forward. 2021 LCI Study The 2021 LCI Study established a community-wide vision and plan for the downtown core. A part of the study evaluated previous planning documents and their recommendations for downtown development. The 2021 LCI study has served the city well and provided comprehensive analysis and recommendations for the downtown area's land use, zoning, and development regulations. 2022 Housing Study The 2022 housing study provided a demographic review, market demand data, and identify potential residential development opportunities in the city.

2 FAYETTEVILLE TODAY

Community Profile OVERVIEW

The City of Fayetteville is located in the center and serves as the county seat of Fayette County. Historically, Fayetteville was predominantly an agricultural area with sprawling homes on large lots. In recent years the city has worked to restore the historic streetscape and downtown charm while still welcoming new residents and businesses. Fayetteville captures estimated 17% of Fayette County's population, with a 2021 census population of 19,284 residing in 6,741 households. The population is fairly diverse across age, race, and income cohorts. While being historically more rural than suburban, recent development activity and housing market trends have fueled growth in Fayetteville.

19,284 Population

6,741 Number of Households Population By Age

12.88 Square Miles

40%

19%

1,365.1 People Per Square Mile 19%

2.60 Average Household Size

22%

Under 18 Years 22

18 to 34 Years 19

35 to 64 Years 40

65 and Over

Population Density DENSITY AND GROWTH PATTERNS Between 2010 and 2022 the population in downtown Fayetteville increased from 3,426 to 3,786 people per square mile, demonstrating a 10% increase in population density. Census statistics show the younger population has increased within the downtown core and the southern portion of the city, while the northern arc has experienced a decrease in the younger population. The shift in age is predominantly due to high-performing schools being located to the west and south of the City, close to Peachtree City and south of the City, as well as job opportunities for younger adults located to the west (Trilith Studios, the Town at Trilith and Piedmont Fayette Hospital) and manufacturing and light industrial-related jobs to the east and north. Since 2010, the census tracts encompassing Downtown Fayetteville have also identified a 10% increase in the 55+ age group, which is consistent with similar growth patterns in neighboring communities. For instance, Peachtree City to our west has experienced a significant increase in residents aged 55 and over, which bodes well as Fayetteville continues to provide opportunities for downsizing and senior living facilities.

POPULATION DENSITY MAPS (PER SQ. MILE) 2010

2022

Growth

& Diversity The median age in Fayetteville is 42, and population growth has been steady since 2010. Based on census-based estimates, the strongest growth will have occurred from 2010 – 2022, with an 18.2% population increase, or just over 1.5% per year.

40,000

30,000 Fayetteville Peachtree City

20,000

Tyrone

10,000 2010

2015

POPULATION GROWTH

Population growth over the last ten years has grown steadily in the 18-34 and 55-85+ age groups, with a steady increase in the Black/African American and Asian populations. These numbers point to a growing number of young singles and professionals as well as empty nesters and retirees, all of which will require a greater variety of housing products. Decreases in the 5-17 and 35-54 age groups indicates a decreasing number of younger families moving to the city.

2020

White

8,000

Black or African American American Indian and Alaska Native

6,000

Asian

4,000

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander

2,000

RACE DISTRIBUTION

10,000

Some other race Two or more races

2010

2015

2020

Regional Comparison Fayetteville is located in the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Atlanta MSA encompasses 29 counties, with ten central counties belonging to the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and forming the core of the MSA. Roughly 78% of the population of the MSA lives within this ten county core including Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry and Rockdale. Between 2000-2010 only 67% of all population growth within the MSA occurred within this ten county core. Since 2010 roughly 85% of all population growth within the MSA occurred in this ten county core as younger and older generations increasingly sought walkable neighborhoods both in urban and suburban areas. Fayette County had considerable growth from 2000 to 2010 with an annual growth rate of 1.6%. However, the story for the City of Fayetteville is more positive. From 2000-2010 population growth within Fayetteville outpaced many of the fastest growing counties in the MSA with a 3.6% annual growth. Since 2010 the city's growth rate is still strong and has outpaced all counties in the MSA except for Cherokee County with an annual growth rate of 1.7%

SQ MILES

% MSA

2020

% OF MSA

200010

201020

200010

201020

200010

2010-20

LAND / CAPTUR E RATIO

Cherokee County

422

4.80%

266620

4.50%

7244

5227

4.20%

2.20%

7.10%

5.20%

1.08

Clayton County

142

1.60%

297595

5.00%

2291

3817

0.90%

1.40%

2.20%

3.80%

2.36

Cobb County

339

3.90%

766149

12.80%

8033

7807

1.20%

1.10%

7.80%

2.01

DeKalb County

268

3.10%

764382

12.80%

2603

7249

0.40%

1.00%

2.50%

7.30%

2.37

Douglas County

200

2.30%

144237

2.40%

4023

1183

3.70%

0.90%

3.90%

1.20%

0.52

Fayette Co. (exl. Fayetteville

0.50%

100237

1.70%

1051

962

1.20%

1.00%

1.9

City of Fayetteville

150

1.70%

18957

0.30%

480

301

3.60%

1.70%

0.50%

0.30%

0.18

Fulton Co. (excl. Atlanta)

394

4.50%

580420

9.70%

10079

8010

2.30%

1.50%

9.80%

8.00%

1.78

City of Atlanta

133

1.50%

486290

8.10%

378

6603

0.10%

1.50%

0.40%

6.60%

4.34

Gwinnett County

430

4.90%

957062

16.00%

21687

15174

3.20%

1.70%

21.20%

15.20%

3.08

Henry County

322

3.70%

240712

4.00%

8458

3679

5.50%

1.70%

8.30%

3.70%

Rockdale County

130

1.50%

93570

1.60%

1510

836

2.00%

0.90%

1.50%

0.80%

0.56

10-County ARC Core

2974

34.10%

4716231

78.80%

67837

86926

1.80%

2.00%

66.30%

87.30%

2.56

Exurban Counties

5739

65.90%

1267876

21.20%

34492

12700

3.50%

1.00%

33.70%

12.70%

0.19

MSA Total

8713

100.00 %

5984107

100.00%

102329

99626

2.20%

1.80%

100.00 %

100.00%

Education Concentrations of highly-educated residents and households are attractive to both office and retail employers. Prospective office tenants desire proximity to a highly-educated workforce. Retailers often use educational attainment levels as a key metric when determining site locations. Additionally, households with high educational attainment levels have shown to include higher income potential and are strong indicators of neighborhood stability. The northern and eastern portions of the city of Atlanta and the north metro suburbs have the highest concentrations of high educational attainment households in metro Atlanta. On the southside of Atlanta, Fayette County stands out, but a lack of high concentrations of educated households and workforce continues to limit major office growth and/or relocation. Nearly 40% of Fayetteville residents 25 years and over have obtained a Bachelor's degree or higher. Historically, college-educated individuals in Fayette County have been concentrated in the west and southwest near Peachtree City and Tyrone, but over the past few decades college-educated individuals have been pushing west, increasing the educational attainment in Fayetteville, and within Fayette County, as a whole.

EDUCATION ATTAINMENT IN FAYETTEVILLE Less Than High School

High School Grad or Higher

6.7%

95%

Education Attainment for Population 25 and Over

Bachelor's Degree or Higher

41% School Dropout Rate

7% 7% 24% 24% 98%

30% 30%

24% 24% 15%

15%

Dropped Out

Less Than High School

High School

Some College

Bachelor's Degree

In School

* Civilian Population 16 to 19 Years

Post-grad

Tenure & Housing As of 2022, Fayetteville has 6,949 total housing units, the majority of which were constructed after 1991 and include single-family detached, townhomes, condominiums and apartments. Approximately 36% of all dwelling units were constructed in the 1990's. While more than 71% of all housing units within the city are owner-occupied, the recently completed Housing Study indicated a lack of product diversity, with an estimated 72% being conventional single-family detached structures. Statistics show a healthy rental vacancy rate typically hovers around 7-8%, while a healthy homeowner vacancy rate is much lower, at 2% or below. Of the city's 6,949 housing units, an estimated 97% are occupied, and 3% are vacant. Vacancy rates within the city are currently 2.7% for rental units and 0.2% for residential structures. When vacancy rates dip below 5%, studies show the demand for housing is outstripping the supply. Rental market vacancy rates in the 5-7% range show the market is providing adequate housing choices. Low rental vacancy rates can be harmful to communities because it can lead to unjustified rent increases, provide a disincentive for property owners to maintain facilities, and reduce the choice and opportunity for renters. Additionally, when rental vacancy rates fall below 5%, there is the possibility that rents will increase making some rental properties less affordable.

Total Housing Units

Occupied Housing Units

33%

2% 5% 5% 5% 1% 0%

67%

72%

Owner Occupied 67%

1-unit, detached

72%

1-unit, attached

2 units

3 or 4 units

5 to 9 units

10 or more units

Mobile home

Boat, RV, van, etc.

Renter Occupied 33%

Transportation Functional Classification The assessment of existing traffic patterns, access points, and conditions of the street network is an integral part of the Comprehensive Plan because land use and the street system are interdependent. Historically commercial establishments generate high traffic volumes and pursue locations along major thoroughfares with high traffic capacity and visibility. Industrial and warehousing operations generate heavy truck traffic and are typically located adjacent to similar uses. Office and industrial employment centers generate high peak hour volumes and require convenient routes to expressways. For example SR 85, SR 92, SR 314 and SR 54 have higher traffic volumes than other roads in the city and, therefore, provide more opportunity to capture a segment of the pass-by traffic. Conversely, the arrangement of land uses can influence traffic flow. Residents often desire convenient access to work and shopping but generally want safe, low-volume streets in their neighborhoods. A well-designed street system can safely accommodate a mix of traffic generated by each land use.

Street Functional Classifications Major Arterial Collector Local

Transportation Functional Classification

Street Functional Classifications Major Arterial

Neighborhoods

Collector Local

Transportation Access and Connection The city has an estimated 150 miles of streets, with limited connections where motorists can travel to other parts of the city without depending on major corridors. While limited connectivity discourages traffic on local streets, it also constraints residents from entering and departing their neighborhood. The city's road network is not comprised of the traditional grid pattern. Between the early 1950's to the 1990's, the street network began to shift from grid to traditional suburban street patterns when regulations focused on reducing and even eliminating through movements on many residential streets and having them take place on main arterials. The opportunities for pedestrian mobility or even bicycles are even more constrained. As the population increases, this could cause further conflict, congestion, and potential safety concerns among all road users.

1900's City of Fayetteville - 2022

1940's

1990's

Transportation Access and Connection Original Downtown Layout from the early 1820's

Transportation Traffic Volume Currently, the vast majority (81%) of city residents who are employed drive alone to work while 8% carpool, 0.5% use transit (bus or rail), and 8% work from home. Most households (98%) have at least one automobile. The average city resident takes 33 minutes on average to travel to work. The table below shows there are currently sixty-four (64) signalized intersections in the county with the majority located within Fayetteville along state routes. Even with the growth in population, traffic volumes on arterials has declined slightly. Further review should be conducted to confirm the decline is not related to the pandemic or other issues. Fayetteville moves forward by considering how streets are not only efficient, but safe for all users. Signalized Intersections

Jurisdiction

2020 Population Estimates

Land area in square miles, 2010

Number of Signalized Intersections

Fayetteville

18,957

10.89

Peachtree City

38,244

24.54

Tyrone

7,658

12.47

Fayette County

119,194

194.34

Average Annual Daily Traffic

30,000

30,800 30,100

31,600 30,400

29,200 28,000

25,000 23,400 22,600

24,000 22,800

22,100

20,000 2018

SR GA - 92

2019

SR GA- 54, East Lanier

SR GA- 54, West

2020

SR North GA - 85

Transportation Sidewalk Map The map below shows a rough estimate of the city sidewalk network in 2019. Overall, the city boasts good sidewalk coverage, but the pedestrian experience when traveling varies greatly and is dependent on factors such as: ▪ Traffic volume ▪ Sidewalk width and physical condition ▪ Quality of the sidewalk surface ▪ Obstructions

▪ The presence of landscaping and street furniture ▪ Public art ▪ Building frontages ▪ Neighboring use

Transportation Pedestrian and Walking Propensity In 2019 a walking propensity analysis was conducted as a part of the city's Master Path Plan. This quantitative analysis reviewed four factors to predict the most likely locations where people would walk if there were sidewalks. The four factors included: ▪ Existing Land Use ▪ School and Park Zones ▪ Intersection Density ▪ Pedestrian Crashes The analysis showed a strong walking demand in downtown Fayetteville which was due to commercial land uses, a grid street network with small blocks, and proximity to schools. Other high demand nodes include the intersection of SR 54 and Grady Avenue due to commercial and office land uses, proximity to Fayette County Alternative School and Spring Hill Elementary School, and the Meridian apartment development. The analysis did not include Trilith Studios or the Town at Trilith due to the fact this area was still under construction at the time the study was conducted.

Transportation Bicycle Comfort Index The Master Path Plan also evaluated existing streets throughout the city to determine how comfortable they were for biking. Among other factors, the Bicycle Comfort Index analyzed the speed and volume of automobile traffic. The index assumes that as travel speed the volume of traffic increase the road becomes less comfortable for cyclists. This map shows level of comfort by color. Roads in green are the most comfortable to ride on. Those yellow and orange are progressively more uncomfortable to ride on. Those in red are the most uncomfortable to ride on. The results show that almost all of longer routes are uncomfortable to ride a bicycle on. This illustrates a need for either on-rode or separated bicycle facilities to help facilitate bicycle mobility.

Transportation Previous Studies 2002 LCI Supplemental Study: The City of Fayetteville undertook an LCI Study in 2002 which identified a series of transportation improvements intended to improve connectivity and circulation within the downtown core. The LCI recommendations mainly focused on congestion relief strategies, safety improvements, and non-motorized travel alternatives. Specifically, the study recommended implementing intersection and traffic signal improvements along SR 85/Glynn Street between LaFayette Avenue and SR 54/Stonewall Avenue. The study also recommended safety improvements for SR 85/Glynn Street, namely the installation of medians. 2010 LCI Supplemental Study: The 2010 LCI Supplemental Study was an update to the 2002 LCI Study. Like the 2002 study, the 2010 LCI Supplemental addressed connectivity and circulation within Downtown Fayetteville. The LCI Supplemental placed an increased focused on walk-ability and access management. It also presented concept plans for: ▪ Extending Hillsdale Drive to SR 85/Glynn Street ▪ Extending Church Street to Kathy Avenue ▪ Intersection improvements at SR 92/Forrest Avenue at SR 85/Glynn Street ▪ Church Street at Kathy Avenue ▪ Hood Avenue at SR 92/Forrest Avenue Roundabout 2018 Master Path Plan Analysis In March of 2018, a community stakeholder meeting was conducted that focused on the Master Path Plan and the development of a county-wide network of sidewalks, side paths (bi-directionally multi-use path along side of roadways), greenway trails, and bicycle routes. This meeting brought a variety of community members from various backgrounds together in an effort to identify common community interests. Community desires for various locations for bicycle routes, pedestrian walkways, and golf cart facilities including sidepaths, greenway trails, shoulder bikeways, signed shared roadway, and sidewalks were discussed and cataloged. The meeting generated a significant amount of feedback for desired pathway connections. Common desired connection locations included a sidepath connections between Peachtree City and Fayetteville along Redwine Road, a sidepath on SR 54, and bicycle facilities on Bernhard Road and Brooks Woolsey Road. Common desired connection destinations include a regional trail connection in southern Peachtree City as well as connections to the Starr’s Mill school cluster as a starting point for the development of the Master Path Plan. The Master Path Plan includes design guidelines that cover the specifics of the path designs and how they should be constructed in relation to the existing environment. The Master Path Plan discusses a City Hall project that will update land-use, pedestrian transportation networks and traffic patterns within the downtown area, while at the same time being integrated with expansion efforts of paths and sidewalks throughout the city, including enhancing the network of streets connecting SR 54, SR 85, Beauregard Blvd, and Grady Avenue.

Transportation Previous Studies

“The Master Path Plan will connect population centers, schools, parks, commercial land use, and other recreational opportunities. The Master Path Plan will accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and golf cart users.”

Transportation Previous Studies 2021 LCI Study: This LCI study of the downtown area focused on implementation and hence featured a multi-disciplinary team that integrated urban planning & design, existing conditions, community engagement, market analysis, transportation, and zoning, in a collective vision for the Downtown Fayetteville study area. The transportation section reviewed operational characteristics, potential changes and improvements to the mobility network. The following frameworks recommendation were proposed: • Recognizes the physical constraints, context, and character of the surrounding built and natural environment. It recommends policies and projects that strengthen the pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle transportation network • Defines ideal standards for Complete Streets in local areas. “Complete Streets” refer to the concept that roadways should be designed with all users in mind, not just motorists. These standards apply contextsensitive design approaches to roadway redesign that enable safe, convenient, and comfortable travel or access for users of all ages and abilities regardless of their mode of transportation. This effort will support walking and bicycling within Fayetteville. • Establish a Street Typology, the traditional functional classifications of streets provide a hierarchy that correlates traffic flow to land access. Traffic volume, speed, and level of service provide the basis for roadway design criteria. However, this classification system falls short in considering non-vehicular users of the public right-of-way (pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit) and is void of context for how the street impacts adjacent land uses and vice versa. • Advocates for (re)developing Fayetteville’s core transportation network to work for the city’s residents, businesses, and visitors. This requires flexibility in its design application and implementation so that mobility priorities and guidance for transportation investments are identified to improve resident’s quality of life and access to goods or services.

Transportation Previous Studies

Transportation Previous Studies 2019 Fayette Transportation Plan The 2019 Fayette Transportation Plan is Fayette County’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) and identifies a set of short-term, intermediate, and long-range transportation system development opportunities. As it relates to the City of Fayetteville, the Fayette Transportation Plan primarily identifies the following policy changes recommendation: ▪ Veterans Parkway Overlay district that will encourage best practices in access management ▪ County-Wide Truck Route Ordinance restrictions through truck movements ▪ Refine Path Design Guidelines ▪ Sandy Creek Road Needs Assessment Additionally, the Fayette Transportation Plan lends support for the City of Fayetteville’s use of Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) program funding, and the development of the Fayetteville City Center. In 2017, in a county-wide referendum, Fayette County citizens voted to approve the 1% (or 1¢) SPLOST. The following is the status of the 2017 SPLOST transportation projects. Project

Number

Category

Fiscal Year

SPLOST Funds

Status

Quadrant 1 Area

Transportation

2018

$1,223,376

Completed

Quadrant 2 Area

Transportation

2019

$1,192,987

Completed

Quadrant 3 Area

Transportation

2020

$960,167

Completed

Quadrant 4 Area

Transportation

2020

$1,174,342

Completed

Transportation Master Plan- Multi- Use Paths

Transportation

2019

$75,000

Completed

S.R. 54 Multi-Use Bridge-Crossing

Transportation

2018

$600,000

In Design

Highway 85 Landscaped - Median

Transportation

2019

$75,000

In design

Downtown Master Plan- Road Engineering

Transportation

2018

$500,000

Underway

Redwine Rd/ Ramah Rd Roundabout

Transportation

2021

$1,200,000

From the comprehensive plan, previous studies, public input, and staff review, the following list of high priority projects were compiled. Some of the projects did not have identified funding sources. • Citywide – add sidewalks • SR 85 South –widen to four lanes • Work with GDOT and other stakeholders to make SR 54 and SR 85 in the downtown area safe and pedestrian friendly • Improve and add sidewalks citywide • Improve and update the multi-use path • Fayette Bypass -- complete • Citywide –create grid street network/connect neighborhoods • Hood Avenue – connect to Sandy Creek • Advocate for citywide – synchronize traffic signals • SR 85, SR 314, and Jeff Davis – improve flow, add safety improvements • City Center Engineering and Constructions • S.R. 54 Multi-Use Bridge-Crossing

Fiscal Outlook Fayetteville is well-positioned geographically to the City of Atlanta, Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport and to I-85 and I-75 which makes it convenient for residents, business owners and industrial tenants to travel for business and/or pleasure. The city has a wealth of natural, cultural, historical, and commercial resources that provide an amenity for residents, a destination for tourists, and an attractive location for commercial business and industry. The unemployment rate within the city in 2022 is 3.7% which is a slight increase over 2020 (3.4%). Revenue continues to be steady in most sectors, while sectors affected by the pandemic (hotel/motel tax, excise tax and court-related revenue) have started to normalize. The financial position of the city continues to improve from the recent recession, with three years of positive growth in the tax digest. Most revenue sources are stabilizing and some are showing slight increases. The city continues to maintain adequate fund balances consistent with the reserve fund policy, while also monitoring of revenue and expenditures.

Households & Economic Mobility A household includes all the persons who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence. The 2021 census data indicates that Fayetteville has 6,741 households, with approximately 69% identified as owner-occupied. Of the owner-occupied households, 25% of the occupants earn less than $50,000 annually, 33% earn between $50-$100,000 annually, and 41% earn more than $100,000 annually. Most homeowners are married couples between the ages of 45-64 with a combined income exceeding $100,000. A growing number of single residents and those between the ages of 25-34 also purchasing homes in the city. In the rental-occupied households, 34% are occupied by residents earning less than $35,000 annually; 24% are occupied by residents earning between $50-$75,000 annually; and 29% are occupied by residents earning more than $75,000 annually. Statistics show that households earning less than $35,000 annually are likely renting due to income restrictions and a lack of affordable housing options. Statistics also show there is a growing number of renters who could afford to own but choose to rent. Within the city, rental-occupied households are split evenly amongst household type (singles, married couples, and other family) and age distribution (25-34, 35-44, and 45-54). In 2019 the average median income of residents in the downtown district was between $52,700-$83,500. Through the years there has been a steady increase in the average median income with concentrations of high-earning households within the western and southern portions of the city. This trend is consistent with the median income in unincorporated Fayette County which also shows a concentration of higher median income households to the west and south of the city. Typically these areas are occupied predominantly by families and/or empty nester homeowners who want to live close to one of the county school complexes.

Home Values Between 2018 and 2019 the median home value in Fayetteville increased 4.1% from $215,200 to $224,100, which was 0.93% less than the national average of $240,500. Within downtown Fayetteville home values have decreased 4% since 2010. On average the median home value within the city is 30% less than median home values within unincorporated Fayette County ($281,400). Home values not only vary within the city limits but also throughout the county depending on location and proximity to school complexes, other jurisdictions (Peachtree City, Tyrone, etc.) and larger lot sizes and open space available within the unincorporated county. This disparity can be attributed to a deficit of new housing being built within the city limits.

Median Value

Median Gross Rent

Median Year Structure Built

$224,100

$1,157

1996

Value Of Owner-Occupied Housing Units

Mortgage Status

5% 36%

76%

39%

14%

76%

36% 39%

14% 6% 6% % %

24%

% Under $100K

$100K to $200K

$200K to $300K

$300K to $400K

$400K to $500K

$500K to $1M

Without Mortgage 24%

With Mortgage

76%

Over $1M

Market Demand 2022 Housing Study Summary Recommended Market Rate For-Sale Residential Product Offerings (5 years) Product

Product Description

Lot Width

Demand

Garage Situation

Square Feet Range

Avg. SF

Typical Price Range

Average Price

Avg. $/SF

Entry Townhomes

2 - 3 Story Townhouse

18'-22'

136

Surface parked, or 12 car garage front loaded

1,600

2,200

1,900

$325,000

$395,000

$360,000

$189

Move-Up Town-homes

2 - 3 Story Townhouse

20' - 24'

Attached front &/or rear-loaded

2,000

2,600

2,300

$395,000

$475,000

$435,000

$189

Upgrade Town-homes

2 - 3 Story Townhouse

24'-28'

Attached front &/or rear-loaded

2,500

3,500

3,000

$475,000

$595,000

$535,000

$178

Small Lot Detached Villa

1.5-Story SFD

26'

Attached rear loaded

1,900

2,400

2,150

$370,000

$445,000

$407,500

$190

Small Lot Cottage

2-Story Cottage Product

40' x 150'

110

Attached rear loaded

2,400

3,200

2,800

$470,000

$595,000

$532,500

$190

Conventional SFD

Two-Story 34 BR product on average lot

55' - 70'

320

Two-car garage, front- loaded

2,000

2,900

2,450

$395,000

$535,000

$465,000

$190

Estate/ Rural SFD

Two-Story 4 6BR detached homes on larger lots

100'+

120

Side loaded, 2 or 3car garage

2,600

5,000

3,800

$520,000

$745,000

$632,500

$166

Source Data: 2022 Housing Market Study

Recommended Market Rate Rental Residential Product Offerings (5 years) Product Description

DU/Ac.

Demand

Home Square Feet

Avg. SF

Typical Rent Range

Average Rent

Avg. $/SF

Rental Townhomes

1-2 Stories, garage or driveway parked

4-10

1,000

1,600

1,300

$1,600

$2,400

$2,000

$1.54

Garden Apartments

3-4 Stories, surface parked

10-30

700

1,300

900

$1,400

$2,000

$1,700

$1.89

Garden- Urban Apartments

3-4 Stories, surface parked, typically with elevators

40-60

600

1,200

800

$1,300

$2,000

$1,650

$2.06

Midrise Apartments

4-5 Stories, around or adjacent to structured parking

60-100

600

1,200

800

$1,200

$2,400

$1,800

$2.25

Product

55+ Apartments

Assisted Living

Rental SFD

3-4 Stories, surface parked, typically with elevators 3-4 Stories, surface parked, typically with elevators 1-2 Stories, garage parked

400

40-60

120

800

1,400

1,100

$1,600

$2,500

$2,050

$1.86

40-60

100

650

900

775

$3,000

$4,000

$3,500

$4.52

3-4

2,000

3,000

2,500

$2,000

$2,600

$2,300

$0.92

Source Data: 2022 Housing Market Study

Economic Development Workforce Population and Prominent Industries The city's proximity to I-85 and I-75 hinders the ability to market the city to larger industrial and/or office uses. In contrast both Newnan and Peachtree City have direct access to the interstate and established industrial parks which make them more marketable to industrial, manufacturing and logistics facilities. Fayetteville is situated to provide for a short commute to major employment centers within the southern crescent of metroAtlanta, including Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport, the Aerotropolis, as well as businesses and industries located within the I-85/I-75 corridors. As seen in workflow patterns, the majority of workers commuting to and from the city tend to live in the surrounding communities, work locally or commute from these areas into other employment centers. An estimated 14,310 people are employed within the city limits with approximately 41% earning more than $40,000 annually; 31% earning between $15-$40,000 annually; and 28% earning less than $15,000 annually. The majority of jobs paying more than $40,000 annually are in the healthcare or public administration fields. Of those individuals working within the city limits, an estimated 13,609 commute to work which indicates a potential shortage of housing options for those wanting to live and work within the city. Approximately 17% of people who work in the city live within a 4-mile radius of the city limits while another 12% within or close to Tyrone, Peachtree City and Jonesboro.

Top Employers Employment data managed by the city indicates the public sector employs a significant number of individuals who work within the city. While the public sector provides high quality jobs for residents, it does not directly add to the tax base of the city especially since these properties are tax-exempt.

Fayette County Board of Education

2,700

Fayette Hospital (Piedmont)

1,536

Fayette County Board of Commissioners

700

Wal-mart Stores, Inc

401

Kroger

332

Publix

304

Olive Garden

243

Trilith is responsible for an estimated 3,700 jobs, including those related to the 60-plus businesses located on site. Trilith's business ecosystem attracts investment capital, innovators, and entertainment-related businesses.

Chic-fil-a 178

City of Fayetteville 170

Concrete Supply Co 165 0

1,000

2,000

3,000

Economic Development Major Industries and Optimal Business Targets The latest census data shows the largest employment sectors within the city are educational services and healthcare, followed by transportation and arts/entertainment. Construction/manufacturing/warehouse jobs are primarily within the eastern and northern sectors while medical and technical jobs are primarily to the west. Most public sector and public administration jobs are concentrated downtown. The city's target industry sectors include small business, retail and film production support services, professional and corporate office users, computers and technology, and health services.

Educational services, and health care and social assistance

1,633

Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and accommodation and food services

931

Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services

910

Manufacturing

712

Retail trade

687 554

Other services, except public administration Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing

484 453

Public administration

Construction

297

Information

289

Wholesale trade

WORKPLACE AREA CHARACTERISTICS

1,033

Transportation and warehousing, and utilities

132

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining

500

1,000

1,500

Broadband Element Broadband is typically defined as a specific type of internet connection faster than non‐broadband internet, it uses wide bandwidth, and the service provides multiple signals at once. Bandwidth refers to the maximum rate at which an internet connection can transmit data. The Georgia Broadband Program defines an area as being served by broadband if at least 80% of locations within a census block have access to a fixed, terrestrial broadband provider with at least 25 megabits per second (Mbps) download speeds and 3 Mbps upload speeds. Critical Infrastructure like utilities, transportation facilities, and technology are essential to everyday business function and community growth. In 2018 the Georgia General Assembly amended the provisions of local planning in Georgia by passing the "Achieving Connectivity Everywhere (ACE) Act," intended to facilitate the enhancement and extension of high-speed internet access in communities that lack such infrastructure and the vast resources it provides. As the first step in planning for this critical, potentially catalytic infrastructure, the "Ace" Act requires all local governments to incorporate the "promotion of the deployment of broadband internet services" into their local plan. The map below shows that the city is well served with broadband service. Both the Federal Communications Commission and the Georgia Department of Community Affairs data indicate that citywide broadband service and high-speed internet coverage are available with several service providers. Also the latest American Community Survey (ACS) stated that 95 percent of households had a computer and 89 percent are served with broadband internet. Georgia Broadband Availability Map

95.7% Households with a computer, percent, 2016-2020

89 % Households with a broadband Internet subscription, percent, 2016-2020 Source: 2022 Georgia Broadband Availability Map https://broadband.georgia.gov/2022-georgia-broadband-availability-map

Value Per Acre Activity Centers are areas within the city that are currently or anticipated to become locations of significant commercial and/or mixed-use development. This 2022 Update identifies four major Activity Centers : Innovative Mixed Use (Trilith), Medical Complex (Piedmont Fayette), Downtown Core, and the 85 North Corridor (Fayette Pavilion). In 2020 the city commissioned Urban 3 to analyze property tax generation and value per acre trends within the city. The Value Per Acre Analysis (below) shows the two areas within the county that dominate the value per acre map - the taller purple spike represents Piedmont Fayette Hospital and the associated medical offices with the second purple spike represents Trilith Studios and the Town at Trilith. The Urban 3 analysis suggested that fiscally-healthy cities should have a downtown core that is six times as productive as the surrounding county. Downtown Fayetteville is about twice as productive as the rest of Fayette County. Medical offices around Piedmont Fayette Hospital and the construction near Trilith Studios are currently making up much of the difference. These more productive developments put Fayetteville in a position that allows the city to focus on growing the downtown.

Property Value & Land Use One of the primary funding sources for local governments is derived from property taxes and charges for services. Residential properties are the highest contributor in Fayetteville. A tax base that is balanced between commercial/industrial and residential uses will ensure reasonable property tax rates in the future.

Top Tax Value (Assessed Value) By Land Use 2012

$393,340,653 $341,459,925

$41,599,160 $10,903,338 Residential

Commercial

Industrial

$161,400 Agricultural

$8,054,235 Utility

Motor Vehicle

Top Tax Value (Assessed Value) By Land Use 2021

$658,806,034

$406,944,247

$38,524,050 Residential

Commercial

Industrial

$5,322,536

$13,010,676

Agricultural

Utility

$6,505,680 Motor Vehicle

Principal Property Taxpayers The chart below provides an overview of the assessed value for the top property taxpayers in 2021. As mentioned in the Urban 3 study and evident from the revenue generation data, leveraging the development and redevelopment of existing commercial nodes increases vibrancy, character, and a sense of community and provides a substantial economic impact. Top Property Taxpayers (Assessed Value) Brent Scarbrough & Co Inc

$30,192,632

Pinewood Atlanta

$27,071,931

Renamed Trilith

DDRTC Fayette Pavilion I & II

$12,329,476

DDRTC Fayette Pavilion I & II

$10,136,452

DDRTC Fayette Pavilion III & IV

$9,844,504

CCC-PWF, LLC

$8,946,436

Renamed Trilith

Cobblestone Apartments LLC

$8,466,888

Pinewood Forrest LLC

$8,382,328

Renamed Trilith

Heartis Fayetteville $7,510,000

Piedmont Fayette Medical & Office Bldg I $6,601,684 0

20,000,000

Existing Land Use The City of Fayetteville encompasses 12.8 square miles. The majority of land is developed with single family detached residential subdivisions. Approximately 14% of the overall land mass is consumed with commercial development, primarily concentrated along Highway 85 and culminating with the Fayette Pavilion shopping center. Fayette Pavilion has in excess of 1.5 million square feet of big box retail and at one time was the largest assemblage of commercial space within the state. Fortunately the retail complex continues to draw patrons from outside the Fayetteville/Fayette County zip codes, increasing sales tax revenue for both the city and county. The Existing Land Use Map provides a citywide perspective of current growth and land-use patterns. The analysis was completed by conducting a thorough review of GIS data provided by city staff. In addition, a windshield survey was conducted to further capture accurate data to analyze and update the Existing Land Use Map.

Existing Land Use Single Family Residential

Business Park

Multifamily Residential

Industrial

Commercial

Public Institutional

Parks and Open Space

Vacant Land

Existing Land Use Over 50% of all parcels within the city are zoned for residential use, with the most significant development being the Town at Trilith. Single-family detached residential developments occupy the majority of the city's land mass, Permit records show the majority of multi-family residential development occurred in the 1990's and early 2000's prior to the 2007 recession. Since then the bulk of residential development within the city has centered around the single-family detached product. In recent years the city has experienced an increase in requests for multi-family developments of all sizes and scopes. In several public work sessions the discussion has centered on the need to redevelop certain areas with mixed-use development which has led to the approval of two multi-use residential projects within the downtown core. As available land becomes scarce, new residential development has been more dependent on infill, rezoning request and redevelopment opportunities. Developers have requested greater densities to offset the higher land values and development costs. Commercially zoned land is primarily located along major corridors and state routes, and there are limited areas zoned for industrial development. Commercial uses in the City have historically benefited from the lack of retail in smaller cities in the area and the regional transportation routes. While many neighborhoods in the City were established in the 1990s, commercial growth followed the traditional development patterns with commerce at the center of town, then expanding along the corridors as the population increased. There has been less commercial growth in recent years as the real estate market has changed. The City has experienced limited redevelopment of older commercial properties, and residents have been outspoken during public meetings about the necessity for projects to revitalize the aging shopping centers. Recent changes in retail and office markets have added uncertainty to the continued possible development options for some commercial properties in the City. There are considerable commercial properties throughout the City with the potential for redevelopment or repositioning themselves for present market demands. Characteristics of potential redevelopment sites include significant amounts of surface parking.

Rethinking The Norm

Other cities and counties in

the Atlanta Metro area have encouraged this auto-centric type of development and are now experiencing budget short falls. Fayetteville’s decisions on future development will determine the direction of the City’s fiscal health for decades

How well Fayetteville handles further growth will be the deciding factor in what type of city it becomes. Encouraging traditional neighborhood design, infill development, and a more connected road network could lead to an economically-sustainable city. On the other hand, if left unchecked, development will likely move towards autocentric shopping centers and suburbs that are ultimately unable to pay for the infrastructure they require. As the city nears build out, much of the remaining opportunities to shape future growth will be through infill of under-developed properties or through redevelopment of obsolete or declining areas.

3 FAYETTEVILLE TOMORROW

Public Input The Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPC) was comprised of community stakeholders including neighborhood and Homeowner Association representatives, non-profit and civic leaders, business owners and other community members as well as representation from the City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and Downtown Development Authority. The purpose of the CPC was to engage the community and to work with City Staff as the 2022 Update was being prepared. The first action of the CPC was the analysis and review of current conditions, demographic changes and the community vision. The 2022 Update was developed with a cohesive vision, along with achievable goals, objectives and implementation strategies based on feedback provided through the public input process and then confirmed by the CPC. The 2022 Update also includes amendments to the Future Land Use Map, special interest area plans and additional plan recommendations which were developed with input from city staff, the CPC and the public. The Draft Comprehensive Plan - 2022 Update was presented the CPC and the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to forwarding to City Council with a request to authorize Staff to transmit the plan to ARC for review. The 2022 Update was officially adopted on September 15, 2022. The planning process is summarized below:

1 Existing Conditions & Fact Finding

Listening and Vision Review

• Existing conditions analysis • Kick-Off Meeting • Steering Committee

• One Visioning Workshops • Steering Committee Meeting

Meeting #1

3 Draft and Finalize Plan

• Steering Committee Meeting #3 • Draft Plan • Finalize and Transmittal • Public plan review

Public Input Community members provided input throughout the planning process, both in person and online. The engagement activities focused on identifying priority needs and opportunities and building consensus around a community vision and goals for the future. Comprehensive Plan Committee (CPC) The CPC was comprised of community stakeholders including neighborhood and Homeowner Association representatives, non-profit and civic leaders, business owners and other community members as well as representation from the City Council, Planning and Zoning Commission and Downtown Development Authority. The purpose of the CPC was to engage the community and to work with City Staff as the 2022 Update was being prepared. Kick-off Public Hearing City Staff initiated the 2022 Update of the Comprehensive Plan by holding a public hearing in the Council Chambers on Tuesday, March 3, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. The public was invited to attend and participate in this public hearing. The purpose of the public hearing was to brief the community on the process and opportunities for public participation. Community Meeting #1 – Existing Conditions Workshop The first community workshop was held on April 18, 2022 at 6:00 p.m. in city hall. The workshop was designed to give attendees an opportunity to share input on the assessment completed by Noel Consulting related to housing and commercial development. Community Meeting #2 – Visioning/SWOT Analysis Workshop The second community workshop was held on May 10th at 6:00 p.m. in city hall. The workshop was structured with exercises for open-ended responses. It was designed to solicit feedback on future development patterns and to identify areas where the city should focus its resources. Attendees were asked to provide a list of "small victories" and "big ideas" for the city, in addition to being encouraged to rate community assets and map future growth areas. They were also asked to provide general feedback on any areas of concern.

Public Input Community Meeting #3 – Visioning/SWOT Workshop The last public workshop was held at a local community center to get direct input from senior citizens on the future. Attendees were asked to add to the list of "small victories" and big ideas for the future. Participants were also encouraged to rate community assets and map future growth areas. They also provided general feedback on any areas of concern. 2021 LCI Study/Fayetteville Forward In 2021 as a part of the Livable Centers Initiative (CLI) Study, the city conducted a virtual community charrette on February 11-12 to develop a collective vision for the downtown core. A portion of the charrette was devoted to discussing the history of development patterns within the city and reviewing the recommendations from previous planning studies. Participants were then encouraged to re-imagine a future for the city and to share input on areas to preserve and/or change as well as perspectives on future land use, development patterns, accessibility and mobility, and parks and open space. Each of these sessions was conducted virtually and engaged 60-80 participants. 2022 Visioning Charrette Following up on the work of the Fayetteville Forward LCI Study, a crossdisciplinary team conducted a design vision workshop with city officials in late April. The goal was to create inspiring visions for key streets and critical city parcels of downtown Fayetteville and to outline a strategy for implementation.

Public Input Community Meeting Summary

VOICES from the COMMUNITY • Opportunity to live and work in the city

• Stop overbuilding apt. complexes for town. Traffic congestion

• Empty building need to be used for business

• More business coming to town

• Copy cat Trilith you need a model

• Fiscally sustainable and profitable development

• Redevelopment of the pavilion

• Pedestrian facilities that are safe, connected and separated from traffic

• Refurbish empty or partially occupied strip centers

• Do not build additional apartments until you fill and rent what you got

• Younger population

• Affordable senior housing - income based

Public Input Key Takeaways At each public workshop, attendees consistently ranked the city's small-town charm, parks, and community events with high marks. Public safety and the Senior Center (Fayette County) were additional areas that received high marks. The lowest-ranked areas included traffic and transportation, housing options and family ties. Other concerns included the increase in multi-family development, aging shopping centers, making downtown more walkable, and ensuring balanced growth. Housing Economic Growth

Family Ties 30

Schools

Transportation

Businesses

Parks/Open Space

History

Small town Charm

Medical Service/Hospital

Events Historic District

Challenges and Opportunities From the previous studies and community meeting, a number of specific priority issues emerged which ultimately

Needs/Challenges

Assets

guided the development of the updated core goals and recommended actions/projects. The following list of needs and opportunities were identified during a series of input meetings .

• New City Center Park including the playground, walkways, a picnic pavilion, a splash pad and lawn space • Small town Charm/Historic District • Existing street network is a great foundation to build upon in creating a vibrant walkable downtown • Historic buildings that contribute to the Southern/ small town charm • Community events are well attended and have created strong bonds • Piedmont hospital and other medical establishments provide vital services • Moderately affluent, established city with a quality school district and several local employment anchors • Presence of Georgia Military College and Georgia Film Academy • Proximity to Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport • Proximity to Atlanta • Pinewood Atlanta Studio and all the related businesses and workers that contribute to the Fayetteville economy • Infill development and undeveloped land • Excellent fire and emergency response • Established neighborhoods and housing stock

• Refurbish empty or partially occupied strip centers, aging Shopping Centers • Parking downtown seems limited, need clear signage to make it less confusing. • Improve the existing parks and add more open spaces • More community artwork in the downtown and new programming for community events • Old houses are deteriorated, lack of maintenance • More community artwork in the downtown • More sidewalks, bicycle paths and multi-use trails. • Improve older parks and provide more green space • Lack of pedestrian facilities that safe, especially downtown • Planned/intentional businesses in square that drive walkability • Reduce the impact of conflicting land uses • Improve older parks and provide more green space • Better traffic management city wide • Major state and U.S. highways transect the downtown • Traffic congestion and high speeds in downtown • Separated bike lanes/temporary road diet on streets such as Jeff Davis or Beauregard • Aging infrastructure needs continuous follow-up and maintenance • More housing options for seniors and young professional

VISION A unique place to call home, a community building from the past, working together creating a better future, while preserving our small town charm.

General Guiding Principles Guiding principles are the values city leaders should use to establish a framework for decision-making throughout the life of the Comprehensive Plan. These principles were conceived through robust and meaningful conversations with the CPC, city leaders, residents and the business community.

Manage Growth

Economic Vitality

Vibrant Neighborhoods

Historic Preservation

Natural Beauty

Exceptional Design

Connected Communities

Context Responsive Infill

Land Use and Development Goals and Policies GOAL ONE: Improve Property Tax Base to diversify and strengthen the fiscal health of the city L-1.1: Update and pursue goals of the Economic Development Plan. L-1.2: Investigate the development of more TAD districts L-1.3: Pursue more Business Park development to accommodate our economic development targets. GOAL TWO: Improve Aesthetics L-2.1: Encourage more parks, street trees, median landscaping and gateways. L-2.2: Continue with high architectural and site design standards L-2.3: Revisit the sign ordinance rules for temporary signs to ensure that the City maintains its appearance. L-2.4: Encourage the growth of the arts and cultural community. L-2.5: Minimize street frontages lined by parking lots and blank walls GOAL THREE: Make Downtown Fayetteville more vibrant and walkable L-3.1: Get more people living Downtown to support businesses L-3.2: Recruit more businesses to Downtown L-3.3: Study financial and engineering feasibility of regional stormwater detention in a water feature (such as a lake or enhanced creek/river/canal) Downtown L-3.4: Improved/ additional wayfinding signage L-3.5:Encourage pedestrian improvements within Downtown including but not limited to sidewalks, pathway systems, multi use trails connecting park areas, businesses, and neighborhoods to Downtown

Land Use and Development Goals and Policies GOAL FOUR: Ensure development is complementary

L-4.1: Finalize and adopted the update zoning ordinance to reflect goals of the Comprehensive Plan

L-4.3: Ensure appropriate density transitions and buffering between incompatible uses. L-4.4: Preserve and protect the desired character and value of well-established neighborhoods and natural resources from encroachment by incompatible uses.

L-4.5: Support the redevelopment of underutilized parcels

L-4.7: As necessary, undertake detailed studies, plans for growth centers, and mixed-use centers to identify areas appropriate for density mixed-use development L-4.8: Support residential infill development and redevelopment that responds to local preference and demand for innovative, high quality housing, that is sensitive to surrounding residential areas, and that supports community character goals and objectives.

Housing & Neighborhoods Goals and Policies GOAL ONE: Get more people living Downtown to support businesses H-1.1: Examine opportunities for higher density development in the activity centers (Trilith, Downtown, Pavillion, etc.) only as part of mixed-use development. H-1.2: Actively recruit mixed use developers. H-1.3: Encourage the development of townhouses that are externally oriented toward the street and neighborhood, not inwardly oriented or oriented toward parking lots. H-1.4: Encourage the development of smaller lot detached homes in walking distance of Downtown amenities.

GOAL TWO: Encourage development of housing for every step of the life cycle H-2.1: Investigate strategies to promote workforce housing, especially for government employees.

H-2.2: Address identified need for smaller single family detached housing with a higher architectural design standard located in walkable mixed use environments. This could be downtown or in a developer created mixed use environment. Care should be taken to limit the number of walkable mixed use developments outside of Downtown so as to not reduce the demand for living Downtown.

H-2.3: Reconsider City standards for required open space set aside for all zoning districts.

H-2.4: Work with community partners to stabilize and improve neighborhoods adjacent to downtown. H-2.5:Target rehabilitation in neighborhoods that need assistance to mend and enhance the existing housing stock. H-2.6: Consider conducting an bi-annual market study to determine demand based housing and employment needs. H-2.7:Revise regulations and administrative procedures to ensure new residential and mixed-use development provides sufficient public open space, green space, and pedestrian connectivity. H-2.8: Ensure new housing density complies with market demand recommendations from the 2022 housing market study.

Quality of Life Goals and Policies GOAL ONE: Continue to cultivate Fayetteville's distinct identity as a safe, welcoming city with attractive places to live; and highquality city programs and services. QL 1.1: Maintain property standards and enforcement to ensure that neighborhoods and buildings remain safe and livable QL 1.2: Preserve Fayetteville unique character QL 1.3: Maintain public infrastructure, buildings, equipment and open space that meets the demand of future community needs. QL 1.4: Support the vision of a community where everyone has access to the resources and opportunities needed to live healthy, active lives. GOAL TWO: Protect open space, natural, and sensitive areas. QL 2.1: Identify open space and sensitive areas that should be preserved for natural recreation areas QL 2.2: Develop a plan to retain a variety of natural areas for use by Fayetteville citizens QL 2.3: Foster dynamic, accessible public spaces and parks QL 2.4: Provide a range of public spaces, programs, and facilities that meet community needs for recreation and leisure

Transportation Goals and Policies GOAL ONE: Ensure coordination with state, regional, county, and local partners. T-1.1: Participate in the Fayette County Transportation Plan. T-1.2: Develop a more cooperative relationship with the Georgia Department of Transportation to help meet local objectives for state controlled roads. T-1.3: Participate in Fayette County Trails Plan in order to connect Fayetteville to larger countywide network. T-1.4: Pursue state and federal funding for community identified transportation high priorities T-1.4: Strategically locate and regularly maintain freight routes T-1.5: Work with GDOT and other stakeholders to make SR 54 and SR 85 in the downtown more safe and pedestrian friendly

GOAL TWO: Maintain or enhance the quality of new and existing infrastructure. T-2.1: Prioritize projects that have the most impact to the most people. T-2.2: Compile and prioritize safety improvements based on accident data. T-2.3: Prioritize creating more of a grid street network and "complete streets" to ensure alternative routes. T-2.4: Prioritize projects that support a more walkable Downtown. T-2.5: Pedestrian improvements including crosswalks and signals. T-2.6: Improved/additional wayfinding signage T-2.7: Promote connectivity of our road network to improve the quality of life in our residential neighborhoods. T-2.8: Require interparcel access in new development T-2.9: Implements traffic calming schemes, such as narrow travel lanes, on-street parking, mid-block crossings, and street trees to slow traffic and increase safety for all modes of transportation. T-2.10:Design all new facilities and upgrade existing facilities to comply with all federal, state, and local safety standards.

Transportation Goals and Policies GOAL THREE: Provide viable and attractive pedestrian facilities T-3.1: Review and refine the City of Fayetteville Trails Plan

T-3.2: Identify and fill gaps in the trail network. Find opportunities for future trails, complete connections to existing segments, implement projects, and pursue new trail connections to create a more functional trail network.

T-3.3: Improve the network of pedestrian facilities (sidewalks) by creating a safe and accessible network throughout the City. Sidewalks of required widths, well-marked crosswalks and approved pedestrian-scaled lighting should be installed to create an inviting and well used pedestrian system.

GOAL FOUR: Continue progress of making Downtown more walkable.

T-4.1: Coordinate with Land Use Goals.

T-4.2: Connect streets to create more of a grid.

T-4.3: Utilize shorter blocks to increase walkability T-4.4: Update Downtown commercial and mixed use zoning districts to enhance the pedestrian experience by creating scenic vistas and promoting street facing retail with store windows and sidewalk cafes. T-4.5:Develop a downtown streetscape plan.

T-4.5: Add more parks and fountains that will enhance the pedestrian experience.

T-4.6: Provide more downtown parking and signage for the parking.

T-4.7: Create a detailed parking management plan and signage

Economic Development Goals and Policies GOAL ONE: Attract people to live here who: • Will appreciate the Fayetteville lifestyle which can best be described as: Active, Outdoors, Family- oriented, Embrace a sense of community, Educated workforce E-1.1: Reconsider City standards for required open space set aside for all zoning districts. E-1.2: Create a green ribbon of parks and trails that connects the entire city. E-1.3: Support a healthy, diverse mix of businesses in Fayetteville GOAL TWO: Develop a Downtown Plan to create a unique destination in Downtown Fayetteville E-2.1: Work with consultant on economically feasible development strategies. E-2.2: Create a comprehensive marketing plan for Downtown. E-2.3: Encourage buildings in walkable areas to be oriented to the street and have facades designed with abundant windows and human scale architectural features GOAL THREE: Business Retention and Expansion E-3.1: Create synergy with local businesses by communicating with existing businesses E-3.2: Working together with the Fayette County Development Authority and Chamber of Commerce on business retention, expansion, and attracting developing the workforce local businesses need. E-3.3: Encourage educational enhancements to make Fayetteville the place to live for all school attendance zones. (i.e. post secondary training and professional development opportunities) E-3.4: Enhance the branding campaign. E-3.5: Encourage the creation (entrepreneur), retention, and expansion of local businesses E-3.6: Encourage sustainable practices in locating, designing, constructing, and maintaining development in the city. GOAL FOUR: Enhance Commercial Corridors. E-4.1: Encourage commercial redevelopment that offers amenities and atmosphere to attract top-tier commercial tenants. E-4.2: Identify underutilized properties (i.e., buildings assessed at considerably less than the total property value) and, encourage redevelopment E-4.3: Encourage structured parking and minimize surface parking, particularly adjacent to public rights-of-way E-4.4: Prepare individual Small Area Plans, for each of the Activity Centers that clearly demonstrate the desired mix of uses, residential density, building intensity, design aesthetic, specific street locations and multimodal connections, infrastructure improvements, parking, and open space.

Economic Development Goals and Policies GOAL FIVE: Encourage and facilitate broadband service throughout the city. E-5.1: Consider adopting the model Broadband Ordinance

E-5.2: Consider becoming a Broadband Ready Community

E-5.3: Promote broadband as an asset and strength of the community for businesses and residents

WORK PROGRAM & ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Community Work Plan This is the review of the Community Work Program from the next five years (2022-2026). This recognizes implementation actions the local government or other entities intend to take during the first five-year time frame of the planning period. This can include any ordinances, administrative systems, community improvements or investments, financing arrangements, or other programs or initiatives to be put in place to realize the plan goals. The Report of Accomplishments immediately follows the Community Work Program and provides an overview of the status of Short-Term Work Program Goals that were previously established for the period 2017-2022.

Community Work Plan Project

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

Economic Development GOAL ONE: Improve Property Tax Base to diversify and strengthen the fiscal health of the city

L-1.1:

Update and pursue goals of the Economic Development Plan

•

2022

$5,000/yr

Economic Development

Underway

L-1.2:

Utilize TAD #1 to ensure the appropriate redevelopment of greyfields

•

2026

Project based

TAD increment

Economic Development

Underway

2023

$90,000

Main Street/DDA

Underway

2026

$40,000

Main Street Tourism/ Hotel Motel Tax

Main Street/DDA

Underway

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

GOAL THREE: Make Downtown Fayetteville more vibrant and walkable

L-3.4:

Plan to update and expand Downtown wayfinding signage

•

GOAL TWO: Improve Aesthetics

L-2.4:

Host events/activities to attract residents and tourists to the downtown area

Project

•

2022

•

2023

•

2024

•

2025

•

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Facilities & Services GOAL ONE: Continue to cultivate Fayetteville's distinct identity as a safe, welcoming city with attractive places to live; and high-quality city programs and services. QL 1.3:

Design/Construct New Fire Station 93

2024

$7,454,430

100% Impact Fees

Fire Department

Underway

QL 1.3:

Tactical Support Fire Apparatus

•

2025

$600,000

CPF

Fire Department

Underway

QL 1.3:

Station 91 Expansion

•

2025

$126,247

IFF

Fire Department

Underway

QL 1.3:

Community Building

•

2025

1 ,465,058

IFF

Public Services

Underway

QL 1.3:

Fire Apparatus - Engine

•

2025

$638,718

100% Impact Fees

Fire Department

Underway

QL 1.3:

Police Dept. Office Space Expansion

•

2025

$626,796

100% Impact Fees

Police Department

Underway

QL 1.3:

Aerial Fire Apparatus

•

2025

$1,000,000

100% IFF

Fire Department

Underway

QL 1.3:

New Station 94

2026

$2,203,386

IFF

Fire Department

Underway

2022

$205,278

100% Impact Fees

Public Services

Underway

•

GOAL THREE: Provide viable and attractive pedestrian facilities L-3.5

The Ridge Boardwalk (Trail project)

•

Community Work Plan Project

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

Intergovernmental Coordination GOAL ONE: Ensure coordination with state, regional, county, and local partners

T-1.1. to T-1.5

Work with local governments to coordinate adjacent land uses, ensure efficient provision of services, and refine municipal boundaries

•

Ongoing

N/A

Administration

Underway

Project

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

Land Use GOAL FOUR: Ensure development is complementary

L-4.1

Audit and revise the City’s Zoning Ordinance to achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan

•

2022

$70,000

Planning

Underway

L-4.1

Audit and revise the City’s Sign Ordinance to achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan

•

2022

$20,000

Planning

Underway 1

GOAL FOUR: Continue progress of making Downtown more walkable T-4.2, T-4.3, T-4.5,

Implement the Downtown Visioning Charrette recommendations where feasible.

T-4.2, T-4.3, T-4.5,

Facilitate the implementation of the "Fayetteville Forward" LCI Plan (2020) recommendations where feasible.

•

2024

20,000,000

Public/Private

Planning

Underway

Ongoing

$40,000

Planning

Underway

GOAL FOUR: Enhance Commercial Corridors

E-4.4:

Prepare individual Small Area Plans, for each of the Activity Centers

•

Ongoing

$25,000 yr

GF, Grants

Planning/ Public Services

Underway

Project

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

GF, Grants

Planning and Economic Development

Underway

Natural & Cultural Resources GOAL TWO: Protect open space, natural, and sensitive areas. QL 2.1. to QL 2.4

Encourage more parks, street trees, median landscaping and gateways.

•

Ongoing

$40,000

Community Work Plan Project

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsibl e Party

Status

Transportation GOAL TWO: Maintain or enhance the quality of new and existing infrastructure.

T-2.10

Conceptual plan for new pedestrian crossings on Highway 85 North and Highway 54 East as identified in the Comprehensive Plan

•

2018

$10,000

Planning

Underway

T-2.10

Implement LCI Plan transportation projects as funding becomes available.

•

2020

$12,247,000

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Jeff Davis Shoulder

•

2023

$492,786

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Stonewall/85 Left Turn

•

2023

$142,234

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Lafayette/Tiger Trail Roundabout

•

2023

$1,228,345

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Highway 54/Gingercake

•

2023

$11,752

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Highway 85 Streetscape

•

2023

$30,134

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Highway 85 Median

•

2023

$377,526

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Lafayette Ave Extension

•

2024

$952,090

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Lafayette/Glynn

•

2024

$257,622

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Redwine/Ramah Road Roundabout

•

2024

$1,282,094

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Veterans Pkwy Small Roundabout (Sandy Creek)

•

2024

$1,004,940

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Fischer Road Extension (Downtown Expansion) City Center

•

2024

$16,026,175

Public Services

Underway

T-2.10

Highway 54/Grady Avenue

•

2024

$783,827

Public Services

Underway

Planning, Public Services

Underway

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

GOAL ONE: Ensure coordination with state, regional, county, and local partners. T-1.1:

Participate in the 2022 Fayette County Transportation Plan

4. Removed due to shift in daily operation

•

2023

$40,000

Community Work Plan Project

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Responsible Party

Status

Public Services

Underway

Public Services

Underway

Public Services

Underway

GF, LCI

Planning/ Public Services

Underway

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Underway

Planning, Public Services

Funding Source

Transportation GOAL TWO: Maintain or enhance the quality of new and existing infrastructure.

T-2.10

Veterans Pkwy 4-lane expansion (1.5 mile)

•

2025

$8,932,802

T-2.10

Habersham Extension

•

2025

$1,004,940

T-2.10

Bradley Sidewalk

•

2024

$500,000

T-2.9

Develop SR 85 North Corridor study to transition the corridor from suburban to urban

•

2024

$80,000

40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

GOAL THREE: Provide viable and attractive pedestrian facilities

T-3.2

Hwy 54 Hospital Area Bridge and Multi-Use Path (Hospital Area Paths and Crosswalk)

•

2024

$4, 200,000

GOAL FOUR: Continue progress of making Downtown more walkable. T-4.1 to T4.7:

Development of a Downtown "Complete Streets" Plan

4. Removed due to shift in daily operation

•

2024

$100,000

Underway

Report of Accomplishments Project

Start Year

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

Economic Development Hire Economic Development Director to pursue the Comprehensive Plan Economic Development Goals of business retention and expansion, business attraction and recruitment AND the Land Use Goal of Improving the City’s property tax base.

2017

$80,000

Administration

Complete

Host events/activities to attract residents and tourists to the downtown area

1996

Ongoing

$40,000

Main Street Tourism/ Hotel Motel Tax

Main Street/DDA

Complete

Facilities & Services Park improvements: Gazebo

2018

2019

$11,342

87.87% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Complete

Park improvements: The Ridge

2018

2019

$105,477

87.87% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Complete

The Ridge Trails 2

2018

2021

$11,795

100% Impact Fees

Public Services

Complete

Build a new City Hall

2018

2019

$14,000,000

Administration

Complete

New Park Lands (Purchased and constructed City Center Park)

2019

2040

2,759,071.89

IFF

Public Services

Complete

Work with public institutions to redevelop vacant or underutilized public buildings in the DHD.

2002

2022

$5,000/yr

GF/Grants/LCI

Economic Development

Cancelled

2002

2022

$5,000/yr

Planning

2016

2018

$2,222,000

Utilize existing infrastructure by encouraging infill and redevelopment as opposed to Greenfield development Design/Construct New Fire Station #3

63.99 percent IFF/36.01 percent CPF

Cancelled

Fire Department

Cancelled

Housing Review Zoning Ordinance and design standards to ensure that they allow for and encourage a variety of housing options

Removed due to shift in daily operation Removed due to shift in daily operation Removed, project now under with Fire Station 93

2000

2022

$2,000/yr

Planning

Complete

Report of Accomplishments Project

Start Year

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

2017

$80,000

Administration

Complete

Host events/activities to attract residents and tourists to the downtown area

1996

Ongoing

$40,000

Main Street Tourism/ Hotel Motel Tax

Main Street/DDA

Complete

Facilities & Services Park improvements: Gazebo

2018

2019

$11,342

87.87% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Complete

Park improvements: The Ridge

2018

2019

$105,477

87.87% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Complete

The Ridge Trails 2

2018

2021

$11,795

100% Impact Fees

Public Services

Complete

Build a new City Hall

2018

2019

$14,000,000

Administration

Complete

New Park Lands (Purchased and constructed City Center Park)

2019

2040

2,759,071.89

IFF

Public Services

Complete

$2,000/yr

Planning

Complete

Housing Review Zoning Ordinance and design standards to ensure that they allow for and encourage a variety of housing options

2000

2022

Report of Accomplishments Project

Start Year

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

Land Use Downtown Master Plan

2017

2022

$30,000

Planning

Complete

Hire additional Code Enforcement Officer to pursue the City’s aesthetic goals

2018

$40,000

Planning

Complete

Facilitate the implementation of the "Re-defining Downtown" LCI Plan (2002) recommendations where feasible.

2003

Ongoing

$12,247,000

LCI, SPLOST

Public Services

Complete

Natural & Cultural Resources Build a new Downtown Park

2019

2020

Included in new City Hall cost estimate

Administration/ Public Services

Complete

Parks Study to include engineering and feasibility study for water feature in a park

2018

2019

$465,000

Planning

Complete

Implement diverse programming at the Amphitheater

2006

2017

$165,000/yr

Main Street Tourism Assoc./

Continue diverse programming at the Amphitheater

Complete

Promote organized walking tours of the Downtown Historic District from the Holliday Dorsey Fife Museum

2004

2022

N/A

Main Street/DDA

Complete

Continue to implement Main Street objectives as they relate to preservation of cultural resources.

1996

2022

N/A

Main Street/DDA

Complete

$40,000

Main StreetHotel/Mot el TaxVendor Fees

Main Street/DDA

Complete

Continue to sponsor cultural activities and events in the Main Street District

1996

2022

Transportation Participate in the 2018 - Fayette County Transportation Plan

2017

2018

$40,000

Planning, Public Services

Complete

Participate in the Fayette County Trails Plan

2017

2018

$40,000

Planning, Public Services

Complete

Develop a City trails plan that will include identification of opportunities to provide connectivity between residential areas and other uses through multi-use trails/sidewalks and greenspace.

2018

2019

$75,000

SPLOST

Planning, Public Services

Complete

Veterans Pkwy Large Roundabout x 2

2017

2022

$3,240,834

Public/Private

Public Services

Complete

Church St. Extension (Hood Ave Conn/SR92)

2011

2016

$140,000 (City)

IFF (100%)

Public Services

Complete

Report of Accomplishments Project

Start Year

Comp. Year

Cost Estimate

Funding Source

Responsible Party

Status

Public Services Implement City SPLOST program

Grady/Beauregard - Roundabout

On-going On-going

2022

$11,649,324

2017

$958,643

Install additional street trees and landscape medians as funding becomes available

2017

2022

$5,000/yr

Require inter-connectivity of roadways within and between new and existing commercial and mixed use developments.

2004

2022

Hospital Area Paths and Crosswalk

2011

2018

SPLOST, LCI, DOT, Grants, Private 40.7% Impact Fees; SPLOST, GF

Public Services

Complete

Completed 1

GF (Tree Bank)

Planning, Public Services

Cancelled

$1,000/yr

Public Services

Cancelled

$650,000

GF, Grants

Public Services

Cancelled

Removed due to shift in daily operation Removed, project was more related to daily operation, now listed in the city ordinance Project Merged with the Hospital Trail Project

3 INTEGRATED LAND USE

ZONING MAP

Future Development Map Framework A number of key considerations contributed to the restructuring of the future land use designations adopted as a part of this update:

▪ Neighborhoods include a mix of housing types and choices at varying price ranges; with density and mixed-use at the center and lower density housing towards the edge.

▪ Neighborhood Centers are strategically located at intersections to maximize access, visibility and economic viability. These centers should include a range of commercial uses within walking distance of housing, serving the neighborhood primarily, but also serving existing, adjacent residential areas.

▪ A single, prominent employment center, or Activity Center, serves as the major employment and revenue-generating specialized uses. Activity Centers often have specialized uses and needs and may be dominated by a single user such as a campus. In addition, a forthcoming zoning rewrite and small area plans will be the primary mechanism for implementing the Future Land Use Map.

Updated Comprehensive Plan

Forthcoming New Zoning Ordinance

Small Area Plans

NEW FUTURE LAND USE MAP

01. North 85 Corridor

04. Innovation Mixed Use Center

02.Downtown Core

03.Medical Center

Neighborhood Residential 1 Neighborhood Residential 2

Activity Centers

Business Park

01-North 85 Corridor

Industrial

02- Downtown Core

Mixed Residential Neighborhood Center

03 - Medical Center 04- Innovation Mixed Use Center

Public Institutional Parks, Recreation and Conservation

PROPOSED NEW FUTURE LAND USE MAP

01. North 85 Corridor

04. Innovation Mixed Use Center

02.Downtown Core

03.Medical Center

Neighborhood Residential 1 Neighborhood Residential 2

Activity Centers

Business Park

01-North 85 Corridor

Industrial

02- Downtown Core

Mixed Residential Neighborhood Center

03 - Medical Center 04- Innovation Mixed Use Center

Public Institutional Parks, Recreation and Conservation

NEIGHBORHOODS Neighborhoods are not all the same - some are established, some are changing, some are emerging, and some are not yet built. The 2022 Update establishes the Neighborhood land use designation which is intended to identify residential areas that require attention to physical details, careful planning and connectivity. This plan focuses on stabilizing, nurturing, and reinvesting in distinct areas where deterioration has negatively affected their vibrancy and livability. Specific goals and objectives have been incorporated into this plan to assist the city with adapting to the impacts of future growth and changes in the real estate market.

PREVIOUS FUTURE LAND USE RESIDENTIAL Low Single Family

Townhome

Medium Single Family

Multifamily

High Density Single Family

NEW FUTURE LAND USE RESIDENTIAL Neighborhood Residential 1 (Low, Medium, and High Single Family Detached) Neighborhood Residential 2 (Single Family Attached, i.e Townhomes)

Mixed Residential (Multifamily )

Neighborhood Residential 1 Existing Conditions Located throughout the city are neighborhoods with single-family detached homes on lots of varying sizes, with nearby uses such as retail centers, parks, recreational areas, places of worship and schools.

Vision The Neighborhood future land use category is intended for single-family detached residential development and aims to recognize, maintain, support, and enhance the existing residential character of these areas. Future development within this land use category will primarily be single-family detached subdivisions that may include complementary uses such as public facilities and parks.

Key Implementation Strategies ▪ Intended for single-family detached homes of varying architectural style ▪ Where infill opportunities exist, development density should be compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods scale and integrate character and neighborhood-defining features ▪ Buildings designed with a pedestrian scale ▪ Identify opportunities to increase walkability and connectivity with outdoor spaces, sidewalks and path system ▪ Include sidewalks on both sides of all internal streets ▪ Minimize the potential for incompatible land uses (e.g. high traffic generators, noisy users, etc.) within or next to single-family neighborhoods. ▪ Encourage the use of landscape buffers and/or natural vegetation to mitigate the impacts that such land uses could have on residential neighborhoods. ▪ Prohibit higher density residential (e.g. duplexes, apartments) or high-density non-residential land uses (e.g. commercial and industrial uses) in single-family residential areas. ▪ Continue streetscape and infrastructure improvements in aging developments.

Neighborhood Residential 1 Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Primarily single-family detached (SF) Small-scale civic/public uses Places of worship Parks/recreation/green space R-70 R-40 R-30 R-15 R-22

Development Characteristics Building Form Mobility Open Space

Low-rise residential buildings with similar setbacks and lot sizes Well-connected local street network supports walking, bicycling, and driving. Typically private yards and improved common areas

Neighborhood Residential 2 Existing Conditions Located in three distinct areas: along or near Highway 85, North Jeff Davis Avenue and Jimmie Mayfield Boulevard, these moderate to high-density neighborhoods include a range of duplexes and/or attached units.

Vision This land use designation is intended to allow for smaller single-family detached residences, duplexes, quadplexes, condominiums and townhouses. Public and institutional uses such as parks, schools or churches may also be built within this designation. The scale and height of revitalization projects and future development should be compatible with the surrounding community's existing and planned character which could include a mix of smaller single-family lots and/or a mix of attached residential. Regardless of the type and density of housing, there is a high standard of product provided. Neighborhoods should be well lit, with attractive landscaping, amenities, and aesthetics.

Key Implementation Strategies ▪ Encourage new housing designs that are attractive and emphasize the structure from the street, rather than the garage. ▪ Where practical, new developments should be designed with vehicle access from a rear alley along with internal sidewalk connectivity throughout the development and to adjoining properties ▪ Encourage the construction of narrow streets in new neighborhoods and require sidewalks on both sides of all streets ▪ Minimize the potential for incompatible land uses (e.g. high traffic generators, noisy users, etc.) within or next to Two-Family/Townhouse Residential areas. Where such uses do occur in close proximity, encourage the use of landscape buffers to mitigate the impacts that such land uses could have on residential neighborhoods. ▪ Plan for interconnected road and open space networks in new residential areas ▪ Identify opportunities to increase walkability and connectivity with outdoor spaces ▪ Discourage the use of cul-de-sacs in new neighborhoods whenever possible. ▪ Promote property upkeep and maintenance through effective code compliance ▪ Buildings designed with a pedestrian scale

Neighborhood Residential 2 Land Use Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Primarily small lot single family residential and attached residential

R-THC Residential Townhouse Condominium

Development Characteristics Building Form

Single-family detached residential Low- to mid-rise attached residential

Mobility

Well-connected and dense street network and short blocks, encourage walking, bicycling and driving.

Open Space

Privately owned, common space and small parks, greenways and open space

Mixed Residential Existing Conditions Primarily located along Lanier Avenue, the parcels with this land use designation are developed with a range of single-family detached and/or attached residential.

Vision This land use designation is intended to provide a compatible variety of residential units as well as recreational and community facilities, with a focus on providing single-family detached as well as a variety of attached residential product (duplex, triplex, quadplex), multi-family residential, townhomes and condominiums along with public and institutional uses such as parks, schools and places of worship.

Key Implementation Strategies ▪ Require residential developments to provide on-site open space areas and amenities ▪ Where practical, new developments should be designed with vehicle access from a rear alley along with internal sidewalk connectivity throughout the development and to adjoining properties ▪ Encourage the construction of narrow streets in new neighborhoods and require sidewalks on both sides of all streets ▪ Support the construction of "complete streets" ▪ Plan for interconnected road and open space networks ▪ Discourage the use of cul-de-sacs whenever possible. ▪ Link parking lots to building entrances by pedestrian walkways that are physically separated from vehicular movement areas ▪ Promote property upkeep and maintenance through effective code compliance ▪ Encourage the use of balconies, porches, stoops, garden walls, varied building and facade setbacks, varied roof designs, bay windows, and similar design features in new mixed residential project designs. In general, multi-family dwelling units should be designed so that they appear to be a grouping of smaller residential units. ▪ Promote architectural design that is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood including building and facade materials, building height, building bulk, setbacks, window and door styles and placements, roof designs and color scheme.

Mixed Residential Land Use Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Single-family detached and attached residential

RMF-15 Multi-Family Residential

Development Characteristics Building Form

Single-family detached Attached residential

Mobility

Well-connected and dense street network and short blocks, encourage walking, cycling, and driving.

Open Space

Privately owned, common space and small parks, greenways and open space

PREVIOUS FUTURE LAND USE COMMERCIAL Business Park Suburban Commercial Suburban Office Public Institutional (Schools) Walkable Mixed Use

Nodes + People = Centers The most significant change in the 2022 Update is how the city classifies commercial development. Studies show that allowing and promoting varying levels of activity within a development can promote pedestrian activity and business vitality along corridors and create a rhythm of development, which helps to segment the linear corridor into distinct areas that will create a greater sense of place. North 85 Corridor

Innovation Mixed Use Center

Medical Center Downtown Core

Neighborhood Centers

Activity Centers

These areas encourage a mixture of small-scale commercial, low-intensity office, restaurants, specialty retail, medical and service uses that cater to the surrounding residential neighborhoods.

Activity centers are often referred to as character areas and encourage a “holistic” approach to long-range planning by integrating the community’s vision and desires with actual land use patterns; Activity Centers: • Downtown Core = Downtown Mixed Use Center • North 85 Corridor - Fayette Pavilion • Medical Center = Piedmont Fayette Hospital Complex • Innovation Mixed Use Center - Trilith Studios/Town at Trilith

Neighborhood Centers Existing Conditions Neighborhood Centers are primarily located on major thoroughfares and near concentrations of existing or planned residential neighborhoods. Current developments and uses include smaller strip centers, shopping centers with grocery stores, storage facilities, offices, retail establishments, restaurants, and services.

Vision This future land use category includes small-scale neighborhood supporting retail, office and service uses which preserve the residential character through building scale, building appearance, landscaping and signage. With the proximity to the Downtown Core and adjacent residential developments, the neighborhood centers will include some infill. Mixed-use developments are envisioned to revitalize aging shopping centers and help buffer the quieter residential neighborhoods. New development and redevelopment in these areas should be compact in form, with free-standing commercial structures and/or some vertical mixed-use structures. These areas should include a network of pedestrian-friendly and welldesigned streetscapes with a distinctive sense of place.

Key Implementation Strategies ▪ Actively promote redevelopment of aging retail centers ▪ Transform parking lots into pedestrian-friendly parking plazas with buffered walkways, parklets and commercial pad sites ▪ Create pedestrian connections to the main building entrances and the adjoining sidewalk networks ▪ Encourage connected street grid network with small blocks and wide pedestrian walkways as properties are redeveloped ▪ Improve mobility within the shopping center and to nearby shopping districts by establishing streetscape hierarchy ▪ Strategically buffer conflicting land uses such as residential areas and/or roadways with open space ▪ Create dedicated circulation for delivery vehicles to minimize conflict between pedestrians and service vehicles ▪ Establish a consistent development pattern along the corridors by implementing design guidelines for building design and materials, sidewalks, landscaping and signage ▪ Require inter-parcel access between developments ▪ Encourage buildings to face the street and locate parking to the side and rear as retail centers redevelop ▪ Provide bicycle and pedestrian amenities, including covered walkways, benches, lighting and bike racks ▪ Reduce parking requirements and encourage adaptive reuse ▪ Consider the use of “build-to” lines and street-oriented customer entrances to encourage walking and neighborhood connections. ▪ Design buildings and sites for pedestrians not just automobiles.

Neighborhood Centers Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Neighborhood-serving retail / commercial Small-scale office Green space For properties identified as having strong revitalization potential, projects with smaller footprints should be considered with a mix of uses. There should be direct linkages between residential and commercial uses; O-I Office and Institutional C-2 Community Commercial C-3 Highway Commercial

Development Characteristics Building Form

Mobility

Open Space

Low-rise retail structures with a walkable, landscaped public realm

Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel

Plazas, patios, and courtyards; landscaping and natural open space is encouraged

Neighborhood Centers

Today

Neighborhood Centers

Tomorrow

Innovation Mixed-Use Existing Conditions This master planned development includes Trilith Studios and the Town at Trilith, including a variety of detached and attached residential dwelling units, retail and commercial, office, restaurant and internal amenities.

Vision This land use category is intended to facilitate a carefully controlled mix of land uses which may include any combination of the following: office, retail, restaurants, residential, community facilities, and highquality industrial that is compatible with neighboring uses. This category is also intended to encourage and facilitate the conservation of open land and other natural resource features.

Innovation Mixed Use Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Mixed-use Retail/commercial/restaurant Office Lodging Hotel Single-family detached Apartments Townhomes Micro-homes Parking garages Indoor/outdoor event center

Create new zoning designation for areas within specified activity node. This should permit a mixture of land uses.

Development Characteristics Building Form

Mobility

Open Space

Mid- or high-rise buildings with active ground floors and building step backs on upper floors

Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel

Improved open space is a key feature; many public and private spaces

Innovation Mixed Use

Innovation Mixed Use Key Implementation Strategies In accordance with New Urbanism principles, the master planned development will continue to adhere the following standards : ▪ The neighborhood, the district, and the corridor are the essential elements of development and redevelopment in the metropolis. They form identifiable areas that encourage citizens to take responsibility for their maintenance and evolution. ▪ Neighborhoods should be compact, pedestrian friendly, and mixed-use. Districts generally emphasize a special single use, and should follow the principles of neighborhood design when possible. Corridors are regional connectors of neighborhoods and districts; they range from boulevards and rail lines to rivers and parkways. ▪ Many activities of daily living should occur within walking distance, allowing independence to those who do not drive, especially the elderly and the young. Interconnected networks of streets should be designed to encourage walking, reduce the number and length of automobile trips, and conserve energy. ▪ Within neighborhoods, a broad range of housing types and price levels can bring people of diverse ages, races, and incomes into daily interaction, strengthening the personal and civic bonds essential to an authentic community. ▪ Concentrations of civic, institutional, and commercial activity should be embedded in neighborhoods and districts, not isolated in remote, single-use complexes. Schools should be sized and located to enable children to walk or bicycle to them. ▪ The economic health and harmonious evolution of neighborhoods, districts, and corridors can be improved through graphic urban design codes that serve as predictable guides for change. ▪ A range of parks, from tot-lots and village greens to ballfields and community gardens, should be distributed within neighborhoods. Conservation areas and open lands should be used to define and connect different neighborhoods and districts.

Medical Center Existing Conditions The Medical Center activity center includes the Piedmont Fayette Hospital and adjoining medical buildings. Piedmont is a leading community hospital and one of the largest employers in Fayetteville with nearly 2,700 doctors, nurses, and other professionals. The activity center offers 24-hour emergency services, cancer care, health care, transplant center, women’s health, and more. This area encompasses a contiguous area of land generally located around the intersection of the Veterans Parkway, Sandy Creek Road and Highway 54 West.

Vision The vision for the area is one of mutual compatibility and support among differing uses with people living and working in the community. It includes a neighborhood that encourages people to live and work within the area and promote development that is consistent with, and transitions to, the established neighborhood scale. Future development will create a center that is a walkable, multi-modal community with a variety of transportation options with enhanced connections and safe pedestrian routes.

Key Implementation Strategies • Establish new zoning designation for areas within a specified activity node to permit a mix of land uses, similar to the Trilith development but at a smaller scale • Maintain existing hospital as an economic anchor for the community and support the future growth of healthcare and healthcare related businesses • Implement interconnected street grid network with small blocks and wide pedestrian walkways • For new mixed-use developments, streets should include landscaping, pedestrian-scale lighting, and street furniture. Public gathering areas should be encouraged. Buildings should be limited to no more than three stories and should include facade variation and fenestration. Parking should be located to the rear or side of buildings. • Require inter-parcel access between developments and parallel access to the medical center • Support the growth, stability and diversity of the residential communities by ensuring a continued mix of housing types • Establish direct, pedestrian friendly circulation and crossing patterns that connect uses with trails and bicycle and pedestrian routes. Provide pedestrian friendly crossings.

Medical Center Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

• Medical offices and other medical-related uses • Higher Density Residential • Retail (stand-alone or ground-floor as part of mixed-use development) • Hotel • Civic uses that support residential uses, such as schools and places of worship

Recommended Zoning

Create new zoning designation for areas within specified activity nodes. This should permit a mixture of land uses.

Development Characteristics Building Form

Commercial, institutional, multi-family or mixed-use buildings

Mobility

Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel

Open Space

Improved open space is a key feature; many public and private spaces

Medical Center

100

North 85 Corridor Existing Conditions This Activity Center includes several existing commercial sites along North 85 and other areas with commercial land uses. The most prominent is the Fayette Pavilion with multiple big box retailers and supporting retail, commercial and restaurant uses. The corridor is easily accessible by car but not easily accessible to adjoining residential developments. Vacancy in the corridor is generally low but is burdened by infill retailers such as discounters, thrift stores and churches.

Vision A vibrant commercial corridor with a mix of aesthetically pleasing and well-maintained mixed use developments that are interconnected with each other as well as the adjoining residential developments.

Key Implementation Strategies ▪ Actively promote redevelopment of the commercial areas and work with property owners to encourage higher occupancy rates and help maintain high occupancies rates through business retention and recruitment ▪ Reduce parking requirements and encourage existing retail centers to redevelop into mixed-use centers ▪ Reintroduce internal grid street networks along with pedestrian-friendly connections. Convert unused parking areas into pedestrian-friendly parking plazas with buffered walkways, parket, and commercial pad sites. ▪ Create pedestrian connections to the main building entrances and the adjacent sidewalk network. ▪ Improve mobility within the shopping center and to nearby shopping districts by focusing streetscape improvements ▪ Strategically buffer from or connect to adjacent uses of conflicting land uses, and open space, protect residential neighborhoods, and the highway ▪ Create dedicated circulation for large vehicles so that retail warehousing uses do not conflict with improvements geared towards creating a pedestrian-friendly environment ▪ Establish a consistent development pattern along the corridor by implementing design guidelines for signage, sidewalks, and landscaping ▪ Require inter-parcel access between developments ▪ As shopping plazas redevelop, encourage buildings to face the street and locate parking to the side and rear ▪ Provide bicycle and pedestrian amenities, including covered walkways, benches, lighting, and bike racks • Continue code compliance efforts to maintain an attractive appearance of shopping centers and buildings.

101

North 85 Corridor Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Shopping centers Standalone retail uses Personal services Restaurants Mixed use (including office and ground-floor retail/commercial)

Create new zoning designation for areas within specified activity node. This should permit a mixture of land uses.

Development Characteristics Building Form

Mid- or high-rise buildings with active ground floors and building step backs on upper floors

Mobility

Very well-connected street network with small blocks and highly walkable connections

Open Space

Improved open space is a key feature; many public and private spaces

102

North 85 Corridor

103

North 85 Corridor Overview

104

Downtown Core Existing Conditions Land use within downtown are characterized by a predominance of institutional uses, single-family homes, and commercial/retail facilities. Records indicate that much of the downtown core was constructed between 1880 and 1920. Since then the downtown has grown more modestly and consistently resulting in the development of previously undeveloped or underdeveloped areas along major transportation routes and redevelopment within the historic downtown square. Recent developments like the city center park has brought new life to downtown, and the two state highways present a challenge to the vision of a walkable, safe and pedestrian-friendly downtown.

Vision This land use designation is intended to encourage pedestrian-oriented retail, office, service, community facility and residential uses. The vision for the downtown core is centered on pedestrian-oriented and walkable development where people living, working and visiting should be able to park their car and easily walk from place to place. The vision for the recent LCI Study centered around moving downtown Fayetteville Forward through catalytic and equitable placemaking, enhanced legibility of the built environment, and creative guidelines for sustainable developments.

Key Implementation Strategies ▪ Prioritize walkability and connectivity ▪ Require inter-parcel access between developments ▪ Develop a comprehensive sidewalk network to enhance safety, emphasize walkability in the street grid and pedestrian scale. ▪ Improve zoning ordinance to permit a mixture of uses ▪ Use code to enhance pedestrian experience, and unified streetscaping (improving aesthetics) ▪ Codify historic inspiration as a guide for new buildings ▪ Emphasis on placemaking/Downtown as a destination ▪ Add more parks, landscaping, and trees ▪ Emphasis on historic character and Identify infill parcels and ownership for redevelopment opportunities ▪ Create distinct character areas ▪ Establish Street Frontage Typologies, Improve Public Space Domains ▪ Adopt architectural design guidelines ▪ Adopt a Complete Street policy ▪ No new auto-oriented commercial developments ▪ Historic buildings originally constructed for residential use must retain their residential architecture regardless of the use or mix of uses ▪ All sites are designed for the convenience of pedestrians first and vehicles second

105

Downtown Core

106

Downtown Core Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Shopping centers Standalone retail uses Personal services Restaurants Residential

Create new zoning designation for areas within specified activity nodes. This should permit a mixture of land uses.

Development Characteristics

Building Form

Buildings are also designed with the convenience of pedestrians in mind. All buildings have street entrances and the primary façade(s) and architectural treatments are street facing

Mobility

Blocks are small and streets are interconnected in a grid fashion to the extent practicable. Streets are tree lined and sidewalks are wide.

Open Space

Improved open space is a key feature; many public and private spaces

107

Downtown Core

108

Parks, Recreation and Conservation Existing Conditions The use and enjoyment of outdoor spaces have long been a source of joy and quality of life for residents and visitors. There are currently six (6) public parks, and the city is committed to enhancing these spaces to benefit the general public.

Vision This land use category is for land dedicated to active or passive recreational uses as well as green space and wildlife management. It is in this area that residents have an opportunity to connect with nature through activities that promote physical activity and healthy lifestyles. These areas may be either publicly or privately owned.

Key Implementation Strategies • Preserve and protect environmental areas that protect wildlife and vegetative resources. • Work collectively with surrounding and overlapping governments and non-profit agencies on the preservation and enhancement of woodlands and open space areas. • Identify opportunities for future open space in neighborhoods that are undersupplied in public recreation and open space opportunities. • Enhance public access to parks and recreational facilities by making necessary infrastructure improvements.

109

Parks, Recreation and Conservation Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Playgrounds Public parks Nature preserves Golf courses Recreation centers Pedestrian and/or bike trails Dog parks Pavilions Amphitheaters and similar uses

OS - Open Space

Development Characteristics Building Form

Mobility

Open Space

Typically low rise recreation, maintenance and other support facilities

Along all street types; Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel

Open space is the primary element

110

Business Park Existing Conditions Business parks are located along or in close proximity to major corridors, the existing developments include offices, warehouse space, and light manufacturing . There are several acres of undeveloped land with this designation.

Vision This category is for land dedicated to maximize the potential for job creation. This classification is for land dedicated to offices, research and development, healthcare and education. It will be supportive of other related uses such as hotels, restaurants, and small scale retail. Business park sites will typically be over five acres and master planned to have easy internal circulation in a planned campus atmosphere.

Key Implementation Strategies • Business park sites will typically be over five acres and master planned to have easy internal circulation in a planned campus atmosphere. • Sites are clean, well landscaped, and heavily buffered. • In general, business park uses will not generate significant truck traffic. • New development should include appropriate landscaping and buffering elements including street trees, parking lot landscaping and perimeter screening. • Screening should be provided between incompatible land uses, especially residential uses. • Pedestrian connections should be established between developments and along roadways to improve the connectivity of the area.

111

Business Park Overview Land Use Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Office and Institutional Medical Office Business Park Business Park

Development Characteristics Building Form

Architectural styles will vary, but site design will have a character similar to that of a college campus.

Mobility

Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel and pleasant pedestrian connections between buildings

Open Space

Significant greenspace is a key feature; many public and private spaces

112

Industrial Existing Conditions There are limited industrial areas within the city and most are fully occupied.

The most recent

development is located along Promenade Parkway.

Vision Located to minimize impact on surrounding uses, the industrial classification is for land dedicated to manufacturing facilities, processing plants, factories, warehousing and wholesale trade facilities, and any other uses with significant truck traffic or any use that has detrimental visual (or other sensory) impact that cannot be concealed by its building and landscaping. Sites have a traditional industrial design and appearance.

Key Implementation Strategies • Protect remaining industrial sites for signature opportunities. • New development should include appropriate landscaping and buffering elements including street trees, parking lot landscaping and perimeter screening • Screening should be provided between incompatible land uses, especially residential uses. • Pedestrian connections should be established between developments and along roadways to improve the connectivity of the area.

113

Industrial Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Primarily light manufacturing Research & development Warehousing Distribution Processing plants Wholesale trade facilities Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial

Development Characteristics Building Form

Mobility

Open Space

Typical high-bay, single-story and large/ long manufacturing or warehousing buildings

Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel

Improved open space is a key feature; many public and private spaces

114

Public Institutional Existing Conditions The Fayette County Public School System comprises 14 elementary, five middle, and five high schools, as well as an adult community school. Along with the administrative offices, there are three schools in the city limits.

Vision This area allows for the location of public and non-profit institutions, and organizations that provide regular services to and for the general public. This includes certain state, federal, and/or local government and institutional land uses. These are ideally located in areas distributed throughout the city with emphasis being on proximity to residential areas and areas with intense population activity during the day. While most of these areas are generally envisioned solely for Public/Institutional use, there are times that these uses will be found in other appropriate character areas.

Key Implementation Strategies • Strategic open spaces should be provided throughout the district that provide both passive and active recreational opportunities which could include parks, common gathering spaces, and gardens. • New development within the district should include appropriate landscaping and buffering elements including street trees, parking lot landscaping and perimeter screening, and building perimeter landscaping. • Screening should be provided between non-residential and residential uses. • Parking and service areas should be minimized where possible by locating the building prominently on the site with parking and service areas to the rear or side of the building

115

Public Institutional Overview Land Use

Primary Uses

Recommended Zoning

Educational facilities Churches Cemeteries Government uses such as city hall, government building complexes, public safety stations, libraries, post offices, community centers, senior centers, recycling collection centers, and recreation centers. Create new zoning designation for areas.

Development Characteristics Building Form

Mobility

Open Space

Primarily office and/or civic buildings

Encourage safe and comfortable access by all modes of travel

Improved open space is a key feature; many public and private spaces

116

APPENDIX

LEGAL NOTICE AND COMMUNITY SIGN IN SHEET

1st Kickoff Public Meeting March 3, 2022

1st Public Meeting: https://www.facebook.com/fayettevillega.gov/videos/2080045055497946

APRIL 2022 - PUBLIC MEETING SIGN IN SHEET

MAY 2022 - "POP -UP" PUBLIC MEETING SIGN IN SHEET

BIG AND SMALL IDEAS - PUBLIC COMMENTS

APRIL & MAY MEETING COMMENTS

MISSION REVIEW - PUBLIC COMMENTS

APRIL & MAY MEETING COMMENTS

COMMUNITY ASSET REVIEW - PUBLIC COMMENTS

TOTAL

( WRITE IN ) ( WRITE IN )

APRIL MEETING = BLUE DOTS MAY MEETING = ORANGE DOTS

Final Adoption Public Meeting September 15, 2022

https://www.facebook.com/fayettevillega.gov/videos/1421039291740832

2022 HOUSING STUDY

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE MARCH 2022 www.NoellConsulting.com

CONTACT | 404.681.0006

Executive Summary

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 1 Fayetteville Land Use Map Potential Future Housing Development

Fayetteville

Trilith

Piedmont

Downtown

The City of Fayetteville is fairly developed, but there are pockets of opportunity for new housing development to occur. The map to the left shows existing concentrations of land use, with areas of opportunities for future development highlighted in red circles. Higher density forms of housing such as apartments and townhomes, should be located near Downtown, Piedmont, and Trilith, where density is naturally higher and a mix of land uses join together. Additionally, senior living facilities and apartments should be located along heavily trafficked corridors for visibility purposes.

Lower density housing such as single family subdivisions and estate lots can be located near the City's edge where density is naturally lower and existing residential homes are more spread out.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Earth 3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 2 Summary of Recommended Market Rate For-Sale Residential Product Offerings Product Attached Products

Product Description

Square Feet Range

Lot Width

Garage Situation

Avg. SF

1,900

$325,000 $395,000

Typical Price Range

Average Price

Avg. $/SF

Target Market Audience

Estimated Demand Level

$360,000

$189

First time buyers, Single-parent families, singles, couples

27/year, up to 136 through 2026

Entry Town-homes

2 - 3 Story Townhouse

18'-22'

Surface parked, or 11,600 2,200 2 car garage front loaded

Move-Up Town-homes

2 - 3 Story Townhouse

20' - 24'

Attached front &/or rear-loaded

2,000 2,600

2,300

$395,000 $475,000

$435,000

$189

Mix of working singles & couples

8/year, up to 40 through 2026

Upgrade Town-homes

2 - 3 Story Townhouse

24'-28'

Attached front &/or rear-loaded

2,500 3,500

3,000

$475,000 $595,000

$535,000

$178

Mix of working singles & couples, retirees

4/year, up to 20 through 2026

Up to 18/year for a total of 90 through 2026

Detached Products

26'

Attached rear1,900 2,400 loaded

2,150

$370,000 $445,000

$407,500

Varies from movedowns (master $190 down) to young couples

40' x 150'

Attached rear2,400 3,200 loaded

2,800

$470,000 $595,000

$532,500

$190

More working couples and families

Up to 22/year for a total of 110 through 2026

Conventional SFD

Two-Story 3Two-car 4 BR product 55' - 70' garage, front- 2,000 2,900 on average loaded lot

2,450

$395,000 $535,000

$465,000

$190

Mostly families with children, some couples

Up to 64/year for a total of 320 through 2026

Estate/ Rural SFD

Two-Story 4 6BR detached homes on larger lots

$166

More established couples and families with children

Up to 24/year for a total of 120 through 2026

Small Lot Detached Villa

1.5-Story SFD

Small Lot Cottage

2-Story Cottage Product

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

100'+

Side loaded, 2,600 5,000 2 or 3-car garage

3,800

$520,000 $745,000

$632,500

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 3 Summary of Recommended Market Rate Rental Residential Product Offerings Product Attached Products

Product Description

DU/Ac.

Home Square Feet

Avg. SF

Typical Rent Range

Average Rent

Rental Townhomes

1-2 Stories, garage or driveway parked

Garden Apartments

3-4 Stories, surface parked

GardenUrban Apartments

3-4 Stories, surface parked, typically with elevators

40-60

600 1,200

800

$1,300 $2,000

$1,650

Midrise Apartments

4-5 Stories, around or adjacent to structured parking

60-100

600 1,200

800

$1,200 $2,400

$1,800

55+ Apartments

3-4 Stories, surface parked, typically with elevators

40-60

800 1,400

1,100

$1,600 $2,500

$2,050

IL/AL

3-4 Stories, surface parked, typically with elevators

40-60

650 900

775

$3,000 $4,000

$3,500

4-10

10-30

1,000 1,600

700 1,300

1,300

900

$1,600 $2,400

$1,400 $2,000

$2,000

$1,700

Avg. $/SF

Target Market Audience

Estimated Demand Level

$1.54

Starter families, Couple w/dogs, Empty Nesters

Up to 50 through 2026, though price band is comparable to conventional MF flats shown below, so demand can be reallocated from flats.

Garden, G-Urban, and Midrise all $1.89 attract similar audiences, but the lower the density the lower the cost, and thus more $2.06 affordable to attract more moderate incomes. In this market Garden = $50-85k, GardenUrban $60-100k, $2.25 and Midrise $65150k+

Estimated at 400 units of additional demand beyond the current pipeline (Walton and Meridian) through 2026.

$1.86

Typically 60-80 years old, 70% female, 70% couples

Demand for one smaller scale facility, under 120 units, through 2026.

$4.52

Typically 70-90 years old, heavily skews to single female

Demand for one additional facility of +/- 100 beds through 2026.

$0.92

Starter families, Couple w/dogs, Empty Nesters. HHs waiting to build/buy

Up to 50 through 2026

Detached Products

Rental SFD

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

1-2 Stories, garage parked

3-4

2,000 3,000

2,500

$2,000 $2,600

$2,300

Location Analysis

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 4 Overview of Metro Area Population Trends Atlanta-Sandy SpringsRoswell MSA

The City is located in Fayette County, within the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The Atlanta MSA includes 29 counties, with ten central counties belonging to the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) and forming the core of the MSA. Roughly 78% of the population of the MSA lives within this ten county core. From 2000 to 2010 only 67% of all growth occurred in this ten county core, however, since 2010 roughly 85% of all growth has occurred in this ten county core as younger and older generations increasingly seek walkable neighborhoods, both in urban and suburban areas. Fayette County had considerable growth from 2000 to 2010 with an annual growth rate of 1.6%. Since 2010, the County has experienced a positive growth rate of 1.0% although slower as in previous years as some cities in Fayette County, such as Peachtree City, have slowed construction. However, the story for the City of Fayetteville is more positive. The City of Fayetteville outpaced many of the fastest growing counties, from 2000 to 2010, with 3.6% annual growth. Since 2010, The City's growth rate is still strong and has outpaced all counties in the MSA except for Cherokee County from 2010 to 2020 with an annual growth rate of 1.7%.

LAND AREA

ANNUAL GROWTH

ANNUAL % GROWTH

GEOGRAPHY

SQ MILES

% MSA

2020

% of MSA

2000-10

2010-20

2000-10

2010-20

2000-10

2010-20

LAND / CAPTURE RATIO

Cherokee County

422

4.8%

266,620

4.5%

7,244

5,227

4.2%

2.2%

7.1%

5.2%

1.08

Clayton County

142

1.6%

297,595

5.0%

2,291

3,817

0.9%

1.4%

2.2%

3.8%

2.36

Cobb County

339

3.9%

766,149

12.8%

8,033

7,807

1.2%

1.1%

7.8%

2.01

DeKalb County

268

3.1%

764,382

12.8%

2,603

7,249

0.4%

1.0%

2.5%

7.3%

2.37

Douglas County

200

2.3%

144,237

2.4%

4,023

1,183

3.7%

0.9%

3.9%

1.2%

0.52

Fayette Co. (exl. Fayetteville)

0.5%

100,237

1.7%

1,051

962

1.2%

1.0%

1.90

City of Fayetteville

150

1.7%

18,957

0.3%

480

301

3.6%

1.7%

0.5%

0.3%

0.18

Fulton Co. (excl. Atlanta)

394

4.5%

580,420

9.7%

10,079

8,010

2.3%

1.5%

9.8%

8.0%

1.78

133

1.5%

486,290

8.1%

378

6,603

0.1%

1.5%

0.4%

6.6%

4.34

Gwinnett County

430

4.9%

957,062

16.0%

21,687

15,174

3.2%

1.7%

21.2%

15.2%

3.08

Henry County

322

3.7%

240,712

4.0%

8,458

3,679

5.5%

1.7%

8.3%

3.7%

1.00

Rockdale County

130

1.5%

93,570

1.6%

1,510

836

2.0%

0.9%

1.5%

0.8%

0.56

10-County ARC Core

2,974

34.1%

4,716,231

78.8%

67,837

86,926

1.8%

2.0%

66.3%

87.3%

2.56

Exurban Counties

5,739

65.9%

1,267,876

21.2%

34,492

12,700

3.5%

1.0%

33.7%

12.7%

0.19

MSA Total

8,713

100.0%

5,984,107

100.0%

102,329

99,626

2.2%

1.8%

100.0%

1.00

City of Atlanta

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, U.S. Census Bureau

3/18/2022

POPULATION

10 County Atlanta Regional Commission

CAPTURE OF REGION

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 5 Description of the Primary Market Area

The City of Fayetteville is located in the center of Fayette County. Historically, Fayetteville was predominately an agricultural area of cotton fields with sprawling homes on large acre lots.

Recently, Fayetteville has worked to restore the historic streetscape and Downtown country charm, while still welcoming new residents and businesses.

Primary Market Area Comparison Area

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Maps

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 6 Inbound Migration Flows for Fayette County Top Ten States Inbound Migration 1

Georgia

7,127

13%

New York

2,770

Virginia

2,133

Texas

2,020

Ohio

1,846

South Carolina

1,616

North Carolina

1,527

Tennessee

1,353

Michigan

760

1% 1%

10 Illinois

726

Top Fifteen Counties Inbound Migration

The map in this exhibit shows the total inbound migration flows for Fayette County, Georgia utilizing 20152019 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS) Data. The leading out of market states are New York and Virginia representing retirees that are largely settling at locations closer to children and family. The county is very diverse with 67% local migrants with 23% of migrants coming from out of state or abroad. Naturally, most of the local migrants come from neighboring Walton County, Clayton County, and Fulton County --with in-Fayette same county migration at nearly 35%.

Walton County

Georgia

966

Clayton County

901

Fulton County

Georgia Georgia

Franklin County

Ohio

722

Chesterfield County

Virginia

703

Coweta County

Georgia

674

Harris County

Texas

653

Shelby County

Tennessee

592

Rockdale County

Georgia

572

10 Kings County

New York

512

11 Richland County

South Carolina

454

12 Wayne County

Michigan

448

13 Queens County

New York

433

14 Richmond County

New York

404

15 Henry County

3/18/2022

381

Georgia

Where Residents Migrate From Same County 5% 35%

28% 32%

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, US Census Bureau

746

Different County, Same State Different State Abroad

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 7 Migration Demographics for Fayetteville, 2017 Percentage of Renters Among In-Migrants

7 75 years and over

70 to 74 years

Moved From Abroad

65 to 69 years

41% 59%

Moved From Different State

43%

57%

60 to 64 years

55 to 59 years

50 to 54 years

Moved Within County

45 to 49 years

26%

Different County, Same State

74%

40% 60%

40 to 44 years

35 to 39 years

30 to 34 years

26.8%

25 to 29 years 0

100

120

140

Moved from abroad

Moved from different state

Moved from different county within same state

Moved within same county

160

180

Renter vs Owner for Current Residents

73.2%

Renter Owner

In this exhibit NCG looks at the inbound migration data for the census defined City of Fayetteville. The graph on the left shows where people who moved to the City are coming from. For those who are new to market, those aged below 55 largely originated in other Georgia counties. That trend declines with the three age tiers from ages 55-60 and reemerges at the 65 and up age group. Among those three groups, intra-county migration was the most popular. Migrants from abroad were more heavily leaving ownership positions (59%) and migrants from other states were in a very similar position, 60% ownership positions. However, persons moving within Fayette County showed a heavy distribution of renters, 74% renters, over homeownership, 26%, who had moved within the County. Current residents in Fayetteville skew toward owning, 73%. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, US Census Bureau

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 8 Change in Population Density (Per Sq. Mile)

Population Density 2010 Census

Population Density 2022 5-Year ACS

The maps above show the change in population density around the City of Fayetteville. As illustrated by the concentrations of color, density of the area is centered around Fayetteville and spreads towards the cores of Peachtree City and Tyrone. The area around Downtown Fayetteville grew from 3,426 people per square mile to 3,786 from 2010 to 2022 - demonstrating a 10% increase in population density. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 9 Change in Educational Attainment

Bachelor Degrees 2010 Census

Bachelor Degrees 2019 5-Year ACS

The maps in this exhibit show the change in the population, per census tract, aged 25+ that have obtained a bachelor's degree or more using the 2010 Census and 2019 5-Year ACS (American Community Survey) data. Historically, college educated individuals in Fayette County have been concentrated in the west and south west near Peachtree City and Tyrone, but over the past few decades college educated individuals have been pushing west increasing the educational attainment in Downtown Fayetteville, and Fayette County, as a whole. This surge is primarily due to many people being priced out of more established neighborhoods to the west. NCG believes, based on available data, educational attainment will continue to growth in the coming years. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 10 Change in Median Household Income

Median Household Income 2010 Census

Median Household Income 2019 5-Year ACS

The maps above show the change in median household income above per census tract within Fayette County. Downtown Fayetteville shows an average median household income of $52,700 to $83,500 in 2019. There has been increases in median income throughout the city with concentrations of high-earning households to the west and south. There is a massive cluster of high earning households to the south and west of Fayette County which is predominantly family/empty nester homeowners who want to live close by one of Fayette County's highest rated schools. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 11 Change in Median Home Value

Median Home Value 2010 Census

Median Home Value 2019 5-Year ACS

The above maps show the change in median home value of owner-occupied housing. Downtown Fayetteville stands out slightly with a 4% decrease in median home value since 2010. Further, the combined median home value of Downtown Fayetteville is 30% less than the Fayette County median home value of $281,400. While Downtown has some varying home values depending on the side of town you are on, the highest home values are concentrated to the west, in Peachtree City and Tyrone, as well as south of the city. The disparity can be attributed to a deficit of new housing being built in Downtown Fayetteville, as well as Peachtree City being an alternative solution to Downtown living. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 12 Change in Family Households

Married-Couple Family Households With Children 2010 Census

Married-Couple Family Households With Children 2019 5-Year ACS

The above maps show the percentage of households, per census tract, that consist of a married-couple family household with children under the age of 18. Downtown Fayetteville showed 22% of this household type--a 15% decrease since 2010. A number of factors play into decreasing family households, such as aging population, younger families being priced out, better schools being located in Peachtree City, etc. but a more plausible explanation is that as the children leave the household and go to college, the parents then become empty nesters. As you will see later in the analysis, the population aged 18-34 is increasing as well as the over 55 population which confirms the exodus of 18 year olds from Fayette County to college. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 13 Change in the Older Adult Population

Age: 55 + 2010 Census

Age: 55 +

2019 5-Year ACS

The maps above show the concentration of the population, per census tract, aged 55+. Downtown Fayetteville's surrounding community has seen an increase in population of people over 55 years of age. Since 2010, the tracts containing Downtown Fayetteville have seen the 55+ population grow more than 10% - consistent with the steady growth seen in neighboring areas. Peachtree City has seen a significant concentration and growth of residents aged 55 and over. This bodes well for Downtown Fayetteville as these persons are strong candidates for a downsize value play. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 14 Change in the Younger Population

Age: 18-34 2010 Census

Age: 18-34

2019 5-Year ACS

This exhibit examines age of residents as of 2019 to examine the growing number of 18-34 aged cohorts in a given area. Downtown Fayetteville has seen an increase of younger demographics in the southern area of the City and a decline in younger populations in the northern area of the City. The shift in age is predominantly due to great schools being located to the west by Peachtree City and South of the City, as well as job cores for younger demographics located to the west, Trilith Studios and Piedmont Hospital, and manufacturing jobs to the east/north of the City. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Social Explorer

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 15 Proximity and Connection of Fayetteville to Jobs Proximity to work is a key factor for residents choosing where to live. There are over 33,000 jobs paying at least $40,000 per year within 10 miles of the study area. The most popular sector within this area is educational services (15% of jobs) followed by Health Care and Social Assistance (12%) and Manufacturing (11%.) You can see the majority of jobs are concentrated along Highway 74 through Tyrone and Peachtree City, as well as Highway 85 through Kenwood and Downtown Fayetteville. The Downtown b eing farther away from the I-85 corridor that houses major job centers, such as the Airport, is a hindrance to the City and has lead to the exponential growth of Tyrone and Peachtree City. However, with new commercial development, Downtown Fayetteville will be able to provide more local employment options. Density of Jobs over $40k/year within 10 miles of Downtown Fayetteville (2019)

Employment w/in 10 Miles - Top 10 Industry Sectors Educational Services

15%

Health Care and Social Assistance

12%

#N/A

Construction

10%

Public Administration

Wholesale Trade

Retail Trade

Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services

10 Miles Jonesboro 5 Miles

Transportation and Warehousing

3Miles Tyrone

Administration & Support, Waste Management and Remediation

4% 0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

Total Employment by Distance from Downtown Fayetteville Peachtree City 10 Miles

33,522

5 Miles

8,180

3 Miles

5,260

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Maps, OntheMap, Gwinnett County

3/18/2022

Fayetteville Pavilion

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 16 Fayetteville Jobs Fayetteville employs 14,310 people in the city limits. The largest employment sectors within the city are Healthcare and Social Assistance, followed by Construction and Public Administration. The City is broken down into Construction/manufacturing/warehouse jobs concentrated to the east and north, medical and techni cal jobs to the west, and public administration jobs concentrated in Downtown. Roughly 41% of City employees earn more than $3,333 per month or $40,000 annually, 31% earn between $1,250 -$3,3333 a month ($15,000 - $40,000 annually), and 28% earn less than $1,250 per month ($15,000 annually). Of the 14,310 employees, 13,609 live outside of Fayetteville's limits and commute in, po inting to what could be a lack of housing options for employees nearby. 701 Fayetteville residents live and work within the City, and 6,759 of residents commute out of the City for work.

Jobs by Earnings

More than $3,333 per month, 41%

Total Jobs in Fayetteville (2019)

$1,250 per month or less, 28%

Fayetteville Pavilion $1,251 to $3,333 per month, 31%

Inflow/Outflow of Workers

4.9% of total employees live and work in Fayetteville compared SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Maps, OntheMap, Gwinnett County 3/18/2022

Downtown Fayetteville

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 17 Study Area Resident Work Outflow, Residents Earning Over $40,000/Year

Commuting patterns of residents can help identify target audiences for residential development. While residents making over $40k/year within a 4-mile radius work all over the metro Atlanta area, the highest concentration (12%) work at the Airport. A substantial amount work in nearby cities Fayetteville (8%) and Atlanta (5%).

ALPHARETTA KENNESAW DULUTH MARIETTA

LAWRENCEVILLE NORCROSS

Top 10 Workplace Locations (By Zip Code) 14% ATLANTA

12% 12%

10%

STOCKBRIDGE

6% 5%

FAYETTEVILLE 3%

COVINGTON

COLLEGE PARK

MCDONOUGH

PEACHTREE CITY 2%

NEWNAN

#N/A

3-Mile radius from DT Lawrenceville

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Maps, OnTheMap

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 18 Downtown Fayetteville Work Inflow, Residents Earning Over $40,000/Year

In the previous exhibit we looked at where residents of Fayetteville work. This exhibit shows where people who work inside the Fayetteville limits are commuting in from. The majority of jobs paying more than $40k/year in Fayetteville are in the healthcare or public administration fields. Roughly 17% of people who work within 4-miles of Fayetteville are already living close by and within the city. Another 12% of workers live nearby in Tyrone, Peachtree City, and Jonesboro.

DOWNTOWN ATLANTA

As the chart points out, Fayetteville is a central location where the majority of workers in a 4 mile radius South of I-20 prefer to live.

HARTSFIELD JACKSON AIRPORT

Top 10 Resident Locations (By Zip Code) 12%

STOCKBRIDGE JONESBORO

11%

10%

FAYETTEVILLE

MCDONOUGH

TYRONE

PEACHTREE CITY NEWNAN 5%

SENOIA

#N/A

3-Mile radius from DT Lawrenceville

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Maps, OnTheMap

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 19 Crime Near the Subject Site

Douglasville

Atlanta

Stockbridge Fayetteville

McDonough

Newnan

The heat map within this exhibit shows area crime in relation to the City (provided by Crimegrade.com). The majority of crime in the City of Fayetteville occurs in the east side of the city and east neighborhoods. However, this pales in comparison to the amount of crime occurring in more established areas of Georgia, such as Atlanta, as well as some areas of Georgia similar to the Fayetteville area, Marietta and Douglasville, and those cities south of I-20 such as Stockbridge, McDonough, and Newnan. A low crime rate is excellent for future families moving to the area who want a safe place to raise a family. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Crimegrade.com 3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 20 Commuting from the City

Hartsfield-Jackson Airport 25-30 minutes

The map in this exhibit is a heat map showing commute times via automobile in the Charleston, SC metro area per data from the website Trulia.com. Stockbridge 35-40 minutes The subject site's proximity and future

direct connectivity to I-26, and from there I526, offers excellent access to the major job centers in the Charleston metro area.

Tyrone 15-20 minutes

Peachtree City 15-20 minutes Newnan 40-45 minutes

The site's location provides excellent access to Downtown Charleston's jobs and entertainment, while also providing convenience to other job markets through McDonough out the metro area. This central location 35-40over minutes provides a strong advantage competing properties in Mt. Pleasant, West Ashley, and Daniel Island as these areas offer limited proximity to job cores and entertainment options. This central location will be very attractive to split commuting couples / roommates, in which one roommate might work Downtown and the other at Boeing.

The map in this exhibit is a traffic map showing commute times via automobile in and around the Fayette County area per data from Google Maps. The City of Fayetteville's proximity to I-85 and I-75 hinders the location slightly, hence why other cities such as Newnan and Peachtree City have grown considerably given their g ood interstate access. However, Fayetteville is still within adequate driving distance to major employment cores such as Hartsfield-Jackson Airport, South Atlanta, and along I-85 and I-75 which are only 7- 13 miles (15-20 mins) away. Further, as seen previously in the work inflows map we see that the majority of workers live in the cities highlighted above as well a s work locally within the city or commute to the cores listed above. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Trulia.com 3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 21 Access to Bars & Restaurants Living close to restaurants and bar options is a key factor for many households when choosing where to locate, as well as for businesses when choosing office space. The heat map within this exhibit shows restaurant and bar options near the City that have been reviewed by users of Yelp.

TRILITH

PEACHTREE CITY

DOWNTOWN FAYETTEVILLE

There are more than two dozen dining options and bars in Downtown Fayetteville. Although the majority of dining options in Downtown are chain restaurants, there are some more boutique options such as Line Creek Brewery and City Cafe and Bakery. Farther west there are more options. geared towards a fancier dining experience at Trilith Studios. Farther west is Peachtree City which has a plethora of dining options from Breweries like Line Creek to Ted's Montana Grill. In terms of walkability, there are some restaurants within walking distance to Downtown, however most are accessible with a short drive. Although Downtown is well served, it will be important for the city to allow more unique infrastructure, like breweries or a dog park with beer and food. To the extent this can be maximized, the stronger the appeal of Downtown Fayetteville being seen as a lifestyle amenity that many residents coming from the north seek.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Yelp, Bing Maps

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 22 Access to Retail

FAYETTEVILLE

As with restaurants and bars, living close to retail and grocers is an important factor to residential households when choosing where to live and to an extent, office decision makers when choosing where to locate their business. By pulling Yelp data from the area we are able to visualize where key retail and shopping nodes are in relation to the City.

FAYETTEVILLE THE AVENUE

PEACHTREE CITY

PEACHTREE

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Yelp, Bing Maps

3/18/2022

The largest retail corridors in Fayette County are located in Downtown Fayetteville and Peachtree City. Downtown Fayette offers a lot of shopping/retail options from large chain stores like Dick's or JCPenney as well as many grocery options such as Kroger and Publix. Peachtree City has many of the same offerings as well as some more boutique shopping/grocery options, such as Sprouts. All in all, the level of retail/shopping is more than suitable for the area. Future development ideas would be to add higher level shopping and retail to the area such as a Sprouts as the median income increases.

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 23 Walkability Fayetteville Overall

Walkable environments are key to economic competitiveness and creating healthy communities. Increasingly, Millennials and sen iors are looking for walkable environments, with studies showing 80% of 18 to 34-year olds want to live in walkable neighborhoods and per AARP surveys roughly 60% of those over 50 want to live within one mile of daily goods and services. Christopher Leinberger of George Washington University completed a study of WalkUPs (Walkable Urban Places) throughout the na tion, including Atlanta, and discovered that office, retail, and rental housing achieved 30%, 144%, and 12% premiums respectively over their drivable, suburban counterparts. Furthermore, a s tudy completed by the Wall Street Journal indicated a 1.69% premium in home prices for a one-point increase in Walk Score. The City of Fayetteville is "Somewhat Walkable" according to Walk Score with much of the area still being dependent on vehicles to access grocery/retail/entertainment. However, foot traffic is still active in the area as shown by the white line s on The Strava map, Top Right map, Peachtree City's walkscore is very similar to the City of Fayetteville yet they have an infrastructure that allows golf carts to take presence over foot travel. To increase the Walkability of the City of Fayetteville, the city could invest in more sidewalks as well as nature trails to increase foot traffic to the area which will be a major draw for empty nesters as well as younger audiences. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, WalkScore, Strava

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 24 City School Districts

North Fayetteville Assigned Schools

South Fayetteville Assigned Schools

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Great Schools

3/18/2022

This exhibit presents context with regard to the local school offerings in the City of Fayetteville, the north city limits and south city limits are separated out. Downtown Fayetteville's assigned elementary, middle, and high schools rank above average in quality. After market interviews, the highly rated schools are a major draw to younger families coming to the area and buying in the Downtown area, though this face should not turn off prospective family buyers with older aged children or emptynester/downsizer audiences not affected by the assigned schools.

BRANCH PROPERTIES, LLC LAUREL ISLAND MARKET ANALYSIS

Demographic Analysis

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 25 City Demographic Profile 2022 Fayetteville captures roughly 17% of Fayette County's population, with a 2022 census estimate of 18,853 persons and 7,194 households living in the city. Fayetteville has a smaller population in comparison to similar Atlanta suburbs including Newnan, Peachtree City, and McDonough. Fayetteville's population is fairly diverse across age, race, and income cohorts. While being historically more rural than suburban analogs, recent development activity and housing market trends have fueled growth in Fayetteville.

City of Fayetteville Population 2022 Census Estimate 18,853 Households 7,194 Fayetteville Capture of County 2022 Census Estimate Households

17% 17%

Fayetteville Population by Age

65+ 18%

45-64 28%

Under 14 17%

Population

25-44 22%

Households

46,840

50,000 45,000 40,000 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 -

37,801 29,829 18,853

16,189

Newnan

13,938

Peachtree City

Fayetteville Population by Race Other 2% Two+ Asian Races 7% 4%

10,869

7,194

McDonough

Fayetteville

Fayetteville Household Income $150k+, 22%

Black 41%

Under $35k, 16% $35k- $50k, 10%

White 46%

15-24 15%

Source: NCG, US Census Bureau, Spotlight by Environics Analytics

3/18/2022

City Comparisons

112,303 42,919 2022 Census Estimates

Fayette County Population 2022 Census Estimate Households

$75k $150k, 35%

$50k $75k, 17%

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 26 City Demographic Profile and Change 2010, 2022, and 2027 City of Fayetteville Population Census Count 2010 Census 15,945 2022 Census Estimate 18,853 2027 Census Estimate 19,918

Increase % Ann. Growth 2,908 1.52% 1,065 1.13%

Population by Age

2010

2022

Age 0 - 4 Age 5 - 9 Age 10 - 14 Age 15 - 17 Age 18 - 20 Age 21 - 24 Age 25 - 34 Age 35 - 44 Age 45 - 54 Age 55 - 64 Age 65 - 74 Age 75 - 84 Age 85+

778 1,097 1,326 875 573 579 1,367 2,259 2,636 2,051 1,252 773 379

866 1,020 1,271 866 772 1,012 1,829 2,258 2,492 2,624 2,170 1,170 503

Population by Race

2010

2022

White Alone 9,571 Black/African American 4,796 American Indian/Alaskan Native 54 Asian Alone 856 Native Hawaiian/Pacific 17 Some Other Race Alone 236 Two or More Races 415

8,649 7,700 73 1,368 32 334 697

Change 20102022 88 (77) (55) (9) 199 433 462 (1) (144) 573 918 397 124 Change 20102022 (922) 2,904 19 512 15 98 282

Source: NCG, US Census Bureau, Spotlight by Environics Analytics

3/18/2022

Households Owner Renter Total 2027 Est. 925 926 1,088 840 806 1,205 2,336 2,016 2,484 2,847 2,618 1,279 548 2027 Est. 7,965 9,020 81 1,604 38 382 828

Change 2022-2027 59 (94) (183) (26) 34 193 507 (242) (8) 223 448 109 45 Change 2022-2027 (684) 1,320 8 236 6 48 131

2010 4,561 1,433 5,994

MILLENNIALS

2022 5,117 2,077 7,194

Increase 556 644 1,200

% Ann. Growth 1.02% 3.75% 1.67%

EMPTY NESTERS

The City of Fayetteville has steadily grown since 2010. Based on 2027 census based estimates, the strongest growth will have occurred from 2010 - 2022 with an 18.2% population increase, or just over 1.5% per year. That growth primarily came from increases in the population aged 18 - 34 and 55 - 85+, and the Black/African American and Asian populations. This points to a growing number of young singles and professionals as well as empty nesters and retirees - many of whom will require greater variety in housing products. Decreases in the population age 5 - 17 and 35 - 54 indicate there are fewer families with young children in Fayetteville, again signaling a need for a variety of housing products

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 27 Age and Income Analysis of the City of Fayetteville and Comparison to Fayette County 2000 - 2022 (Estimates) PMA Total Household Growth 2000 - 2022

15 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65+

Total

$0 - $25,000

-26

-40

$25,000 - $35,000

-18

-65

178

157

$35,000 - $50,000

-17

-82

-89

-15

241

$50,000 - $75,000

116

-12

-97

138

215

$75,000 - $100,000

-50

153

248

442

$100,000 - $150,000

126

163

434

885

$150,000 - $200,000

149

174

139

541

$200,000 +

252

276

722

Total

180

401

848

1,500

3,080

City of Fayetteville Fayette County

The City of Fayetteville has seen very strong growth among all age and income cohorts, outpacing the rest of Fayette County in almost all categories. Fayetteville has grown by approximately 3,080 households from 2000-2022, and currently has 7,194 households in the city limits. The city's growth is primarily fueled by increases in households aged 15-24 and 55+ and households who earn more than $100,000 annually. This growth in affluence has contributed to growth in development of large single family homes, but growth in other household incomes and ages should also be supported by growth in diverse housing product and options.

Household Growth by Income

Household Growth By Age (HHs $50k+ Only) 7.6%

65+ 55 - 64

4.5%

45 - 54 35 - 44

0.3% -1.3%

5.6%

$150,000 - $200,000

2.1%

$100,000 - $150,000

1.3%

$75,000 - $100,000 2.8%

25 - 34

$50,000 - $75,000

2.3%

15 - 24 -3.0%

9.4%

-1.0%

1.0%

3.0%

5.0%

7.0%

City of Fayetteville

9.0%

14.5%

11.0% 13.0% 15.0% 17.0%

Fayette County

Source: NCG, US Census Bureau, Spotlight by Environics Analytics

3/18/2022

10.3% 9.5%

$200,000 +

8.5%

-0.1%

0.3% 1.0%

2.0% 2.5%

6.4%

0.5%

$35,000 - $50,000-1.2% -2.0%

4.7% 5.1%

0.0%

2.0%

City of Fayetteville

4.0%

6.0%

Fayette County

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 28 Summary of Renter Households in the City of Fayetteville, 2022 Income/Age Less than $15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 Income $150,000 + Total

15 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65 - 74

75 - 84

85+

Total

1 0 0 0 35 2 0 0 38

75 14 149 57 187 80 46 22 630

54 15 83 39 114 65 52 31 454

76 4 37 73 101 75 60 75 501

24 1 7 16 21 15 11 14 109

29 4 31 32 22 16 15 6 155

35 6 41 33 18 9 8 2 153

11 2 10 8 3 2 1 0 38

306 46 359 259 501 264 193 150 2,077

Of the 7,194 households in Fayetteville, roughly 29% or 2,077 are renter households. Of the renter households, 34% of them earn less than $35,000 a year, 24% earn between $50,000 $75,000, and 29% earn more than $75,000 annually. Households earning less than $35,000 annually are likely renting due to income restrictions and a lack of affordable housing options, but there is a strong share of renters who could afford to own but choose to rent. Renters are split fairly evenly amongst household type (singles, married couples, and other family), and age distribution (25-34, 35-44, and 45-54).

Target Market Income Distribution Income $150,000 + 7%

Target Market Age Distribution

$15,000 $24,999 2%

$100,000 $149,999 9% $75,000 $99,999 13% $50,000 $74,999 24%

$25,000 $34,999 17%

$35,000 $49,999 12%

75 - 84, 7.5% 65 - 74, 7.6%

15 - 24, 1.8%

Roommates 0.1%

25 - 34, 30.9%

55 - 64, 5.4%

Singles 30.9%

Married Couples 29.0%

45 - 54, 24.6%

SOURCE: Noell Consulting projections based on data obtained from the US Census and Claritas, Inc.

3/18/2022

Target Market HH Type Distribution

35 - 44, 22.3%

Other Family…

Unmarried Couples, 5.9%

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 29 Typical Class A Renter Audiences and Opportunity Level and Product Type for City of Fayetteville Young Professionals

Empty Nesters

Singles over 35 seek Couples mostly in their 30s, Professionals working in the Mature couples and empty convenience in quieter with some late 20s and area seeking a lifestyle and nesters. Established and setting. Many have relocated early 40s. A mix of recently easy access to employment seeking home close to work to the area for work and may married and dating. May be and entertainment. and in the suburbs. choose to rent before buying. recent relocatees.

Families

Students/ Roommates

New parents and those with young and early school-aged children. Some single parents working in the area.

Students, recent graduates, and working roommates who moved our of their parents homes or are new to the area for jobs and school.

Use unit as crash pad and Tend to stay in more than A true home. Eat-in most Eat-in more often, but still Seeking space and place to unwind. Often more younger counterparts. More nights and host friends on a Most space for the money enjoy going out. Tend to functionality. Values finish active/out and about. Trade likely to cook and host. Value regular basis. seek spacious and keeping absolute rents stay local. Value amenities, levels and amenities but space for less rent. space, quality, but not kitchen and living areas. lower. Larger floorplans and have friends over on a will make trade-offs for Appreciate well-executed excessive finishes, and Often down-sizing and need with a minimum of 2BRs. frequently. price. building amenities. functional unit layouts. extra storage.

Income

$35,000-$75,000

$75,000-$150,000

$75,000-$200,000

$100,000-$200,000+

$75,000-$150,000

$50,000-$75,000

Typical Rent

$1,000 - $2,000

$1,500 - $3,000

$1,500 - $3,750

$2,500+

<$2,000

$1,500 - $2,000

Age Range

22 - 35

35 - 55

25-44

45-64

+35

18-24

Market Mix

25%

15%

30%

15%

10%

STRONG

MODERATE

STRONG

MOD. BUT GROWING

MODERATE

LIMITED

Seek areas with a trendy local perception and proximity to entertainment, employment and retail. Downtown core and Trilith only areas in the County that feature this.

Value proximity to employment and retail, but will generally prefer quieter neighborhood areas.

Level of Opportunity for New Growth in City

Can afford higher end Typically either temporary product with dual incomes, Many will rent units while renters who want space will likely be saving to buy a waiting for homes to be built, for a growing family while home in the future. Often but a growing segment is waiting to build/buy, or look for more spacious choosing a rental lifestyle. lack financial means to product types. purchase.

Limited by higher rents in newer Class A, but still a small audience.

Distribution by Product Type TH/Villa Conventional Flats 55+ AgeTarg./Rest. SFD Summary:

20%

25%

50%

40%

25% 1%

80%

70%

15%

10%

60%

58% 89%

10%

20%

10%

40%

13% 10%

The City of Fayetteville's diverse renter audiences lead to the potential support for a variety of rental product types, beyond the predominately conventional rental flat communities already in-place or in the coming pipeline. Consideration should be given to rental TH/villa, and/or 55+ rental communities.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

Est. Existing Mix

How They Use Their Units

Professional Couples

Market Indicated Mix

Description

Mature Singles

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 30 Summary of Owner Households in the City of Fayetteville PMA, 2022 Income/Age Less than $15,000 $15,000 - $24,999 $25,000 - $34,999 $35,000 - $49,999 $50,000 - $74,999 $75,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $149,999 Income $150,000 + Total

15 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65 - 74

75 - 84

85+

Total

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

13 18 34 22 111 82 76 40 395

22 44 45 36 163 160 205 135 811

30 12 19 63 136 172 220 312 965

55 24 23 83 165 208 238 346 1,142

49 49 68 119 126 156 235 106 909

52 61 82 110 94 78 116 39 632

32 38 39 50 31 30 31 12 262

252 247 310 484 827 886 1,121 991 5,117

There are approximately 5,117 households, 71% of the total households, who own their housing units in Fayetteville. Of the owner households, 25% earn less than $50,000 a year, 33% earn between $50,000 - $100,000, and a solid 41% earn more than $100,000 annually. Most home owners are married couples, between the ages of 45-64, and earn over $100,000. There is a strong share of singles and households aged 25-34 who also own homes in Fayetteville.

Target Market Income Distribution

Income $150,000 + 20%

$100,000 $149,999 22%

$15,000 $25,000 $24,999 $34,999 4% 6%

25 - 34 75 - 84 8.1% 13.0%

$35,000 $49,999 9%

$50,000 $74,999 16% $75,000 $99,999 18%

Source: NCG, Nielsen, US Census Data

3/18/2022

Target Market Age Distribution

65 - 74 18.7%

55 - 64 23.5%

Target Market HH Type Distribution Non-Related Roommates, 1.5%

35 - 44 16.7%

45 - 54 19.9%

Singles, 24.4%

Other Family, 12.8%

Married Couples, 61.4%

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 31 Typical Market Rate Buyer Audiences and Opportunity Level and Product Type for City of Fayetteville Market Audience

Single Prof.

Prof. Couples

Young Families

Established Families

Seniors / Widows

Est. Existing Mix

Mature couples who are Retired senior couples and either looking to simplify some widows who are lifestyle with smaller looking for a maintenance homes, or upgrade to free lifestyle but don't want accommodate to leave the area. Will grandchildren and family appreciate quality and may visitors. Most likely to have money from prior purchase homes in pre- home sale to spend, but sale phases or build will be modest in spending custom dream homes to retirement incomes and retire in. likely to downsize.

Market Indicated Mix

Young and mature Typically fairly affluent Mix of first-time and moveprofessionals seeking dual working couples, up buyers from existing Established families with access to employment and primarily 35-45, value product in the market, or older children and entertainment. Often more both work access and relocates from out of teenagers. May include active/out and about. More neighborhood quality. market. Looking for a some executive willing to trade space for Most likely first time home that offers room to households and price. Often between the home buyers ready to grow as the family corporate employees, or Description ages of 20-35, and many settle in the suburbs, or expands. Will be divorced households and coming out of apartments looking for the best value concerned with school single parents. Likely nearby, or graduating and home for a decent price. districts, neighborhood upgrading into larger coming back to where they Often coming from rental safety, and where other homes or moving in from grew up and looking to communities in the City, young families are out of market. purchase their first home at as well as out-of-market located. an affordable price. move-ins.

Empty Nesters

Small Lot SFD

40%

30%

10%

60%

70%

36%

Conventional SFD

10%

30%

50%

60%

20%

10%

38% 16%

Estate Lot SFD

10%

30%

13% 74%

Townhome/ Duplex/Condo

50%

25%

10%

15%

20%

13%

Income Range

$50,000 - $150,000

$100,000 - 200,000

$75,000 - 200,000

$150,000 - 500,000

$150,000+

$75,000+

Sale Price

Mostly under $400k

$400,000 - $600,000

$300,000 - $600,000

$450,000 - $1M+

$450,000+

$300,000 -$450,000

15%

20%

30%

20%

10%

Estimated Mix in the Market

Typical Distribution by Product Type

Citywide we believe Fayetteville has a lack of product diversity, with an estimated 90% being conventional single-family homes and/or estate homes. This leaves very little opportunity for those looking for lower price points, maintenance-free products, and/or homes in a more walkable lifestyle option. An estimated 50% of the market audiences have the majority of their preferences being non-typical SFD products, leaving a significant market gap. Also worth noting is that many of the under represented housing products are more dense, helping to justify higher land prices and smaller parcel sizes which is a majority of the undeveloped land in the City, but also helping to keep absolute home affordability.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 32 Fayetteville Growth, Gentrification, and Implications to New Housing Product Needs Fayetteville Household Projected Growth Next 5 Years by Age and Income, 2022 - 2027 Income/Age

Min-Max Rent at 20Min-Max Sales 33% Income Price at 3x Income

15 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65 - 74

75 - 84

85+

Total

Less than $15,000

-1

-13

-12

-14

-3

-36

$15,000 - $24,999

-1

$25,000 - $34,999

-9

-31

-16

-12

-24

-31

-16

-138

$35,000 - $49,999

-9

-1

$583 - $1,389

$105,000 - $149,999

$50,000 - $74,999

-64

-44

-27

-4

-108

$833 - $2,083

$150,000 - $224,999

$75,000 - $99,999

-38

-27

-14

$1,250 - $2,778

$225,000 - $299,999

$100,000 - $149,999

-22

-3

177

$1,667 - $4,167

$300,000 - $449,999

Income $150,000 +

143

439

$2,500+

$450,000+

Total

147

-150

-9

107

246

431

Land/construction costs do not justify without substantial subsidy

Market Risk Level High - Decreasing opportunity for the private sector to hit these price points without subsidy Medium - Moderate ability for the private sector to deliver this product without subsidy Low - Strong ability for the private sector to deliver this product without subsidy Without the ability for new housing stock to hit the potential demand levels, particularly rental product below $800 and for-sale product below $200,000, demographic projections forecast a loss in households earning less than $75,000, and the majority of future growth is projected from those earning greater than $100,000 through 2027. While much of the new apartment development is obtainable for those earning above $75,000, land and constriction costs are making it harder for those earning under $75k, and especiall y under $50k to rent in the community, making renter households earning $25-35k the most at risk. Garden apartments represent the best market based opportunity to solve this, or relying on LIHTC subsidized deals. New single-family homes are generally obtainable for those earning above $150,000, but it is largely only townhome and/or condominiums that are affordable to those earning $75-150k. Increasing land and construction costs are making it considerably harder for those earning $75-100k (often young singles/couples and starter families) to purchase. This makes those in the estimated 113-150% AMI levels ($75-100k) the most at risk. Starter townhomes, including one bedrooms and those without garages to maximize affordability, represent the best opportunity to solve this.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group based on data obtained from US Census and Claritas.

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 33 Fayetteville Depth For Affordable Units Fayetteville Households by Age and Income, 2022 15 - 24

25 - 34

35 - 44

45 - 54

55 - 64

65 - 74

75 - 84

85+

Total

AMI Levels (Based on 2 Person HH)

Est. Annual ForSale Demand

Est. Annual Rental Demand

Less than $15,000

392

Under 23%

$15,000 - $24,999

169

24-37%

$25,000 - $34,999

131

130

558

38-54%

$35,000 - $49,999

118

190

145

714

55-76%

$50,000 - $74,999

123

166

237

187

205

176

108

1,238

77-112%

$75,000 - $99,999

113

216

220

241

203

1,120

113-150%

$100,000 - $149,999

105

277

281

276

304

124

1,400

151-227%

228%+

Income/Age

Income $150,000 +

237

519

523

180

1,603

Total

135

600

1,191

1,400

1,500

1,302

755

311

7,194

Based on existing households and current tenure and turnover patterns (Census), the demand for affordable, subsidized for-sale units from households earning $75-100k, or approximately 120-150% AMI based on 2-person households is 52 units per year. Typically affordability for these households is for homes in the $225,000 - $300,000 range. For affordable subsidized rental units, the demand potential for households earning $35-50k, or approximately 60-80% AMI, is nearly 80 units per year.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group based on data obtained from US Census and Claritas.

3/18/2022

BRANCH PROPERTIES, LLC LAUREL ISLAND MARKET ANALYSIS

For-Sale Product Analysis

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 34 Metro Atlanta Building Activity & Homeownership Trends Metro Atlanta Housing Unit Building Permits 1990-2020 2001-2007 2011-2020

80,000

Population Growth: Total Permits: Permits / Pop. Growth:

70,000

60,000 50,000 40,000

227,550 Permits Below Historic Average from 2008 to 2020

41,554 Average Annual Permits

30,000 20,000 10,000

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

Atlanta Metro Home Ownership Rate by Quarter 73.0% 71.0%

69.0% 67.0% 65.0%

63.0% 61.0% 59.0%

57.0% 55.0%

Source: NCG, US Census Bureau

3/18/2022

Atlanta Metro Home Ownership Rate 4Q Rolling Avg

834,577 462,986 0.55

723,353 279,113 0.39

Pot. Missing Housing Units 122,171

Since 1990 Metro Atlanta permitted roughly 41,554 units annually peaking right before the Great Recession in 2004. Since the Great Recession permitting activity has been slow to recover despite substantial job and population growth. From 2001 to 2007 there were 0.55 permits per job, from 2011 to 2020 0.39 permits per new job. While some of this has been oversupply of housing being absorbed into the market, historic lows in for-sale vacancies indicate a lack of supply emerging over the last few years, inflating prices and resulting in a serious lack of affordable product today. This housing crunch can be seen in home price appreciation in many Atlanta suburbs and particularly in the city of Atlanta where demographic preference trends saw households flocking into the city and muted new inventory. Based on historic levels since 1990 the metro has underdelivered roughly 230,000 homes since 2008. Even since the recovery years of 2011 to 2020 the metro has lagged behind historic building activity, with a potential 122,171 units missing when measuring historic population growth to total permit activity. All these metrics indicate a market that has been severely undersupplied, particularly in desirable suburban and intown Atlanta locations where entitlement challenges, local opposition, and costs of construction have often limited new product delivery. This has forced many households into less established areas. Additionally, since peaking prior to the recession, the homeownership rate in the Atlanta metro has declined with renters making up a larger share of households with this trend much more pronounced in the city of Atlanta. After bottoming out in 2015, homeownership trends at a metro level began to slowly reverse and have picked up steam with historically low mortgage rates in 2020. That said, a lack of inventory post COVID has resulted in the rates again declining.

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 35 Atlanta Metro Values & Housing Supply Limited new supply compared to historic averages has led to recent lows in active residential listings according to the Georgia Multiple Listing Service (GAMLS). The metro has seen negative growth in listings through out 2020 and 2021.

Active Residential Listings in Atlanta Metro 30%

30,000

20%

YoY Active Listings Growth

20,000

-10% -20%

15,000

-30% 10,000

-40%

Negative YoY Growth since January 2020. -35%

-50%

Active Listings (GAMLS)

25,000

10%

5,000

-60% -70%

25.0%

16.6% YoY Growth through out 2021.

20.0%

YoY Growth

15.0% 10.0%

5.0% 0.0% -5.0% -10.0%

Source: NCG, S&P / Case-Shiller Home Price Indices, Georgia MLS

3/18/2022

2021-10-01

2021-01-01

2020-04-01

2019-07-01

2018-10-01

2018-01-01

2017-04-01

2016-07-01

2015-10-01

2015-01-01

2014-04-01

2013-07-01

2012-10-01

2012-01-01

2011-04-01

2010-07-01

2009-10-01

2009-01-01

2008-04-01

2007-07-01

2006-10-01

2006-01-01

2005-04-01

2004-07-01

2003-10-01

2003-01-01

2002-04-01

2001-07-01

2000-10-01

2000-01-01

1999-04-01

1998-07-01

1997-10-01

1997-01-01

1996-04-01

1995-07-01

1994-10-01

1994-01-01

1993-04-01

1992-07-01

1991-10-01

-20.0%

1991-01-01

-15.0%

210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50

Atlanta Case-Shiller Home Price Index

Case-Shiller Home Price Index: Atlanta & YoY Growth

With limited supply coming to market and strong demand for housing, particularly in dynamic urban and suburban environments, home values have seen a sharp increase since bottoming out in 2012 and continue to reach all time highs. According to the Case-Shiller Home Price Index of Atlanta, which measures repeatsales, home values have increased 16.6% on average year over year in 2021 despite the ongoing pandemic.

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 36 Historical Home Price Trends - Case Shiller 150,000

25.0%

21.9%

15.0%

METRO JOB GROWTH

50,000

9.9%

9.9% 6.7% 7.3% 6.6% 3.7%

4.5%

8.9% 4.4%

3.5% 3.0%

4.4%

2.9%

5.1% 5.5%

6.1%

5.4% 5.9%

0.0%

-50,000

-3.3%

Avg. C-S Change 1996-2001 5.5%

2.6%

5.0%

-3.9%

-7.9% -150,000

3.5%

4.0%

0.0%

-100,000

Avg. C-S Change 20022003 3.2%

5.2%

10.0%

-12.8% -12.8% Avg. C-S Change 2007-2011 -8.1%

Avg. C-S Change 2012-2019 7.5%

-200,000

Projected Avg. Change 20202021 15.4%

Projected Avg. Change 20222025 5.3%

-5.0% -10.0%

Y-o-Y HOME VALUE CHANGE AS PERCENTAGE

20.0%

18.1%

100,000

-15.0% -20.0%

Metro Job Growth

Change in Case Shiller

This exhibit expresses the change in home values as a percentage increase/decrease from the previous year based on the Case Shiller Index. It then uses a historic correlation model based on annual job growth versus the home price index change (historically an approximate 70% correlation from 1996-2019) to forecast what will happen with home prices going forward as a result of the COVID recession and forecasted recovery. Based on the current recession due to COVID-19, one would have expected the Case-Shiller index to drop, but it in fact surged as those of means continued to buy despite the pandemic, and limited supply continued to push pricing to record levels. Going forward we forecast the market will come back to a more normalized state of supply/demand balance, however strong forecasted job gains, and potentially still supply constraints with the cost of lumber, is likely to result in strong continued growth of the index and thus home prices through 2025.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, US Census Building Permits Survey, Moody's/Economy.com, Zillow

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 37 Historical and Projected Job Growth to New Home Sales Relationship in the Atlanta Metro ATLANTA METRO JOB GROWTH

(20,092)

2005

2006

2007

2009

2010

2011 - 2021: 45,341 Jobs/year

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

Historical Job Growth

2017

2018

2019

2020

24,071

23,808

35,055

57,059

118,510

74,854

64,575

57,575

83,692

78,333

88,483

60,067

42,283

62,808

(150,033)

(136,950)

2008

2005 - 2007: 50,257 Sales/year

-150,000 -200,000

(26,542)

-50,000 -100,000

2008 - 2010: -61,194 Jobs/year

48,292

66,150

50,000

69,833

Metro Job Growth

100,000

36,117

150,000

2022 - 2026: 51,700 Jobs/year

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Projected Job Growth

The metro Atlanta for-sale market has experienced a strong recovery since the great recession, but has struggled with supply shortages since early 2013. Below we show new home closings as they relate to job growth, and over the 2011-2021 timeframe 36.2 new homes were sold for every 100 jobs that were added at the metro level. That said, the COVID-19 pandemic has created a recession resulting in job loss of over 150,000 jobs in 2020, but with a strong rebound occurring/forecasted to continue in 2021-2022. That said, 2020 did not act like any previous recession, with home sales still hitting highs not seen since before the last recession as those with means still purchased. That said, increasing construction costs and market concerns for how long the pandemic would continue (along with concerns for potential repeats) resulted in some cooling of sales in 2021 (a 7% drop in volume). Strong job gains in 2022 should result in a strong year, but then we expect decreasing job gains will start to cause the market to cool off through 2026.

ATLANTA METRO NEW HOME SALES

40,000 30,000

2005 - 2007: 50,257 Sales/year

2011 - 2021: 36.2 Sales/ 100 Jobs

2022 - 2026: 32.3 Sales/ 100 Jobs

2011 - 2021: 16,425 Sales/year

100

2022 - 2026: 16,715 Sales/year

2008 - 2010: 13,096 Sales/year

20 0 -20

20,000

38,638

20,315

11,381

7,592

6,352

7,660

11,135

12,606

15,579

18,234

19,689

21,714

21,430

23,985

22,293

24,887

20,541

16,125

11,428

10,591

55,334

10,000

-40

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Historical New Home Sales SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, MetroStudy and Economy.com | Moody's Analytics

3/18/2022

Projected New Home Sales

Sales/100 New Jobs

-60 -80 -100

New Home Sales/100 New Jobs

50,000 2005 - 2007: 81.8 Sales/ 100 Jobs

120

2008 - 2010: -21.4 Sales/ 100 Jobs

56,798

Metro New Home Sales

60,000

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 38 Atlanta Metro New Home Sales and Attached Share

Metro New Home Sales

60,000

2005 - 2007: 50,257 Avg. New Sales 16.5% Attached

2011 - 2021: 16,425 Avg. New Sales 18.6% Attached

2008 - 2010: 13,096 Avg. New Sales 18.3% Attached

2022 - 2026: 16,715 Avg. New Sales 22.7% Attached

50,000 40,000

30,000 20,000

20.3%

22.4%

22.7%

20.3%

16.0%

17.1%

16.5%

15.6%

16.5%

2005

2006

2007

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Single Family New Home Sales

2013

2014 2015 2016 2017 Attached New Home Sales

14.1%

14.7%

15.8%

19.1%

24.0%

25.0%

26.0%

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Attached Share of New Home Sales

2025

2026

20.8%

23.4%

20.4%

20.0%

22.0%

10,000 0

2018

50.0% 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0%

Share of Attached

ATLANTA METRO NEW HOME SALES & ATTACHED CAPTURE

Prior to the great recession, attached product accounted for 16%-17% of all new home sales, however, during the recession and the following recovery period attached product sales rose into the 20%-23% range as new unattached product sales plummeted and large condo buildings, delivering during the recession, had product scooped up by investors / speculators and/or sold in distressed situations. Attached sales have slowly increased as a percentage of new sales since bottoming out in 2015, largely driven by townhome development, as people seek relative affordability in quality locations. As the Atlanta metro and its suburbs mature, we project this number to increase, averaging 22.6% of new sales over the next 5 years.

ATLANTA METRO NEW ATTACHED HOME SALES 10,000 8,000 7,000

2022 - 2026: 3,795 Attached Sales / Year

2011 - 2021: 3,062 Attached Sales / Year

2008 - 2010: 2,392 Attached Sales / Year

2005 - 2007: 8,308 Attached Sales / Year

6,000 5,000 4,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

2,857

2,754

2013

3,870

2012

4,519

1,835

2011

4,977

1,558

2010

4,537

1,442

2009

5,622

1,701

2008

4,465

2,312

2007

4,149

3,162

2006

2014 2015 2016 2017 Attached New Home Sales

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2,677

6,379

2005

2,202

9,447

9,098

1,000

3,114

3,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group (based on surveys of properties) 2,000

2,083

New Attached Sales

9,000

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 39 OTP Share of Atlanta Metro New Attached Sales 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0

2005 - 2007: 58.8% Capture 59.4%

58.7%

58.2%

2008 - 2010: 53.2% Capture

68.6%

73.7%

60.7% 50.4% 43.0%

46.9% 46.7%

70.9%

72.7%

73.8%

67.3%

75.3%

74.0%

76.0%

78.0%

79.0%

80.0%

90.0% 80.0% 70.0%

2022 - 2026: 77.7% Capture

2011 - 2021: 69.0% Capture

52.9%

77.0%

60.0% 50.0% 40.0%

2005 - 2021: 63.4% Capture

30.0% 20.0% 10.0%

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Historical New Attached Sales

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Projected New Attached Sales

2020

2021 2022 Capture

2023

2024

2025

2026

0.0%

OTP New Attached Capture Rate

Metro New Attached Sales

ATLANTA METRO NEW ATTACHED SALES W/ OTP SHARE

The Outside the Perimeter (OTP) submarket including popular core areas such as Smyrna, Roswell, Alpharetta, Forsyth among others has consistently captured 68-75% of the Metros new attached sales since 2014. As low inventory levels and increasing prices continue to put affordability pressure on the market, and demographic surges of first-time buyers and Empty Nester/Retirees increasing look for more maintenance-free product, we forecast this capture to maintain around 76-80% over the next five year period. This will result in sales volumes surpassing what has been demonstrated in the most recent 2011-2021 cycle, but continuing the more recent averages witnessed in 2017-2021.

OTP NEW ATTACHED SALES 2005 - 2007: 4,889 Avg. New Attached Sales

5,000

2008 - 2010: 1,272 Avg. New Attached Sales

2011 - 2021: 2,112 Avg. New Attached Sales

2022 - 2026: 2,948 Avg. New Attached Sales

2017 - 2021: 3,182 Avg. New Attached Sales

4,000

3,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

3,783

3,480

3,019

2,257

2,203

4,162

3,005

3,064

2,263

3,416

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 OTP - Historical New Attached Sales

1,899

1,622

2009

1,429

2008

970

2007

728

2006

676

1,165

2005

731

1,920

3,714

1,000

5,549

2,000 5,404

OTP New Attached Sales

6,000

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 OTP - Projected New Attached Sales

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 40 Fayette County (PMA - Primary Market Area) Capture of OTP New Attached Sales 2005 - 2007: 0.0% Capture

5,000 4,000

0.0%

2011 - 2021: 0.1% Capture

2008 - 2010: 0.0% Capture 0.0%

0.0%

0.1%

0.4%

0.5%

0.2%

2022 - 2026: 1.3% Capture 2.0% 1.5% 1.0%

2.3%

0.0% -2.0% -4.0%

2,000 3,019

2,257

2,203

2021

3,480

3,416

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 OTP - Projected New Attached Sales

2022 2023 Capture

2024

2025

2026

3,783

4,162

3,005

3,064

2,263

1,899

1,622

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 OTP - Historical New Attached Sales

1,429

2008

970

2007

728

1,165

2006

676

1,920

2005

731

3,714

-6.0% 5,549

1,000

4.0% 2.0%

3,000

5,404

OTP New Attached Sales

6,000

-8.0% -10.0%

PMA New Attached Capture Rate

OTP NEW ATTACHED SALES & FAYETTE COUNTY CAPTURE

Historically Fayette County has had a significant lack of new attached homes offered, and this has only recently shifted with the addition of townhomes in Trilith (located within the City limits). To understand the potential captures the County (and it is assumed 100% of this would be within the City limits) could achieve, we examined demonstrated captures at analogous Cities such as Newnan and McDonough on the next exhibit. Based on these we are making a conservative estimate that the City could witness captures ramp up to average 1.3% through 2026, which would result in demand potential of nearly 40 attached homes per year.

FAYETTE COUNTY NEW ATTACHED SALES 50 40 30 20

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 PMA Projected New Attached Sales

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 PMA Historical New Attached Sales

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

2022 - 2026: 39 Avg. New Attached Sales

2011 - 2021: 02 Avg. New Attached Sales

2008 - 2010: 00 Avg. New Attached Sales

2005 - 2007: 00 Avg. New Attached Sales

PMA New Attached Sales

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 41 Fayette County Analog City Attached Sales Comparison City Capture of OTP New Attached Sales 2015 - 2021

New Attached Capture Rate

CITY CAPTURES OF OTP NEW ATTACHED SALES

Fayetteville average: 0.1% capture McDonough average: 0.6% capture Newnan average: 0.5% capture Alpharetta average: 5.2% capture

1.8% 1.3% 0.8% 0.4%

0.3%

0.2%

0.1%

-0.2%

0.0%

2015

2016

0.0%

2017 Fayetteville Capture

2018 McDonough Capture

2019 Newnan Capture

2020

2021

Although Fayetteville has had a historically low capture of the total new attached sales OTP, the projected capture rate is not unreasonable when compared to the new attached sales and capture of analog cities. Newnan's capture is increasing at about 6% per year and McDonough's capture is increasing at about 65% per year, so if Fayetteville delivers new attached product it can achieve a capture rate between 1-2% from 2022-2026. Not show on the charts is the Alpharetta average capture of 5.2% and total new attached sales of 921 homes. Fayetteville can model their attached product after the high quality well executed Alpharetta stock and maintain the value of attached product.

NEW ATTACHED SALES Total New Sales 2015 - 2021

New Attached Sales

Fayetteville Historical New Attached Sales

Fayetteville: 25 sales McDonough: 148 sales Newnan: 109 sales Alpharetta: 921 sales

Newnan Historical New Attached Sales

McDonough Historical New Attached Sales

60 50 40 30

2015

2016

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

20 2017

3 2018

13 2019

57 2020

20 4 2021

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 42 Sale History of Attached Product in Fayetteville New Attached Product Sales in PMA 2005-2021

2007 2008 2009

2010

6 6

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

2017

2018 2019 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

< $300,000 16

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

$300,000 - $400,000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

$400,000 - $500,000

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

$500,000 - $750,000

$750,000 +

2020 2021

Historically, Fayetteville delivered no attached housing product until the delivery of Trilith in 2019. The Trilith attached product price point is much higher than that of entry townhomes, duplexes, and other attached product, pointing to a lack of diverse and affordable attached product that the City could benefit from providing. An increase in density and attached product can help offset increasing prices of land and construction costs, but product can be well designed to maintain high home values throughout Fayetteville. Attached product can also be located in concentrations, like in Trilith, near downtown in walkable areas where density is appropriate.

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

< $300,000

Source: NCG, MetroStudy

3/18/2022

2010

2011

$300,000 - $400,000

2012

2013

$400,000 - $500,000

2014

2015

2016

$500,000 - $750,000

2017

$750,000 +

2018

2019

2020

2021

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 43 Fayette County New Attached Sales & Distribution and City of Fayetteville's Capture 2022 118,510 21.0 24,887 20.0% 4,977 76.0% 3,783 0.5% 19

2023 57,059 36.0 20,541 22.0% 4,519 77.0% 3,480 1.0% 35

2024 35,055 46.0 16,125 24.0% 3,870 78.0% 3,019 1.5% 45

2025 23,808 48.0 11,428 25.0% 2,857 79.0% 2,257 2.0% 45

2026 24,071 44.0 10,591 26.0% 2,754 80.0% 2,203 2.3% 50

Projected Price Distribution < $300,000 $300,000 - $400,000 $400,000 - $500,000 $500,000 - $750,000 $750,000 +

2022 2 11 4 2 0

2023 3 21 7 3 0

2024 5 27 9 5 0

2025 5 27 9 5 0

2026 5 30 10 5 0

Potential Fair Share Capture3 < $300,000 $300,000 - $400,000 $400,000 - $500,000 $500,000 - $750,000 $750,000 +

2022 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2023 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2024 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2025 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

2026 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Potential Annual Capture: < $300,000 $300,000 - $400,000 $400,000 - $500,000

2022 2 11 4

2023 3 21 7

2024 5 27 9

2025 5 27 9

2026 5 30 10

$500,000 - $750,000

$750,000 +

Potential Annual Capture:

Historic & Projected New Attached Sales in PMA2 NOTES: 1. Employment growth from Economy.com. 2. For the purpose of NCG's supply and demand analysis the Primary Market Area (PMA) Is defined as Fayette County. 3. Potential Fair Share capture is based on historic captures the City has achieved within the county. NCG predicts that any new attached product will locate directly within the city limits of Fayetteville, giving the city a 100% capture rate of product, as has been demonstrated thus far. 4. The results of our demand analysis indicate the City can support an annual average of approximately 40 new attached sales per year, or a total of 194 through 2026.

FORECAST

2011-2021 Average 45,341 36.2 16,425 18.6% 3,062 69.0% 2,112 0.1% 2

Employment Growth in the Metro1 Hist. & Project, Jobs to Total New Home Sales in Metro Per 100 Jobs Historic & Projected Total New Home Sales in Metro Percentage New Attached Sales of Total New Sales Historic & Projected New Attached Sales in Atlanta Metro OTP Capture of Atlanta Metro New Attached Sales Historic & Projected New Attached Sales in OTP PMA Capture of OTP New Attached Sales

2005-2021 Average 29,379 74.2 21,808 17.7% 3,870 63.4% 2,454 0.1% 1

*Please note that there could be some rounding errors in price band estimates

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, MetroStudy, Moodys / Economy.com

3/18/2022

2022-2026 Average 51,700 32.3 16,715 22.7% 3,795 77.7% 2,948 1.3% 39

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS

Metro New Home Sales

ATLANTA METRO NEW HOME SALES & DETACHED CAPTURE 110,000 100,000 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0

2005 - 2007: 50,257 Avg. New Sales 83.5% Detached

84.0%

82.9% 83.5%

2008 - 2010: 13,096 Avg. New Sales 81.7% Detached

84.4%

83.5% 83.5% 79.7%

85.9% 85.3%

2011 - 2021: 16,425 Avg. New Sales 81.4% Detached

84.2% 80.9%

79.7% 77.6% 77.3%

2005

2006

2007

2022 - 2026: 16,715 Avg. New Sales 77.3% Detached

79.6% 80.0%

79.2% 76.6%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Detached New Home Sales

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Detached New Home Sales

78.0%

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Detached Share of New Home Sales

76.0%

2024

75.0%

2025

74.0%

2026

88.0% 86.0% 84.0% 82.0% 80.0% 78.0% 76.0% 74.0% 72.0% 70.0% 68.0%

Share of Detached

Exhibit 44 Atlanta Metro New Home Sales and Detached Share

With the exception of the recovery post great recession, detached product has accounted for 82%-86% of all new home sales in the metro up until 2017. Since 2017 however there has been a significant decline in the detached home sale portion of the market, as affordability pressure increased following a strong economic run and associated price appreciation, which was only sped up further with the onset of COVID. While 2021 witnessed a slight bounce back, we forecast the trend will continue with a gradually declining % of detached sales as more attached products gain popularity both for their more affordable price point, but also in many areas their increased walkability and maintenance-free aspects.

ATLANTA METRO NEW DETACHED HOME SALES 60,000

2022 - 2026: 12,919 Detached Sales / Year

2011 - 2021: 13,363 Detached Sales / Year

2008 - 2010: 10,704 Detached Sales / Year

40,000 30,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

8,571

7,837

2013

12,255

2012

16,022

9,300

2011

19,910

6,102

2010

17,756

4,910

2009

18,363

5,891

2008

16,965

9,069

2007

17,565

17,153

2006

16,575

32,259

2005

15,557

45,887

47,700

10,000

13,377

20,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group (based on surveys of properties)

10,523

New Detached Sales

50,000

2005 - 2007: 41,949 Detached Sales / Year

2014 2015 2016 2017 Detached New Home Sales

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 45 OTP Share of Atlanta Metro New Detached Sales ATLANTA METRO NEW DETACHED SALES W/ OTP SHARE 50,000

2011 - 2021: 89.1% Capture

2008 - 2010: 82.7% Capture

2005 - 2007: 84.4% Capture

40,000 30,000

84.6%

83.7%

87.2%

85.0% 82.3%

82.6%

84.0%

82.3%

89.3%

88.5%

88.6%

97.3%

88.8%

87.6%

90.0%

88.6%

100.0%

2022 - 2026: 88.9% Capture 89.0%

88.0%

95.0% 88.0%

83.3%

85.0% 2005 - 2021: 86.5% Capture

20,000

80.0%

10,000 0

90.0%

75.0% 2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Historical New Detached Sales

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Projected New Detached Sales

2021 2022 Capture

2023

2024

2025

2026

OTP New Detached Capture Rate

Metro New Detached Sales

60,000

70.0%

While not a surprise, the market has witnessed nearly 90% of the new detached sales occurring OTP, as infill sites for low density products ITP are becoming increasingly scarce. We believe this trend will largely continue, resulting in a forecast of nearly 12,000 new detached sales per year Outside the Perimeter.

OTP NEW DETACHED SALES 40,000

2005 - 2007: 35,407 Avg. New Detached Sales

35,000

2008 - 2010: 8,850 Avg. New Detached Sales

2022 - 2026: 11,480 Avg. New Detached Sales

2011 - 2021: 11,902 Avg. New Detached Sales

30,000 25,000 20,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

17,276

17,919

14,260

10,785

7,542

6,897

16,264

14,866

15,589

14,678

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 OTP - Historical New Detached Sales

13,783

2009

11,841

2008

9,397

2007

8,107

2006

5,083

4,946

2005

4,043

7,493

14,112

5,000

27,427

10,000

38,420

15,000 40,374

OTP New Detached Sales

45,000

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 OTP - Projected New Detached Sales

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 46 Fayette County Capture of OTP New Detached Sales OTP NEW DETACHED SALES & FAYETTE COUNTY CAPTURE 40,000

2011 - 2021: 2.3% Capture

3.8%

35,000

2.5% 2.0% 1.5%

17,276

17,919

14,260

10,785

7,542

6,897

1.0%

16,264

14,866

15,589

4.0% 3.0%

2.5%

1.4%

4.5% 3.5%

2.0%

14,678

9,397

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 OTP - Historical New Detached Sales

8,107

2008

5,083

2007

4,043

2006

4,946

2005

13,783

1.5%

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 OTP - Projected New Detached Sales

2021

2022 2023 Capture

2024

2025

2026

11,841

1.5%

4.0%

3.0% 2.5%

1.7%

7,493

1.3%

1.6%

14,112

5,000

1.4%

1.6%

27,427

10,000

1.4%

1.6%

38,420

15,000

3.3%

2.3%

25,000 20,000

3.0%

2.7%

30,000

2022 - 2026: 2.7% Capture 3.5%

0.5%

PMA New Detached Capture Rate

2008 - 2010: 1.6% Capture

2005 - 2007: 1.3% Capture

40,374

OTP New Detached Sales

45,000

0.0%

Historically Fayette County has averaged a 1-2% capture of the OTP new detached home sale market. Most recently, Trilith has enabled that capture to ramp up to nearly 3.5% when significant inventory was available. To understand demand potential, we are assuming the County can witness a ramp up to 4% of the OTP market if inventory was made available. As can be seen below this results in just over 315 average sales per year.

FAYETTE COUNTY NEW DETACHED SALES 2005 - 2007: 474 Avg. New Detached Sales

500

2008 - 2010: 142 Avg. New Detached Sales

300

358

356

324

264

276

401

498

474

202

240

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 PMA Historical New Detached Sales

234

275

2009

258

2008

311

2007

2006

122

2005

225

351

100

526

200

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and MetroStudy

3/18/2022

2022 - 2026: 316 Avg. New Detached Sales

2011 - 2021: 275 Avg. New Detached Sales

400

546

PMA New Detached Sales

600

2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 PMA Projected New Detached Sales

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 47 Sale History of Detached Product in PMA New Detached Product Sales in PMA 2005-2021

Since the Great Recession, the bulk of the new detached sales market in the PMA has been the under $400k band. The delivery of Trilith, as well as new job gains associated with the hospital, and market wide appreciation rates have resulted in the majority of sales now occurring in the $400-750k bands.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

2011 2012 2013

110

2014 2015 2016

2017

2018

13 < $300,000

10 $300,000 - $400,000

$400,000 - $500,000

$500,000 - $750,000

$750,000 - $1,000,000

3 $1,000,000 +

2019 2020 2021

600

500

400

300

200

100

0 2005

2006

2007

2008

2009 < $300,000

Source: NCG, MetroStudy

3/18/2022

2010

2011

$300,000 - $400,000

2012 $400,000 - $500,000

2013

2014

$500,000 - $750,000

2015

2016

$750,000 - $1,000,000

2017 $1,000,000 +

2018

2019

2020

2021

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 48 Fayette County New Detached Sales & Distribution and City of Fayetteville's Potential Capture 2022 118,510 21.0 24,887 20.0% 4,977 90.0% 17,919 2.0% 358

2023 57,059 36.0 20,541 22.0% 4,519 89.0% 14,260 2.5% 356

2024 35,055 46.0 16,125 24.0% 3,870 88.0% 10,785 3.0% 324

2025 23,808 48.0 11,428 25.0% 2,857 88.0% 7,542 3.5% 264

2026 24,071 44.0 10,591 26.0% 2,754 88.0% 6,897 4.0% 276

Projected Price Distribution < $300,000 $300,000 - $400,000 $400,000 - $500,000 $500,000 - $750,000 $750,000 - $1,000,000 $1,000,000 +

2022 14 88 108 125 18 5

2023 11 71 125 123 21 6

2024 6 52 127 110 23 6

2025 0 32 117 90 21 5

2026 0 22 130 94 25 5

Potential Fair Share Capture3 < $300,000 $300,000 - $400,000 $400,000 - $500,000 $500,000 - $750,000 $750,000 - $1,000,000 $1,000,000 +

2022 30% 30% 35% 40% 50% 60%

2023 30% 30% 35% 40% 50% 60%

2024 30% 30% 35% 40% 50% 60%

2025 30% 30% 35% 40% 50% 60%

2026 30% 30% 35% 40% 50% 60%

Potential Annual Capture: < $300,000 $300,000 - $400,000 $400,000 - $500,000

2022 4 26 38

2023 3 21 44

2024 2 16 45

2025 0 10 41

2026 0 7 45

Historic & Projected New Detached Sales in PMA2 NOTES: 1. Employment growth from Economy.com. 2. For the purpose of NCG's supply and demand analysis the Primary Market Area (PMA) Is defined as Fayette County. 3. Potential Fair Share capture is based on historically demonstrated captures the City has witnessed of County sales across price bands. 4. The results of our demand analysis indicate the City has demand potential for an annual average of 118 new detached sales per year, and up to 588 total sales through 2026.

FORECAST

2011-2021 Average 45,341 36.2 16,425 81.4% 13,363 89.1% 11,902 2.3% 275

Employment Growth in the Metro1 Hist. & Project, Jobs to Total New Home Sales in Metro Per 100 Jobs Historic & Projected Total New Home Sales in Metro Percentage New Detached Sales of Total New Sales Historic & Projected New Detached Sales in Atlanta Metro OTP Capture of Atlanta Metro New Detached Sales Historic & Projected New Detached Sales in OTP PMA Capture of OTP New Detached Sales

2005-2021 Average 29,379 74.2 21,808 82.3% 17,938 86.5% 15,512 1.8% 287

$500,000 - $750,000

$750,000 - $1,000,000

$1,000,000 +

Potential Annual Capture:

131

121

100

105

*Please note that there could be some rounding errors in price band estimates

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, MetroStudy, Moodys / Economy.com

3/18/2022

2022-2026 Average 51,700 32.3 16,715 77.3% 12,919 88.9% 11,480 2.7% 316

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 49 Analogous For-Sale/ Rental Product Community Map 11

1 12

8 9

Market Rate Apts

Units

Avg. Size

1 Lofts at Trilith

263

879

$2,109

$2.40

2 Meridian at Lafayette

210

966

$2,005

$2.08

3 Equinox at Knight

194

997

$1,627

$1.63

Market Rate Apts Avg

222

947

$1,914

$2.04

Independent Living

Units

Avg. Size

4 Heartis Fayetteville IL

789

55+ Rental (Tax Credit)

Units

Avg. Size

5 Hearthside Club Lafayette

125

970

For-Sale Single Family

6 5

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Google Earth, Google Maps

3/18/2022

$3,573

$4.53

Avg. Rent Avg. $/SF $1,327

$1.37

Units/Lots Avg. Size Avg. Price Avg. $/SF 164

3,536

$334,875

$95

7 Apple Orchards

2,835

$380,000

$134

8 Trilith

600

2,145

$783,450

$365

10 Canoe Club

350

3,364

$525,549

$158

11 Brighton Homes

2,923

$451,658

$155

12 Annelise Park Drive

6,904

$992,500

$144

For-Sale Single Family Avg

219

3,618

$578,005

$175

9 Trilith (TH) 55+ For-Sale Communities 14

Avg. Rent Avg. $/SF

6 Villages Lafayette

For-Sale Townhomes 10

Avg. Rent Avg. $/SF

Units/Lots Avg. Size Avg. Price Avg. $/SF 100

1,589

$641,043

$403

Units/Lots Avg. Size Avg. Price Avg. $/SF

13 Garden Court

112

1,338

$188,000

$141

14 Fayette Meadows

129

2,288

$383,900

$168

55+ For-Sale Communities Avg

121

1,813

$285,950

$154

Average All Market Rate Apts

237

922

$2,057

$2.24

Average All Independent Living

789

$3,573

$4.53

Average All 55+ Rental (Tax Credit)

125

970

$1,327

$1.37

Average All Single Family

248

2,961

$495,106

$181

Average All Townhomes Average All 55+ For Sale

100 112

1,589 1,338

$641,043 $188,000

$403 $141

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 50 Summary of the Competitive Communities by Product Type ID Community Name

Product Type

Year Built

Sold in past two years

Total Units

Weighted Unit Size Range Average Unit Size

6 Villages Lafayette

For-Sale Single Family

2018

164

1,845 5,227

7 Apple Orchards

For-Sale Single Family

2001

2,092 3,578

Base Price Range

Base Average Price

Base Average $/SF

3,536

$190,750

$479,000

$334,875

$95

2,835

$318,000

$442,000

$380,000

$134

8 Trilith

For-Sale Single Family

2017

600

475 5,663

2,145

$212,900

$1,650,000

$783,450

$365

10 Canoe Club

For-Sale Single Family

2006

350

3,247 3,899

3,364

$517,759

$561,157

$525,549

$158

11 Brighton Homes

For-Sale Single Family

2021

2,264 3,581

2,923

$425,325

$477,990

$451,658

$155

12 Annelise Park Drive

For-Sale Single Family

2004

4,014 9,793

6,904

$425,325

$477,990

$451,658

$144

ID Community Name

Product Type

Year Built

Sold in past two years

Total Units

Base Price Range

Base Average Price

Base Average $/SF

9 Trilith (TH)

Townhome

2017

100

$489,000

$641,043

$403

ID Community Name

Product Type

Year Built

Sold in past two years

Total Units

Base Price Range

Base Average Price

Base Average $/SF

13 Garden Court

55+ For-Sale Community

1992

112

1,226 1,450

1,338

$134,000

$242,000

$188,000

$141

14 Fayette Meadows

55+ For-Sale Community

2021

129

1,817 2,759

2,288

$376,900

$390,900

$383,900

$168

Market Average

2011

184

2,022

4,261

2,991

$343,329

$603,283

$460,015

$196

For-Sale Single Family Average

2011

219

2,323

5,290

3,618

$348,343

$681,356

$487,865

$175

For-Sale Townhomes Average

2017

100

1,214

2,397

1,589

$489,000

$708,507

$641,043

$403

55+ For-Sale Community Average

2007

121

1,522

2,105

1,813

$255,450

$316,450

$285,950

$154

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar 3/18/2022

Weighted Unit Size Range Average Unit Size 1,214 2,397

1,589

Weighted Unit Size Range Average Unit Size

$708,507

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 51 Comparison of Key Competitive/Analogous Communities For-Sale Product in the Market - Weighted Average 55+ For-Sale Communities $870,000

Annelise Park Drive $144/SF

For-Sale Single Family For-Sale Townhomes

$770,000

Trilith $365/SF

$670,000

PRICE

Trilith (TH) $403/SF $570,000 Canoe Club $158/SF Brighton Homes $155/SF

$470,000

Fayette Meadows $168/SF

$370,000 Exhibit 55 (Page 2 of 2)

Apple Orchards $134/SF Villages Lafayette $95/SF

$270,000

Garden Court $141/SF

$170,000 1,200

1,700

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group based on surveys of properties.

3/18/2022

2,200

2,700 SIZE

3,200

3,700

4,200

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 52 Competitive SFD Community - The Villages at LaFayette: Park (110 Mansfield Drive) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Lennar Homes

Construction began in Q3 2017. 1.5 / mo. 1 actively selling; 0

Sales Pace: under construction; 3 future lots; 3 lots remaining

Delivery: Q1 2018 Presale: Began Q3 2017 Type: 164 SFDs 32' - 48'

Grounds maintenance; 5 pocket parks located throughout

Construction: Cement Siding

Features & community; pet stations located throughout community; Amenities: playground; sport court w/ regulation pickle ball; swimming pool

Parking Type: Rear-entry garage

plaza with sun shields

Spaces/Ratio: Private 2 car garage

WalkScore®: (18) Car-Dependent

HOA Fees: Annual Assoc. Fee: $710; $145 initiation fee

PRODUCT PROGRAM

3B/2.5b

Recently Sold (2020+) 11

$190,750 $389,900

$311,055

1,845 2,562

Average Size 2,172

$103 $152

Avg. $/SF $143

3B/3b

$330,000 $435,000

$382,500

2,503 2,654

2,579

$132 $164

$148

3B/3.5b

$235,900 $345,000

$298,475

2,125 2,400

2,260

$111 $144

$132

$300,000 $400,900

$341,225

2,348 5,227

3,100

$77 $128

$110

$275,000 $405,000

$355,250

2,157 2,957

2,427

$127 $137

$146

$300,000 $479,000

$377,958

2,348 3,407

2,827

$128 $141

$134

$475,000 $475,000

$475,000

2,904 2,904

2,904

$164 $164

$164

5B/3.5b

$319,900 $380,000

$356,633

2,700 3,160

2,903

$118 $120

$123

SUMMARY:

$190,750 $479,000

$334,875

1,845 5,227

3,536

$77 $164

$95

Appliances and Tech

Windows and Balconies

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

Vinyl tilt-in windows with wood returns; a front porch and covered, rear patio.

Not offered

Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Only the total unit count in the neighborhood is known. Data is from recent sales

4B/2.5b 4B/3b 4B/3.5b 5B/2.5b

164

Actively Selling

Closing Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

Effective PSF

UNIT FINISHES Ceiling Height and Finish

Lighting

10’ Ceilings on Main Floor

Recessed can lighting

Flooring

Electrolux® Stainless Steel Appliances including 36” Gas 3” Plank Shaw® Timberlake® Fairfield Cabinets with 42” Cooktop, Vent Hood, WaveTouch Engineered Uppers and Crown Molding, Granite Double Ovens (Standard and Hardwood Flooring, Kitchen Countertops Speed cooking), Ring® Video ceramic tile in bath Doorbell; Samsung SmartThingsTM Hub

MARKET AUDIENCE Mix of empty nesters, downsizers, and young professionals/single parents from Atlanta. Typically airport-area workers, including some Delta attendants.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

Countertops, Cabinets and Bath Detail

SUMMARY Previously developed by Ravin Homes (most custom homes); Lennar purchased in 3Q 2017 (production).

total units are 173

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 53 Competitive SFD Community - Apple Orchard (Apple Blossom Lane, Winesap Way, Stayman Park) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Unknown

Phased construction began in 1999. All units were delivered by

Sales Pace: 2004. No active sales. Most recent resale was a 3B/3b for

Delivery: Q1 2001

$395,000 which sold in March 2022.

Presale: Unknown Type: 49 SFDs on less than 1-acre sites Construction: Concrete Siding, Stick Built, Wood/Frame

Features & Fees cover grounds maintenance and park area in center of Amenities: neighborhood

Parking Type: Private attached garage in rear of building Spaces/Ratio: Private 2 car garage in rear

WalkScore®: (41) Car-Dependent

HOA Fees: Annual Assoc. Fee: $500 ($46/mo.)

PRODUCT PROGRAM Recently Sold (2020+) 4

Actively Selling 0

3B/3b

4B/3b

Total Unit Count

Closing Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

$295,000 $342,000

$318,500

1,704 2,493

Average Size 2,099

$137 $173

Avg. $/SF $152

$395,000 $395,000

$395,000

2,353 2,353

2,353

$168 $168

$168

$343,000 $385,000

$364,000

2,092 3,438

2,765

$112 $164

$132

$365,000 $365,000

$365,000

2,688 2,688

2,688

$136 $136

$136

$340,000 $354,000

$347,000

3,227 3,227

3,227

$105 $110

$108

5B/3b

$318,000 $318,000

$318,000

3,578 3,578

3,578

$89 $89

$89

5B/4b

$442,000 $442,000

$442,000

2,901 2,901

2,901

$152 $152

$152

$318,000 $442,000

$380,000

2,092 3,578

2,835

$89 $168

$134

Appliances and Tech

Windows and Balconies

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

SS appliance package w/electric range, microwave, fireplace

Punch windows, Private patio/deck

None

N/A

Unit Type 3B/2.5b

Unit Mix

Only the total unit count in the neighborhood is known. Data is from recent sales

4B/3.5b 4B/4.5b

SUMMARY:

Effective PSF

UNIT FINISHES Ceiling Height and Finish 9'+ ceilings

Lighting

Flooring

Wide plank Hw on Varies, lighted fans in main, tile in bath, Dark granite countertops in kitchen, bedrooms, chandeliers, carpet in beds and white granite in bath, framed walk in decorative pendants, decorative on second floor if shower with separate tub in master. track lighting in bath there is one.

MARKET AUDIENCE Broad mix of mature suburban home owners, some empty-nesters, and maturing families seeking new housing in Fayette County.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

Countertops, Cabinets and Bath Detail

SUMMARY 49 custom homes on less than one acre lots. Master's on second floor for some while other homes have master on main floor.

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 54 Competitive SFD Community - Trilith (290 Heatherden Ave) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Halbert Development / Pinewood Atlanta Studios

Construction began in Q2 2015. They are still building, with the

Sales Pace: construction of Phase 3 of the development underway. Sales

Delivery: Q4 2017

pace in 2021 was roughly 3 (2.8) units sold per month.

Presale: Began Q1 2017 Type: 600 SFDs

118 acres of green space

Features & Community wellness center 15 miles of pedestrian pathways Amenities: Gardens and playgrounds

Construction: Brick 4 Sided Parking Type: Private attached garage

Multiple swimming pools

Spaces/Ratio: Private 2 car garage

WalkScore®: N/A

HOA Fees: Typical annual assoc. Fee: $2,400

PRODUCT PROGRAM Recently Sold Actively Selling (2020+) 3 0 4 2 14 4 13 1 2 1 Only the total unit count in 6 0 the neighborhood is 3 0 known. Data is from 3 1 recent sales 8 0 3 1 6 3 1 0 2 0

Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

1B/1b 2B/2b 2B/2.5b 3B/2.5b 3B/3b 3B/3.5b 4B/2.5b 4B/3b 4B/3.5b 4B/4b 4B/4.5b 4B/5b 6B/5.5b *Currently in Phase 3 of Construction

SUMMARY:

600

100%

Ceiling Height and Finish

Lighting

10' ceilings on main

Custom designer lighting

Flooring

Wide-plank hardwood flooring

MARKET AUDIENCE Buyers all over; tv stars, investors, from out of town, few families with kids, some empty-nesters, majority from Atlanta metro area. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

Base Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

$212,900 $265,000 $519,900 $679,900 $385,000 $599,900 $384,000 $729,900 $524,000 $589,900 $524,900 $625,000 $459,900 $479,900 $774,900 $1,279,000 $470,302 $1,299,900 $661,500 $977,500 $975,150 $1,599,900 $1,200,000 $1,200,000 $1,500,000 $1,650,000

$233,933 $574,900 $507,269 $559,660 $556,950 $566,850 $466,567 $1,012,933 $877,807 $779,667 $1,273,317 $1,200,000 $1,575,000

475 565 1,342 1,343 1,122 2,178 1,098 2,178 1,680 1,680 1,488 1,827 1,748 1,748 2,376 2,391 2,178 2,717 2,464 3,149 2,506 5,663 3,149 3,149 3,235 3,235

Average Size 527 1,342 1,409 1,743 1,680 1,735 1,748 2,385 2,568 2,749 3,617 3,149 3,235

$212,900 $1,650,000 $783,450 UNIT FINISHES Countertops, Cabinets and Appliances and Tech Bath Detail

475 5,663

2,145

Marble countertops in bathrooms & kitchens. Wood custom cabinetry w/ custom paint or stained finishes. Granite, marble & stone counter top selections & apron front kitchen sink are standard.

Bosch appliance package, plumbing fixtures in popular finishes by Delta. Pre-wired for electric vehicle charging station.

$469 $506 $343 $350 $351 $353 $275 $535 $478 $310 $389 $381 $510

Avg. $/SF $444 $428 $360 $321 $332 $327 $267 $425 $342 $284 $352 $381 $487

$216 $535

$365

Effective PSF $448 $387 $275 $335 $312 $342 $263 $326 $216 $268 $283 $381 $464

Windows and Balconies

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

Private courtyards

N/A

SUMMARY

600 detached residences, 100 townhomes, and 600 apartments/condos. Massive, multiplephase mixed-use planned community. Next door to Trilith Studios.

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 55 Competitive TH Community - Trilith (290 Heatherden Ave) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Halbert Development / Pinewood Atlanta Studios

Construction began in Q1 2017. 1.8 / mo. As of 2022, the rate is

Sales Pace: less 1 unit a month.

Delivery: Q4 2017 Presale: Began Q4 2017 Type: 100 THs

118 acres of green space

Features & Community wellness center 15 miles of pedestrian pathways Amenities: Gardens and playgrounds

Construction: Brick 4 Sided Parking Type: Private attached garage

Multiple swimming pools

Spaces/Ratio: Private 3 car garage

WalkScore®: N/A

HOA Fees: Annual Assoc. Fee: $2,400

PRODUCT PROGRAM Recently Sold (2020+) 1 Only the total unit count in the neighborhood is 14 known. Unit mix is unknown. Data is from recent sales

Unit Type

Unit Count

2B/2.5b/TH 3B/2.5b/TH

SUMMARY:

100

Unit Mix

100%

Actively Selling 3

Base Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

$649,900 $649,900

$649,900

1,214 1,214

Average Size 1,214

$535 $535

Avg. $/SF $535

$489,000 $708,507

$632,186

1,754 2,397

1,964

$279 $296

$322

74%

$489,000 $708,507

$641,043

1,214 2,397

1,589

$279 $535

$403

Effective PSF

UNIT FINISHES Ceiling Height and Finish

10' ceilings on main

Lighting

Custom designer lighting

Flooring

Countertops, Cabinets and Bath Detail

Appliances and Tech

Windows and Balconies

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

Wide-plank hardwood flooring

Marble countertops in bathrooms and kitchens. Solid wood custom cabinetry with custom paint or stained finishes. Granite marble and stone counter top selections and apron front kitchen sink are standard.

Bosch appliance package, plumbing fixtures in popular finishes by Delta. Pre-wired for electric vehicle charging station.

Private front porch

N/A

MARKET AUDIENCE

SUMMARY

Buyers all over; tv stars, investors, from out of town, few families with kids, some empty-nesters, majority from Atlanta metro area.

600 detached residences, 100 townhomes, and 600 apartments/condos. Massive, multiplephase mixed-use planned community. Next door to Pinewood Atlanta Studios.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 56 Competitive/Analogous Communities - Canoe Club Community Overview ◘ Developer: Euram-Macauley One, LLC/Reynolds Capitol Group, LLC ◘ Lot sales and construction began in 2006, still ongoing ◘ HOA fees: $700 Community Features ◘ Master planned community of approximately 600 acres ◘ 350 homesites along 2 freshwater lakes ◘ Lake-adjacent cottage with fitness center, pool, coffee bar, addtl. New Construction Sales from Q4 2019 Beds ALL 4 5 Year Q4 2019 2020 2021

AVG Price

AVG SF

AVG $/SF

Avg Lot SF

525,549

3,364

158.34

66,726

517,759

3,247

161.01

70,551

561,157

3,899

146.17

49,513

All

Sales 4B

Sales 5B

Master planned community with custom homes as well as pre-built or pre-designed options. Includes access to 2 freshwater lakes along with wharf docks and canoe storage. Lake cottage includes some traditional amenities like lighted tennis courts, sunroom, coffee bar, fitness center, catering kitchen, and lap pool. Located within convenient driving distance of historic downtown Fayetteville as well as Trilith. All home sites 1 acre or more.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Metrostudy

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 57 Competitive SFD Community - Brighton Homes (110 Eastmark Wy, Fayetteville, GA 30214) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Pulte Homes

Recent sales data indicates that five homes were sold in the month of December (2021) alone which is a strong pace. Sales

Sales Pace: have slowed as construction slowed with the most recent sale was

Delivery: Q4 2021 Presale: N/A

in March of 2022.

Size: 1-2 stories Construction: Pour Concreate; Stick Built; some with brick vaneer Parking Type: 2 car garage parking

Features & None Amenities:

Spaces/Ratio: 2 per unit WalkScore®: (0) Car-Dependent

HOA Fees: $117 Per mo.

PRODUCT PROGRAM Unit Type 2B/2.5b 4B/2.5b 5B/4.5b SUMMARY:

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Only the total unit count in the neighborhood is known. Complete unit mix is unknown. Data is from recent sales

Recently Sold (2020+) 2

Actively Selling 1

Base Price Range $425,325 $458,990

$442,158

2,264 2,430

Average Size 2,347

$188 $189

Avg. $/SF $188

$438,569 $477,990

$460,526

2,854 3,140

2,982

$154 $152

$154

$486,110 $642,990

$534,316

3,336 3,581

3,472

$146 $180

$154

17%

$425,325 $477,990

2,264 3,581

2,923

$146 $189

$155

Avg. Price

$451,658

Unit Size Range

Effective PSF

UNIT FINISHES Exterior

Brick/hardy plank

Ceiling / Lighting

Flooring

Cabinets

9’ ceilings finished, Hardwood floors in Modern designed shaker cabinets, recessed can, living and kitchen, track lighting in tile in bath, carpet with Brushed nickel pulls bath in bedrooms MARKET AUDIENCE

Many buyers are empty nesters, 55+, and families. Attracted to convenience to job cores at the Airport, Atlanta, as well as local job cores.

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

Countertops

Granite/quartz with tile back splash

Appliances

Bath

Windows

Quartz, walkin showers Stainless appliances, gas cook top with with separate Large double pane windows double ovens, and vent hoods tubs in master

Outdoor Space Misc.

Porches and decks

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 58 Competitive SFD Community - Annelise Park Drive: Park (Vinings Walk; Annelise Park Drive,) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Multiple Developers

Construction began in 2005 and the community has been slowly adding on through the years. As of 2022, there are 22 lots ready

Sales Pace: to build with 3 lots breaking ground. There is no estimated time

Delivery: Q1 2004

of delivery.The current data is only resales.

Presale: N/A Type: 75 SFDs custom mini-mansions Construction: Cement Siding

Features & Pool, clubhouse, sports courts Amenities:

Parking Type: 2-3 car garages Spaces/Ratio: 2-3 car garages

WalkScore®: (18) Car-Dependent

HOA Fees: Annual Assoc. Fee: $1,000

PRODUCT PROGRAM Recently Sold (2020+)

Actively Selling

Base Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

Average Size

Effective PSF

Avg. $/SF

6B/5.5b

$849,900 $1,425,000

$1,007,483

4,014 9,793

6,754

$146 $212

$149

5B/4b

$875,000 $875,000

$875,000

4,248 4,248

4,248

$206 $206

$206

$880,000 $880,000

$880,000

4,128 4,128

4,128

$213 $213

$213

$560,000 $560,000

$560,000

5,974 5,974

5,974

$94 $94

$94

$825,000 $825,000

$825,000

6,755 6,755

6,755

$122 $122

$122

13%

$560,000 $1,425,000

$992,500

4,014 9,793

6,904

$94 $213

$144

Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Only the total unit count in the neighborhood is known. Data is from recent sales

5B/4.5b 5B/5b 5B/7b

SUMMARY:

UNIT FINISHES Ceiling Height and Finish

Lighting

Flooring

Countertops, Cabinets and Bath Detail

Appliances and Tech

Windows and Balconies

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

10’ Ceilings on Main Floor; in some cases vaulted ceilings

Recessed can lighting, lighted fans, chandeliers

Hardwood Flooring, ceramic tile in bath, carpet in bedrooms

Custom 42” Uppers and Crown Molding, Granite Kitchen and bathroom countertops. Framed walk in showers, double vanities, large soaking tub in master.

Custom, Stainless Steel Appliances including gas cooktop, Double Ovens, granite island

Large double pane windows with metal returns; porches and covered rear patio.

Previously, upgrades were up to the discretion of the owner. The future phase will be uniform with no upgrades.

MARKET AUDIENCE Mix of empty nesters and families from local area who work in Atlanta, airport-area workers, including some Delta pilots, and healthcare workers. Most recent inquires have been from out of state, California and New York.

3/18/2022

SUMMARY Previously developed by various home builders (most custom homes); Currently being developed by Heather homes.

BRANCH PROPERTIES, LLC LAUREL ISLAND MARKET ANALYSIS

Rental Product Analysis

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 59 Historical and Projected Job Growth to Apartment Absorption Relationship in Atlanta Metro

Note: Class A apartments are defined as CoStar's 3, 4 & 5 Star properties and exclude military, senior, and vacation properties.

Atlanta Metro Job Growth

2005

2007

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Historical Job Growth

2015

2016

2017

2018

Projected Job Growth

2019

2020

35,055

57,059

118,510

74,854

64,575

57,575

62,808

78,333

88,483

60,067

83,692

(150,033)

2008

42,283

48,292

2006

24,071

2004

2011 - 2019: 63,770 Jobs/year

23,808

2003

(20,092)

-150,000

(136,950)

-100,000

2004 - 2007: 53,688 Jobs/year

(26,542)

-50,000

66,150

69,833

30,475

50,000

36,117

2008 - 2010: -61,194 Jobs/year

100,000

(23,100)

Metro Job Growth

150,000

2025

2026

2022 - 2026: 51,700 Jobs/year 2021

2022

2023

2024

The graphs on this page track the relationship between job creation and Class A apartment absorption. While population and wage growth are strongly related to apartment absorption, job growth figures capture many of these trends. Additionally, the relationship between job creation and apartment absorption can illuminate demographic trends and shifts in preferences. This relationship in the Atlanta metro has steadily risen since coming out of the Great Recession as young professionals have put off home ownership and many empty-nesters have sought to downsize with developers meeting this demand, often in urban, walkable areas, with an increasing amount of deliveries (thus net absorption). Despite the jobs fall out from the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, the metro absorbed over 14,800 units, and with a significant rebound in jobs occurring in 2021, an additional record of over 17,000 units were absorbed. Moving forward, NCG projects the net absorption to jobs relationship to grow with continued strong job growth and a lack of for-sale product within the Metro unable to meet demand, particularly at more modest price points, with just over 8,000 apartments absorbed on average per year over the five-year projection period.

20,000 16,000 14,000 10,000

2022 - 2026: 8,044 Apts/year

2022 - 2026: 15.6 Apts/ 100 Jobs

-10

6,000

7,939

4,165

2,653

9,031

6,321

4,769

1,061

3,994

6,808

4,011

7,357

4,848

9,773

10,152

9,099

14,836

17,385

13,629

9,415

7,362

5,000

4,814

-20

6,573

2,000

20 10

8,000 4,000

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Historical Absorption

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, Costar, Economy.com | Moody's Analytics

3/18/2022

2020 - 2021: 16,111 Apts/year 2020 - 2021: -42.9 Apts/ 100 Jobs

2011 - 2019: 9.9 Apts/ 100 Jobs

2008 - 2010: -11.0 Apts/ 100 Jobs

2004 - 2007: 9.9 Apts/ 100 Jobs

12,000

2011 - 2019: 6,345 Apts/year

5,317

Metro Apartment Absorption

2008 - 2010: 6,707 Apts/year

2004 - 2007: 5,333 Apts/year

18,000

Projected Absorption

Absorption/100 New Jobs

-30

-40

Metro Absorption/100 New Jobs

Atlanta Metro Class A Apartment Absorption

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS

4,814

5,000

7,362

13,629

17,385

14,836

9,099

10,152

9,415

2022 - 2026: 8,044 Avg. Abs. 41.7% Capture

COVID OTP Capture Spike

9,773

4,848

4,011

6,808

3,994

1,061

4,769

6,321

9,031

7,357

2011 - 2021: 8,120 Avg. Abs. 46.9% Capture

2008 - 2010: 6,707 Avg. Abs. 47.6% Capture

2,653

4,165

7,939

6,573

20,000 18,000 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0

2004 - 2007: 5,333 Avg. Abs. 59.1% Capture

5,317

Metro Apartment Absorption

Atlanta Class A Apartment Absorption & Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Capture

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Historical Metro Absorption

Projected Metro Absorption

100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0%

Regional Capture Rate

Exhibit 60 Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Capture of Atlanta Metro Class A Apartment Absorption

Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Capture of Metro Absorption

The Atlanta regional core, defined as "OTP" or Outside the Perimeter (the local reference for Interstate 285 that rings the City of Atlanta), has seen a decreasing share of absorption since 2003 as renters increasingly seek job proximity and dynamic, walkable intown neighborhoods. However, in recent years, there has been a small uptick with apartment units added to several suburban mixed-use developments and historic downtowns. This uptick became more pronounced during the COVID 19 pandemic, as many choose to relocate out of urban areas to save money given a decreased need for commuting. That said, we do believe this was a temporary spike that will gradually cool (as already demonstrated in 2021) as more and more employees are required to go back into the office, even if only for a few days per week, and urbanization trends return. Moving forward, while individual years will vary as the pipeline delivers, we project OTP to capture roughly 42% of metro absorption through 2026. Overall, this equates to an average of just over 3,300 units absorbed annually from 2022 - 2026.

Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Class A Apartment Absorption

10,000 8,000 6,000

1,926

2,000

2,945

3,766

6,133

8,314

9,638

3,423

4,832

3,966

2,950

1,754

3,740

3,149

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Historical Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Absorption Projected Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Absorption

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and Costar

3/18/2022

3,577

736

2,737

4,533

4,608

4,975

2,000

2,334

4,000

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group (based on surveys of properties)

3,671

Regional Apartment Absorption

2022 - 2026: 3,354 Apts/Yr

2011 - 2021: 3,806 Apts/Yr

2008 - 2010: 3,194 Apts/Yr

2004 - 2007: 3,154 Apts/Yr

12,000

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 61 Fayette County Submarket Capture of Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Apartment Absorption

2004 - 2007: -0.1% Capture

10,000

2008 - 2010: 0.1% Capture

2022 - 2026: 5.1% Capture

2011 - 2021: 1.1% Capture

8,000 6,000

1,926

2,000

2,945

3,766

6,133

8,314

9,638

3,423

4,832

3,966

2,950

1,754

3,740

3,149

2,334

3,671

3,577

736

2,737

4,533

2,000

4,608

4,000 4,975

Regional Apartment Absorption

12,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Historical Absorption Projected Absorption Fayette County Capture

30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% -10.0% -20.0% -30.0% -40.0% -50.0% -60.0% -70.0%

Capture Rate

Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Class A Apartment Absorption & Fayette County Capture

Over the past cycle (2011-2021) Fayette County has averaged just 1.1% capture of the OTP market, however in more recent years, new deliveries at mixed-use developments such as the Lofts at Trilith and Downtown walkable deals such as Meridian, have shown the potential to boost the capture. In addition to more of these urban-suburban town centers helping to increase capture going forward, COVID has also helped to spur the increase of the build-to-rent SFD & TH market, much of which is in the pipeline for areas like Fayette County, indicating the demand potential is there going forward. Given these trends, along with an overall push to the suburbs and more affordable markets as a result of more work remote situations, we forecast this capture to have the potential to increase to as high as 5-10% of the OTP market. The result is a forecasted annual average of approximately 170 units per year through 2026.

Fayette County Class A Apartment Absorption 2004 - 2007: -02 Avg. Absorption

250

150

-100

173

180

236

264

160 -2

171

-15

-32

-17

38 -25

19 -23

0 -8

-5

0 -50

100

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Fayette County Historical Absorption Deliveries

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group and Costar

3/18/2022

2022 - 2026: 171 Avg. Absorption

2011 - 2021: 42 Avg. Absorption

2008 - 2010: 04 Avg. Absorption

200

-36

Submarket Apartment Absorption

300

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 62 (Page 1 of 2) Fayette County Apartment Supply and Demand Analysis

Employment Growth in the Metro1 Projected Jobs to New Apt. Absorption In Metro Est. Supportable New Apt Absorption in Metro Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Capture of Metro Est. Supportable New Apt Absorption Outside the Perimeter (OTP) Fayette County Capture of New Apt. Abs. w/in OTP Fayette County New Apartment Absorption

'03-'20 Average 23,998 27.5 6,595

'11-'20 Average 42,390 19.2 8,120

2021 74,854 23.2 17,385

2022 118,510 11.5 13,629

2023 57,059 16.5 9,415

FORECAST 2024 35,055 21.0 7,362

2025 23,808 21.0 5,000

2026 24,071 20.0 4,814

2022- 2026 Average 51,700 15.6 8,044

51% 3,374 0.6% 19

47% 3,806 1.1% 42

48% 8,314 1.1% 95

45.0% 6,133 0.1% 5

40.0% 3,766 7.0% 264

40.0% 2,945 8.0% 236

40.0% 2,000 9.0% 180

40.0% 1,926 9.0% 173

41.7% 3,354 5.1% 171

1/ Employment growth from Economy.com 2/ Noell Consulting Group analysis based on larger analysis and trends of the market. 3/ Fayette County submarket shown above SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar, Economy.com

3/18/2022

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 62 (Page 2 of 2) Fayette County Apartment Supply and Demand Analysis Fayette County New Apartment Absorption NOTES: 1. The numbers found beneath the year columns for each project indicate the percentage of the year the projects are expected to be in lease-up. 2. Projects that delivered in 2020 or 2021, but were/are currently in lease-up are designated in PURPLE, with the number of outstanding units as of January 1st, 2022 listed. Projects that are currently under construction are designated in GREEN. 3. Based on our demand forecast we believe there is positive demand for up to an additional 500 units within the City. These may come in a variety of product types - rental TH, rental SFD, multifamily flats, etc. but represent the otal volume the market can support.

5 Year Pipeline Premier Lofts at Trilith (Capstone Communities) Walton Fayetteville (Walton Communities) Meridian on the Square (Miles Hill) Potential Future Project Potential Future Project

Total Unmet Demand (After the addition of 500 New Units):

3/18/2022

0.25

2023 264

2024 236

1.00

0.25 1.00

These projects added to see how many units the market can support and still maintain supply/demand balance

Total, Projects Known Matriculation Factor Total, All Projects w/Matriculation Total Deliveries (in units)

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar, Economy.com

2022 5

2025 180

1.00

2026 173

1.00

Total 857 Total 5 270 220 250 250

0.3 100% 0.3 0

1.0 100% 1.0 270

1.3 100% 1.3 220

1.0 75% 1.8 188

1.0 66% 1.2 165

995 843

-6

-8

843

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 63 Historic and Projected Vacancy and Rent Growth of Class A Properties in the Fayette County Rental Submarket SUBMARKET ABSORPTION, DELIVERIES, & TOTAL VACANCY Historic Ann. Avg. 6.2%

300 250

7.0%

200 150 100

6.2%

6.1% 5.7% 5.9% 5.7% 5.7%

6.6% 5.5%

5.0%

7.7%

7.1%

Projected Ann. Avg. 4.2%

8.4%

8.1%

9.0% 8.0%

7.1%

7.0%

5.7%

5.1% 5.2%

6.0%

5.1% 4.9% 4.7%

4.1%

3.9% 3.9%

5.0%

3.5%

4.0% 3.0%

2.0%

-50

1.0%

-100

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Net Absorption Units

Deliveries Units

Total Vacancy Percent

0.0%

Historical Vacancy (2002-2020)

The result of our supply demand analysis can be seen here, with validation that even the addition of an additional 500 units above the current pipeline will still enable the market to maintain lower vacancy rates and push strong rate growth through 2026.

EFFECTIVE RENT VS VACANT STOCK 250

Historic Ann. Avg. 2.5%

18.1%

200 10.3%

150 100 50 0

3.4%

-0.3%

1.0%

-2.9%

5.3% 4.9%

2.7%

1.4% -2.7%

1.6%

9.8% 5.2%

5.1%

3.3%

14.00%

11.3% 4.4%

5.8% 5.8% 6.5%

-0.4%

9.00% 4.00%

-1.00%

-4.3%

Vacancy Units

24.00% 19.00%

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar

3/18/2022

0.1%

Projected Ann. Avg. 6.8%

Effective Rent Growth/Yr

-6.00%

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 64 Estimated Demand Potential for New Market Rate Independent and Assisted Living Units in the City of Fayetteville Senior Household Demand Total Senior Households (65+) 2022, City of Fayetteville /1

2,368

Seniors 65-84, $50k Income + /1

1,234

% Not already in Nursing Home/Indp.-Assisted Living/Living with Family /2

76%

Preference for Age-Restricted Apartments (55+, IL) /2

66.0%

Annual Turnover /4

11.8%

Total Currently Supportable Age-Restricted Apartments

Growth through 2027 of Age/Income-Qualified Seniors Preferring Age-Restr.

Total Annual Demand

Factoring in Lost Seniors (at 5%) /5

Factoring in 10% Vacancy Rate /5

106

City of Fayetteville Capture - Those Remaining in City

85%

Est. Annual Senior Demand in City of Fayetteville Number of Competitive Indp/Ass. Senior Living Facilities in Fayetteville

2 1

90 3

Potential New Development Fair Share Capture

25%

Net Annual Demand Potential at Fair Share Capture (55+ and/or IL)

Total Annual Units Supported Assuming Add'l 30% Assisted Living Units /5

While limited, demand exists for market rate senior housing (in either 55+ or an IL/AL facility) at an estimated 30 beds per year within the City of Fayetteville. This would likely translate into one new 90 bed facility supported every three years. 1 1/ Claritas, Inc. for HHs 65+. 2/ AARP based on National average. 3/ Noell Consulting using modified estimates from the US Census. 4/ US Census Bureau 5/ From previous interviews and research with analogous facilities in the SE. SOURCE: Noell Consulting, Claritas, AARP, US Census

3/18/2022

Heartis Fayetteville

2 Azalea Estates of Fayetteville 3

Oaks at Fayetteville

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 65 Summary of the Competitive Communities by Product Type Product Type

1 Villages at Lafayette

Market Rate Apts

2014

97%

263

603 1,388

2 Meridian at Lafayette

Market Rate Apts

2015

100%

210

576 1,369

3 Equinox at Knight

Market Rate Apts

2016

96%

194

711 1,285

ID Community Name

Product Type

4 Heartis Fayetteville IL

Independent Living

ID Community Name

Product Type

5 Hearthside Club Lafayette

Year Built % Leased

2017

100%

Year Built % Leased

Total Units

Absolute Effective Rent Range

Weighted Average Rent

879

$1,600 $2,800

$2,109

$2.40

51%

966

$1,505 $2,485

$2,005

$2.08

35%

997

$1,438 $1,863

$1,627

$1.63

28%

Absolute Effective Rent Range

Weighted Average Rent

$3,134 $3,933

$3,573

Absolute Effective Rent Range

Weighted Average Rent

$800 $2,150

$1,327

$1.37

44%

Weighted Unit Size Range Average Unit Size 654 900

789

Weighted Unit Size Range Average Unit Size 717 1,384

970

Weighted Percent Average Less than $/SF 2B/2b

Weighted Percent Average Less than $/SF 2B/2b $4.53

45%

Weighted Percent Average Less than $/SF 2B/2b

55+ Rental (Tax Credit)

2018

100%

125

99%

174

652

1,265

920

$1,695

$2,646

$2,128

$2.40

41%

Market Average

2016

Market Rate Apts

2015

98%

222

630

1,347

947

$1,514

$2,383

$1,914

$2.04

38%

Independent Living Average

2017

100%

654

900

789

$3,134

$3,933

$3,573

$4.53

45%

55+ Rental (Tax Credit) Average

2018

100%

125

717

1,384

970

$800

$2,150

$1,327

$1.37

44%

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar

3/18/2022

Year Built % Leased

Weighted Unit Size Range Average Unit Size

ID Community Name

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 66 Comparison of Key Competitive/Analogous Communities For-Sale Product in the Market - Weighted Average 55+ Rental Communities (Tax Credit) $3,700

Market Rate Apartments

Heartis Fayetteville IL $4.53/SF

Independent Living

$3,200

PRICE

$2,700

Lofts at Trilith $2.40/SF

$2,200

Meridan at Lafayette $2.08/SF

Exhibit 71 (Page 2 of 2)

Equinox at Knight $1.63/SF

$1,700

Hearthside Culb Lafayette (Tax Credit) $1.37/SF $1,200

600

700

800

SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group based on surveys of properties.

3/18/2022

900

1,000

SIZE

1,100

1,200

1,300

1,400

1,500

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 67 Competitive Rental Community - Premier Lofts at Trilith (301 Veterans Pky) OVERVIEW

Developer Name Pace Lynch Corporation

App. + Admin. Fee: $75/app + $200/admin

Owner Name Pinewood Forrest Real Estate

Pet Fees: $350 fee + $30/mo

Property Manager Name Capstone Companies - Premier Lofts at PinewoodOther For Fees: $30/mo valet trash Year Built 2019-2020

Parking Fees: $50/mo for 2nd vehicle

Number Of Stories 4

Parking Type: Surface/parking deck

Lease Up Pace: N/A

Total Spaces 442

PRODUCT PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Walk Score®: 15 (Car-Dependent)

Spaces/Bed: 1.09

According to the leasing agent, there is a wide mix of age demographics with many young professionals working at

Market Audience: local hospital, airport, and other south Atlanta employers as well retirees and families.

Multi-phase apartment complex that is part of the Pinewood Forest ecosystem, including for-sale resi, retail, office, and movie studio. Leasing has just begun, with 18 units online and another 18 coming online March 1st. All unit

Building Summary: phases are expected to be complete and online by the end of Q3 2020, for a total of 263 units that will also include some Studios and 3B's.

Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Available Units

Percent Leased

Quoted Effective Rent Range

Avg. Rent

Jr. 1B/1b 1B/1b 1B/1b/D 2B/2b 2B/2b/D 3B/2b 3B/2.5b

17 114 3 104 13 10 2

6% 43% 1% 40% 5% 4% 1%

0 5 1 0 0 1 0

100.0% 95.6% 66.7% 100.0% 100% 90% 100%

$1,600 $1,600 $1,775 $2,014 $2,065 $2,095 $2,075 $2,550 $2,091 $2,091 $2,561 $2,750 $2,800 $2,800

$1,600 $1,922 $2,080 $2,328 $2,091 $2,706 $2,800

SUMMARY:

263

100%

97.3%

$1,600 $2,800

$2,109

Unit Size Range 603 623 805 964 1,059 1,377 1,377

603 791 805 1,132 1,059 1,388 1,377

603 701 805 1,040 1,059 1,387 1,377

603 1,388

879

FINISHES AND AMENITIES

Ceiling Height and Finish: 9' ceilings Lighting and Fixtures: Black track lighting in kitchen/bath, glass pendants in kitchen, lighted fans in living/bedroom Flooring: LVT throughout Cabinets and Hardware: Shaker cabinets w/ SS pulls Countertops: Granite countertops; subway tile backsplash Appliance Package: Flat top electric SS appliances with standard SS refrigerator Laundry and Bath Detail: Stackable full size washer and dryer Windows and Balconies: Large double pane windows Additional Features: French doors leading to balcony/patio (in select units) Community Features 24-hour fitness center, lounge, courtyard, pool, grill stations, clubhouse w/ entertainment room, and Amenities: dog park, on-site retail/restaurant, electric vehicle charging stations

Source: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar

3/18/2022

Weighted Avg. Size

Current Conc.

None

Effective $/SF Range Avg. $/SF $2.65 $2.65 $2.55 $2.85 $2.57 $2.60 $2.15 $2.25 $1.97 $1.97 $1.86 $1.98 $2.03 $2.03

$2.65 $2.74 $2.58 $2.24 $1.97 $1.95 $2.03

$1.86 $2.85

$2.40

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 68 Competitive Rental Community - The Meridian at Lafayette (665 Lafayette Ave) OVERVIEW

Developer Name -

App. + Admin. Fee: $85/app + $250/admin

Owner Name Cowart Building Group

Pet Fees: $350 fee + $30/mo

Property Manager Name Matrix - The Meridian at Lafayette

Other Fees: $45-$85/mo storage

Year Built 2017

Parking Fees: Free surface, $150/mo garage

Number Of Stories 3

Parking Type: Surface/assigned garage

Lease Up Pace: 25 units/mo

Total Spaces 317

PRODUCT PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Walk Score®: 39 (Car-Dependent)

Spaces/Bed: 0.88

Primarily 60% local families, with the rest comprising of young professionals working at local hospital, airport, and

Market Audience: other south Atlanta employers.

New apartment community adjacent to Downtown Fayetteville and the price leader in Fayetteville. Offers an updated

Building Summary: finished and amenity package and the only community in the competitive set offering dens. Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Available Units

Percent Leased

Quoted Effective Rent Range

Avg. Rent

1B/1b 2B/2b 2B/2b/Den 3B/2b

74 112 9 15

35% 53% 4% 7%

0 1 0 0

100.0% 99.1% 100.0% 100.0%

$1,505 $1,825 $1,990 $2,190 $2,385 $2,385 $2,485 $2,485

$1,720 $2,098 $2,385 $2,485

SUMMARY:

210

100%

99.5%

$1,505 $2,485

$2,005

Unit Size Range 576 1,006 1,329 1,369

729 1,201 1,329 1,369

692 1,063 1,329 1,369

576 1,369

966

FINISHES AND AMENITIES

Ceiling Height and Finish: 9'-10' ceilings Lighting and Fixtures: Track in kitchen, pendants over island Flooring: Vinyl HW in kitchen, bath and living room. Carpet in bedroom. Cabinets and Hardware: 42" shaker with vertical pulls Countertops: Two packages, cloud white granite or harbor white granite Appliance Package: Whirlpool stainless steel with smooth top range Laundry and Bath Detail: Full sized, washer/dryer, tub/shower combo, standing showers in select units Windows and Balconies: Standard punch windows, balconies in select units Additional Features: USB outlets Community Features Salt water pool, grilling stations, fire pit, car detailing station, conference room, tenant lounge, pet and Amenities: park, fitness center

Source: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar

3/18/2022

Weighted Avg. Size

Current Conc. None

Effective $/SF Range Avg. $/SF $2.50 $2.61 $1.82 $1.98 $1.79 $1.79 $1.82 $1.82

$2.49 $1.97 $1.79 $1.82

$1.79 $2.61

$2.08

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 69 Competitive Rental Community - Equinox at Knight (100 Knight Way) OVERVIEW

Developer Name N/A

App. + Admin. Fee: $100/app + $300/admin

Owner Name Boardwalk Wealth

Pet Fees: $400 fee + $45/mo

Property Manager Name Alexander Properties - Equinox at Knight Year Built 1988

Parking Fees: -

Number Of Stories 3

Parking Type: Surface

Lease Up Pace: N/A

Total Spaces 388

SUMMARY

Walk Score®: 13 (Car-Dependent)

PRODUCT PROGRAM

Other Fees: -

Spaces/Bed: 1.04

Roughly equal percentages of healthcare workers, air-line employees, studio workers, and locals. There is a 50/50

Market Audience: split in age demographics

An old class A apartment community east of Downtown Fayetteville. Currently, the only community in the competitive

Building Summary: set offering dens, sunrooms, and patios. Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Available Units

Percent Leased

Quoted Effective Rent Range

Avg. Rent

1B/1b 2B/1b 2B/b/D 2B/2b 3B/2b

54 30 40 30 40

28% 15% 21% 15% 21%

3 0 2 2 1

94.4% 100.0% 95.0% 93.3% 98%

$1,438 $1,468 $1,513 $1,513 $1,653 $1,653 $1,748 $1,748 $1,798 $1,863

$1,455 $1,513 $1,653 $1,748 $1,831

SUMMARY:

194

100%

95.9%

$1,438 $1,863

$1,627

Unit Size Range 711 932 1,027 1,128 1,208

FINISHES AND AMENITIES

Ceiling Height and Finish: 9'-10' ceilings Lighting and Fixtures: Fluorescent light in kitchen, flush lighting in living area, no ceiling fans in bedrooms Flooring: Vinyl HW in kitchen, bath and living room. Carpet in bedroom. Cabinets and Hardware: 42" shaker with SS knobs, subway tile backsplash Countertops: Granite throughout Appliance Package: Standard black appliances with gas range Laundry and Bath Detail: Community washer/dryer, standards tub/shower combo Windows and Balconies: Standard punch windows, balconies in select units Additional Features: Fire places in every unit, walk-in closets, sunrooms/patios available in select units Community Features Swimming pool, Playground, fitness center, sport/activities court, and tennis courts and Amenities:

Source: Noell Consulting Group, CoStar

3/18/2022

Weighted Avg. Size

786 932 1,027 1,128 1,285

753 932 1,027 1,128 1,247

711 1,285

997

Current Conc.

None

Effective $/SF Range Avg. $/SF $1.87 $2.02 $1.62 $1.62 $1.61 $1.61 $1.55 $1.55 $1.45 $1.49

$1.93 $1.62 $1.61 $1.55 $1.47

$1.45 $2.02

$1.63

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 70 Competitive 55+ Community - Garden Court: Park (Garden Ct., Courtyard Lane, Arbor Way, Wilbanks Drive) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: Lennar Homes

Construction began in Q1 2021 with presales beginning in

Sales Pace: February 2021. So far 63 have been built with 66 remaining.

Delivery: Q1 2021

This is Phase 1 of 5 planned phases.

Presale: February 23 2021 Type: Master on main 55+ community design Construction: Cement Siding, Stick Built

Features & Clube House and Pool Amenities:

Parking Type: 2 car garages per unit Spaces/Ratio: 2 car garages per unit

WalkScore®: (22) Car-Dependent

HOA Fees: $114/mon

PRODUCT PROGRAM Unit Type

Unit Count

2B/2b

Unit Mix

There are three designs with floor plans from 2B's to 3B's. Data is from recent sales

3B/2b

SUMMARY:

Recently Sold (2020+)

Actively Selling

Base Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

Average Size

Effective PSF

Avg. $/SF

$376,900 $390,900

$384,883

1,817 2,104

1,968

$186 $207

$196

$401,900 $446,395

$419,708

2,084 2,759

2,585

$162 $193

$162

$376,900 $390,900

$383,900

1,817 2,759

2,288

$162 $207

$168

Appliances and Tech

Windows and Balconies

129

UNIT FINISHES Ceiling Height and Finish

Lighting

9'-10’ Ceilings with crown molding

Recessed can lighting, lighted fans in living and bedrooms, chandilers in kitchen, track lighting in bathroom

Flooring

modern 42" shaker cabinets in all with Standard punch SS gas cooktop with seperated windows, some with LVT in living rooms, tile in brushed nickel pulls, granite/marble double oven, and refrigerators with back yards, others only bath, carpet in bedrooms throughout, farmless walk in showers, water/ice dispenser modern tile in bath/shower have a front yard.

MARKET AUDIENCE Mix of empty nesters, retirees, and families. The community was designed for 55+ community but accepts everyone no matter the age. 75% are over 55( 60% single 40% couples) with the rest being a mix of families and other audience demographics. According to the listing agent, all tenants are locals who are moving due to downsizing and/or wanting to be close to good schools . SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

Countertops, Cabinets and Bath Detail

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

None

$5,000 towards closing If the future owners use their insurance agent.

SUMMARY Quiet neighborhood close to Downtown Fayetteville. Typical product for 55+ communities (master on main with limited two story homes).

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS Exhibit 71 Competitive 55+ Community - Garden Court: Park (Garden Ct., Courtyard Lane, Arbor Way, Wilbanks Drive) COMMUNITY OVERVIEW

SALES PACE

Developer: N/A

Construction began in 1990 and ended in 1992. Recent sales

Sales Pace: have the property reselling at around 11 units per year, or

Delivery: Q1 1992

almost 1 unit a month.

Presale: Began selling in 1990 Type: 112 duplexes Construction: Cement Siding

Features & None Amenities:

Parking Type: 1 car garages per unit Spaces/Ratio: 1 car garages per unit

WalkScore®: (22) Car-Dependent

HOA Fees: N/A

PRODUCT PROGRAM Unit Type

Unit Count

Unit Mix

Recently Sold (2020+)

Actively Selling

Closing Price Range

Avg. Price

Unit Size Range

Average Size

Effective PSF

Avg. $/SF

2B/2b

112

100%

$134,000 $242,000

$185,682

1,226 1,450

1,285

$109 $167

$145

SUMMARY:

112

$134,000 $242,000

$188,000

1,226 1,450

1,338

$109 $167

$141

Appliances and Tech

Windows and Balconies

Typical Upgrades

Financing and Incentives

lower level houses with black appliances where the high priced ones have SS appliances and refrigerators with French doors,, fire places in all units

Standard punch windows, some with fenced in back yards, others only have a front yard.

None

Typically lower income

UNIT FINISHES Ceiling Height and Finish

Lighting

Flooring

Countertops, Cabinets and Bath Detail

10’ Ceilings

Recessed can lighting, lighted fans, chandeliers

Carpet/LVT in living rooms, LVT's in bath, carpet/LVT in bedrooms

Standard 42" shaker cabinets in all, laminate in lower priced houses granite in higher priced ones

MARKET AUDIENCE Mix of empty nesters, retirees, 55+. Typical of retirees who don’t have a lot of money and don't want to deal with the hassle of having a lot of land which is typical of most SFD's in the Fayetteville area. SOURCE: Noell Consulting Group

3/18/2022

SUMMARY Quiet neighborhood close to Downtown Fayetteville. Typical product for 55+ communities that are of lower economic status.

Fayetteville - Hwy 85 Corridor Market Analysis

DETACHED FOR-SALE DEMAND IN COUNT Y • This data shows the historic and future demand potential for single-family detached product in the County • Strong job growth projections in the Metro for 2022 and 2023 will continue to drive strong demand • The County’s capture of the Metro has been trending up thanks to new developments such as Trilith increasing awareness and inventory New Single Family Detached Home Sales Region

2005-2020 Avg. Annual Sales

2015-2020 Avg. Annual Sales

2021-2025 Projected Avg. Annual Sales

Atlanta Metro

18,021

19,800

16,678

Fayette County Share (%)

1.7%

2.2%

2.7%

Fayette County

314

362

421

ATTACHED FOR-SALE DEMAND IN COUNT Y • This data shows the historic and future demand potential for single-family attached product for the County • Metro wide the percentage of attached new home sales of all new sales has been increasing, primarily as a means of offering greater affordability, but also as growing demographic segments chose more maintenance-free living such as first-time home buyers and Empty Nester downsizers • While attached product has been rare in the County historically, Trilith and increased lifestyle offerings in Downtown Fayetteville bring new opportunities for buyers to consider the product and we therefore believe it will see increased demand going forward, ultimately matching the metro average of 20-22% of all new home sales being attached. In Fayette County these will likely all be fee-simple townhomes. New Single Family Attached Home Sales Region

2005-2020 Avg. Annual Sales

2015-2020 Avg. Annual Sales

2021-2025 Projected Avg. Annual Sales

Atlanta Metro

3,635

3,189

3,888

Fayette County Share (%)

0.1%

0.2%

1.95%

Fayette County

MULTIFAMILY RENTAL RESIDENTIAL DEMAND • Coweta and Fayette County have seen an increase share of Class A multifamily absorption since 2011 • Absorption in Fayette County has largely been limited by lack of new supply • Increasing lifestyle environments in Newnan, Trilith, and potential Downtown Fayetteville will increase the market’s capture moving forward • NCG’s forecasted demand of 276 units annually from 2021-2025 allows for absorption of the planned deals in the pipeline and up to an additional 250-300 units within the County by 2025 Net New Multifamily Absorption Region

2011-2020 Avg. Annual Apt Abs.

2015-2020 Avg. Annual Apt. Abs.

2021-2025 Projected Avg. Annual Apt. Abs.

Atlanta Metro

7,187 units

9,349 units

12,561 units

Coweta & Fayette County Share

2.0%

2.5%

3.9%

Coweta & Fayette County

143 units

233 units

494 units

Fayette County Share

25.4%

28.7%

55.9%

Fayette County

36 units

67 units

276 units

Sources: CoStar, NCG

RETAIL DEMAND IN COUNT Y • Nationally, and throughout the Atlanta metro, retail growth has been dwindling as more retail expenditures shift to online sales. That said, net absorption is still seen in areas of increasing population density and as newer retail concepts – primarily in food and beverage and professional services are introduced • With retail in Fayette’s core serving a larger market area than just the county, and strong new household growth in those areas, we forecast the county capture to steadily increase in the coming years

Net New Retail Absorption Region

2002-2011 Avg. Annual Retail Abs.

2012-2020 Avg. Annual Retail Abs.

2021-2025 Projected Avg. Annual Retail Abs.

Atlanta Metro

5.6 Million SF

2.65 Million SF

1.9 Million SF

Fayette County Capture

3.1%

2.5%

3.87%

Fayette County Absorption

174,000 SF

67,000 SF

73,500 SF

OFFICE DEMAND IN COUNT Y • The local office market has been stagnant in recent years with 3 years showing negative absorption since 2016 • However, there has been limited new product added to attract prospective users to the market • NCG estimates the County will absorb close to 62,000 SF of Class A office space annually, Trilith likely to get first several years given existing space • Given annual absorption levels office product should be provided in the 5,000 - 20,000 SF range, ideally in high value areas such as proximity to retail, parks / trails, with high visibility

Net New Office Absorption Region

2002-2011 Avg. Annual Office Abs.

2012-2020 Avg. Annual Office Abs.

2021-2025 Projected Avg. Annual Office Abs.

Atlanta Metro

2,150,476 SF

2,351,877 SF

1,033,785 SF

Fayette County Capture

3.9%

1.7%

5.9%

Fayette County Absorption

83,014 SF

40,451 SF

61,362 SF

CORRIDOR CAPTURE AND FORECASTED DEMAND  Since 2015, approximately 1 million SF of new commercial and multifamily space has been added to the Fayette County market  Of this, 60,000 SF was within the Highway 85 north corridor, or a 6% capture.  With Peachtree City limiting development, and Trilith and the Fayetteville LCI increasing market perception/awareness of the Fayetteville market, we believe this capture can grow up to a 10-20% range. Land Use

2021-2025 Annual Forecasted County Demand

Est. Highway 85 Corridor Capture

2021-2025 Annual Forecasted Highway 85 Demand

Detached For-Sale

421

Attached For-Sale

20%

Multifamily

276

15%

Retail

73,500 SF

15%

11,025 SF

Office

61,362 SF

10%

6,136

DEMAND REALIZATION IN THE CORRIDOR  While demand exists, it is unlikely detached (SFD) homes will be built in the corridor given the lack of remaining greenfield sites. If realized this would be in the form of small lot (35’-55’) product.  While attached/TH demand is limited in the corridor today, we believe pent-up years of demand from 2021-2023 will combine to sell out the new units coming online at Satterfield, then new demand will be available for approximately 30 additional units in 2024 -2025.  Multifamily demand will likely come in the form of one new 200 +/- unit community within the 20212025 time frame.  Most retail demand will continue to be small outparcels and back filling existing tenants that may close – more on this in a few slides.  Office demand is limited, but potential for adaptive reuse of older retail centers in the corridor. Likely to be one in the 30-40,000 SF range by 2025.

Land Use

2021-2025 Annual Forecasted Highway 85 Demand

Detached For-Sale

Attached For-Sale

Multifamily

Retail

11,025 SF

Office

6,136

OVERVIEW OF HWY 85 CORRIDOR  3.8 Million SF of commercial space ▪ 3.5 M retail ▪ 266k office ▪ 67.5k industrial/flex ▪ 0 MF

 4,994 jobs ▪ 83% pay below $40k ▪ 99% commute in

RETAIL MARKET OVERVIEW

(150,000) (200,000)

8,000

16,680 106,918

11,438 187,780

4.0%

10.0% 8.0%

(10,193)

5.2%

8,964 2,139

0 123,430

12,320 98,547

6.5%

(120,530)

(100,000)

7.8%

8.5%

(63,258)

(50,000)

12,713 33,752

50,000

7.8%

(122,545)

8.6%

12.0%

9.7%

150,000

9.9%

(112,575)

10.9%

3,338 55,445

200,000 100,000

14.0%

12.4%12.7%

0 24,077

 Since 2008, approx. 73k SF added – mostly free standing outparcels  Net absorption has gone up and down, losing big tenants and then taking 1-2 years to fill  Total net absorption since 2008 only 49,000 SF  Vacancy is currently low, but rate growth has been flat for over a decade

250,000

▪ 79% in 15 shopping centers of 20k SF+ ▪ Over 40% located in Fayette Pavilion alone

Local Retail Activity: 2008-2021 YTD - Class A/B Properties

(153,701)

 3.5 Million SF

4.6%

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Deliveries SF Net Absorption SF Total Vacant Percent % Total YTD

6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0%

REGIONAL DRAWING TRADE AREA  Majority of patrons come from within 15-miles  Most from Fayette County, but also Fairburn, Union City, Senoia

RETAIL SALES LEAKAGE  Demand potential is high for many store categories, however several are likely less desirable for the corridor: ▪ Motor vehicle and parts dealers ▪ Gasoline stations

 Strongest acceptable opportunities are for: ▪ Full-service restaurants ▪ Health and personal care ▪ General merchandise ▪ These uses tend to be in small boxes on out parcels, or in the case of general merchandise – large anchor boxes (Target, Sam’s Club, Costco, etc.) ▪ Most out parcels opportunities are gone, and large anchor space does not exist without redevelopment

EXISTING RETAIL CENTERS  We examined the 15 shopping centers along the corridor are rated them for redevelopment potential  Rating was based on: ▪ Age ▪ % leased ▪ Current rental rates ▪ Tenant strength

 A; Strong fundamentals, low redev. opportunity  B; Moderate fundamentals, redev. 5-10 years  C; Poor fundamentals, high redev. opportunity

REDEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS  A properties are in the $150+/SF value and result in a land value to high for redevelopment  B properties are +/$100/SF in value and result in a land value that would require high density development  C properties are less than $100/SF in value and result in a land value under $750k/acre

REDEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS - RESIDENTIAL  Land values of existing centers along the corridors, even C grade, will not make residential redevelopment feasible. Future residential additions will largely need to be on remaining greenfield sites.

REDEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS - COMMERCIAL  Current office lease rates in the greater Fayette market will make new construction speculative office space difficult unless part of a larger mixeduse development.  Opportunities do exist to adaptively reuse older retail spaces into creative office and bring to market at lower lease rates that will be accepted. 16

REDEVELOPMENT ECONOMICS - MULTIFAMILY  Multifamily development is often the primary driver for redevelopment given its strong market demand, and ability to pay higher land prices with increased density. While the current market will not support structured parking (unless subsidized), both Garden-Urban and 3-4 story garden (w/elev) product will justify redevelopment of the B and C grade centers in the corridor.

INFILL OPPORTUNITIES  In addition to the full scale redevelopment opportunities examined, we believe there are also opportunities for infill along the corridor.  The addition of multifamily on underutilized portions of existing centers, can help to enhance them

*Heat map of patron activity at Fayette Pavilion from cell phone use

ADAPTIVE REUSE OPPORTUNITIES  The low values associated with the Grade B and C properties make them prime for adaptive reuse if their land area is too small for full redevelopment.  Acquisition of these properties for $100/SF or less allows them to support adaptive reuse budgets of $175-200/SF, and still hit rent levels supported in the market of $20-25/SF.

DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Promote full redevelopment of C grade shopping centers on large land parcels (5 acres+) close to Downtown; Fayette Place (Davis Development?), Fayetteville 85 Center/Fayetteville Center North. Leverage the in-place TAD to make more attractive to developers. 2. Aid adaptive reuse on C grade shopping centers on small land parcels (under 5 acres) close to Downtown; Glynn Hood Plaza. Leverage the in-place TAD to make more attractive to developers. 3. Facilitate select infill multifamily development opportunities where it will strengthen retail support; Fayette Pavilion, Banks Crossing (JC Penny) 4. Continue to allow development of retail outparcels and/or infill residential where feasible

3 4 2 1

2022 DOWNTOWN VISIONING STUDY

VISION OF FAYETTEVILLE REPORT

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia on-site April 28-30, 2022 INTENT Following up on the work of Moving Fayetteville Forward and the Livable Cities Initiative, a crossdisciplinary team conducted a design vision workshop with city officials. The goal was to create inspiring visions for key streets and critical city parcels of downtown Fayetteville and to outline a strategy for implementation.

SCHEDULE RECAP On the first day, the team created preliminary designs for improvements to the transportation network and concept plats for priority parcels. The second day was focused on detailed study of the critical parcels and creating an outline regulatory framework to review and permit infill projects within the study area. On the final day, the team refined concepts according to feedback and revised concepts for a final round of presentation and feedback.

Studio pinup. At the end of each day, the team hosted an open feedback session. Suggestions and critiques were immediately incorporated into the next day’s work.

PRINCIPAL FINDING In general, the team finds development prospects in the city are very strong based on the fundamentals. Residential demand is high as indicated in prior reports and reflected by active permits and inquiries. If the city can slow the traffic and codify a system supporting appropriate infill, the vibrant walkable vision for Downtown Fayetteville will become an inspiring reality.

NEXT STEPS

Short listing building types. At the feedback sessions, community members helped the team narrow down the list of candidate building types for a pre-approved building program.

1. Exploratory work plan re: GDOT conversation a. Overview call w/ referred traffic engineer b. Execute scope to make a schematic case to GDOT. c. Goal is to get GDOT to agree to receive an application. Then engage a detailed follow-on scope, including legal counsel. 2. Program outline for pattern zone a. Overview call: components, optional integrations, benchmark pricing b. Concept program proposal is focused on pocket neighborhoods and main street buildings. 3. Adopt the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and Downtown Mixed-Use zone (DMU). a. Set the expectation for regular amendment packages. Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 1 of 20

IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT WITH GDOT. Downtown Fayetteville is currently bisected in each cardinal direction by roadways under GDOT jurisdiction. These roads are designed to highway standards and prioritize traffic volume and traffic speed. In contrast, rights-of-way in active downtowns are designed to be streets that accommodate pedestrian movement at least as well as vehicular movement. Execution of a streetscape improvement plan will require a negotiated agreement–or even a transfer of jurisdiction–with GDOT. The team considers this recommendation mission critical to providing the type of living environment the citizens and city officials of Fayetteville want to enjoy and share with future generations. Without significant streetscape changes, Downtown Fayetteville’s full potential will remain suppressed.

PARKING The team recommends the city maximize the use of existing parking and postpone the construction of a parking deck; however the team also identified future sites for planning purposes. Sufficient downtown parking is available but underutilized due to a lack of connecting pedestrian infrastructure such as safe and comfortable sidewalks and adequate lighting. The entire downtown area, including city center and the square, is within a 3 minute walk of existing surface parking lots. The city can address present and future parking needs through shared use agreements with private parking lot owners and construction of parking on streets within existing right-of-way.

PRECISION CODE AMENDMENTS Certain sections of the new UDO and DMU still need to be amended. The team observed that the use unit tables and ADU and cottage court codes may be improved with downtown-focused revisions.

PATTERN ZONE / PRE-APPROVED BUILDING PROGRAM The proposed UDO and DMU is a substantial step forward and should be adopted as soon as possible. To maximize its impact, combining the DMU with a pre-approved building program would help guide the local market to build appropriate infill development in the right places.

PROACTIVE REPLATS In the case of large tracts, the team recommends the city replat these parcels for small-scale projects in a proactive manner. Replatting these parcels for traditional lot sizes and arrangements will open a large market of buyers and developers that is currently unaddressed.

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 2 of 20

STREET IMPROVEMENTS CONVERSION TO 2-WAY TRAFFIC: LANIER AVE AND STONEWALL AVE Downtown Fayetteville is presently dominated by high-speed automobile traffic. Conversion of 1-way streets to 2-way traffic has been demonstrated to dramatically improve business revenues and desirability of residences by significantly reducing operating speeds (and therefore road noise) and increasing accessibility by allowing the site to be conveniently accessed from either direction.

LANE REDUCTION AKA ROAD DIET The team recommends reducing the number of lanes on Glynn St between Grady Ave and Lanier Ave from four travel lanes to two travel lanes with planted medians and left turn pockets or turn lanes. This creates more room for safe pedestrian and cycling facilities and for parking. This configuration can accommodate existing traffic counts if it includes network improvements. 1. Segment A: Between Grady and Stonewall, include a center turn lane. 2. Segment B: Between Stonewall and Lanier, remove the center turn lane in favor of angled parking on both sides of the street. 3. Segment C: North of Lanier, keep four travel lanes but install a tree-lined median in the center turn lane. 4. Major opportunity for network improvement: Roundabout at Grady Ave and Glynn St. a. Segment A starts at this roundabout. It’s a signal to drivers they are entering downtown. b. Lee Street links into the new roundabout. This will help with development on the east and southeast sides of the downtown and reduce pressure on Glynn. c. A vehicular connection on Williamsburg Way to Jeff Davis should be considered a high priority connection.

NEGOTIATING WITH GDOT 1. Engage a traffic engineer with experience in roundabout design, lane reductions, and 2-way conversions. 2. Prepare for a protracted negotiation as you would with any state agency. Persistence is key. 3. Broach conversations about transferring jurisdiction of the street or changing its designation from a principal highway to a business route. 4. Reference the ITE Context-sensitive Highway Design manual and the NACTO Street Design Guide.

GENERAL STREET IMPROVEMENTS The team recommends the city create an accelerated work plan for the repair and widening of existing sidewalks and installation of new sidewalks, on-street parking, lighting, and street trees, prioritizing and scheduling work on each street. Most downtown streets are of sufficient width to install parallel parking on the existing paved section without reductions in roadway capacity. 1. On some streets, a protected cycling facility may be more appropriate than parallel parking. The team observed the LCI trails map will be complemented by on-street linkages. 2. Returning Stonewall and Lanier to two way operation will require adjustments to traffic signals throughout the downtown network. 3. When feasible, construct raised intersections on Stonewall and Lanier at the square and in other appropriate locations.

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 3 of 20

Raised Intersection Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 4 of 20

CONCEPT: ROUNDABOUT LOCATIONS

Blue outline represent 3 minute walking areas from existing surface parking lots.

Charrette Report — Page 5 of 20

CONCEPT PARKING PLAN

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Postpone the construction of a parking deck indefinitely. The entire downtown has coverage via existing lots.

3. Negotiate shared use and management agreements with area churches who own large parking lots in downtown

2. Link walkability and lighting improvements with effective use of existing parking capacity.

4. Construct on-street parallel parking on most streets. (designated in pink)

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Existing street spaces New street spaces Existing parking lots

NOTES 1. Stonewall has one fewer lane than Lanier, but the principle is the same.

Charrette Report — Page 6 of 20 Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

CONCEPT STREET SECTIONS: LANIER AVENUE AND STONEWALL AVENUE

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 7 of 20

CONCEPT STREET SECTIONS: GLYNN STREET

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 8 of 20

CONCEPT STREET SECTIONS: GLYNN STREET

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 9 of 20

CONCEPT STREET SECTIONS: GLYNN STREET

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Prioritize adaptive reuse of the existing building. The second floor can undergo a residential conversion. Furthermore, the building’s location and depth allows for the interior to be divided into leasehold units and for the back of the building to become a second front. 2. Construct modest apartment buildings on the north side of the existing parking lot as liner buildings.

3. Replace the existing, underused parks with apartment and mixeduse buildings in a courtyard format. This maintains the open space concept while providing living space and the associated tax revenue. 4. This model maintains a substantial surface parking lot in the middle of the property. This parking lot could be the site of a parking structure in the future.

Charrette Report — Page 10 of 20

VIEW

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING AND LAND

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 11 of 20

VIEW OF NEW CORNER NEXT TO SQUARE

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Create a new pedestrian street on the parcel in front of city hall framed by substantial, 3-story mixed-use walkup buildings. 2. Retain existing historic houses fronting Stonewall east of city hall and when the timing is right for infill, companion walkup apartment buildings facing Lanier could be constructed.

3. Encourage the renovation of the Masonic Lodge and apartment buildings. Instead of demolishing these assets, pair complementary new construction with renovation and stormwater improvements. Note: The conversion to 2-way traffic on Stonewall and Lanier is critical to these recommendations.

Charrette Report — Page 12 of 20

VIEW

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

PARCELS WITH DOUBLE FRONTAGE ON STONEWALL AND LANIER

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 13 of 20

VIEW: NEW PEDESTRIAN STREET FRAMING VIEW OF CITY HALL

Charrette Report — Page 14 of 20

SITE ON GRADY AVE

Conservation plan. This uses the same techniques as the development plan but preserves 40% of the total space for conservation.

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Pre-approve the plan sets with the best market fit: Detached and attached single-units, convertible garages and guest suites, 2- and 3- story townhouses, ADU’s with carriage variants, apartment houses.

2. Replat and prescribe courtyard and pocket neighborhood formats in critical locations. 3. Permit most building types by right, including walkup buildings Center connection.

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Development-oriented plan. Using pocket neighborhoods and a smart grid system of new streets and alleys, this plan maximizes the buildable area.

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 15 of 20

PLAN: POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD

VIEW

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 16 of 20

VIEW: POCKET NEIGHBORHOOD

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 17 of 20

PLAN: ENTRY COURT TO GRADY AVE PARCEL

VIEW

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 18 of 20

VIEW: ENTRY COURT TO GRADY AVE PARCEL

Charrette Report — Page 19 of 20

PARCELS NORTH OF LANIER

1. Pursue coordinated replats and likely street and alley utility layouts with the present property owners so that this land is infill-ready when the owners are ready to execute a new transaction. 2. Plat the project such at one parcel can be developed at a time with subsequent developers completing the frontages on new streets. 3. Focused commercial use and apartment houses may be appropriate adjacent to Lanier Ave, but a majority of the site should be developed with compact single-family building types.

4. Use the northwest corner as a district stormwater facility. 5. The use of pre-approved plans would work well for these parcels, simplifying the permitting process and encouraging the development of city approved plans to create the desired aesthetic for this new neighborhood. 6. Consider companion construction to the west on the Hampton Inn site and to the North on the corner of the school site.

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS

PATTERN ZONE / PRE-APPROVED BUILDING PROGRAM HOW IT WORKS A pattern zone is an overlay code that supplements the underlying code by pre-approving specific buildings for construction on specific parcel. The city licenses architectural assets for construction by applicants and associates them with an expedited review process and supplemental criteria for site design and development. Using the plans is voluntary; applicants can still propose custom architecture via conventional review procedures. The result is a program that dramatically reduces

www.fayettevillear-patternzone.com

Explore

Find a Contractor

Pattern Zone

Find a Lender

About

Contact

My Account

Pre-Approved Buildings for your Property

Pre-Approved for 404 S. College Ave.

404 S. College Ave.

Sears Bungalow Single Family 1800 Sq. Ft. 3 beds 2 Bath

Cab Forward Single Family 1800 Sq. Ft. 3 beds 2 Bath

Garage Cottage Accessory Dwelling Unit 1200 Sq. Ft. 2 beds 1 Bath

Flex House 1 Single or Two Family 1800 Sq. Ft. 3 beds 2 Bath

Flex House 2 Single or Two Family 1800 Sq. Ft. 3 beds 2 Bath

Apartment House Four Family 1200 Sq. Ft. 2 beds 1 Bath

Walkup Apartment

Garden Cottage 1

Garden Cottage 2

Zoning Details

Neighborhood Conservation Zoning (NC) Pre-Approved Building Types for this Property • Single Family (all types) • Accessory Dwelling Unit (all types) • Flex House • Live Work • Duplex (all types)

• Apartment House (all types) • Walkup Apartment (two story)

Pre-Approval Map

PATTERN ZONING | MBL PLANNING

IMPLEMENTATION PHASES Program and policy design. Short list building types, define applicable areas, outline review processes. Technical implementation. Short list and select specific buildings, site diagrams, supplemental development criteria, policy and process construction.

Pre-approved building program. Multiple buildings are pre-approved for most parcels to ensure variety.

www.fayettevillear-patternzone.com

Explore

Find a Contractor

Pattern Zone

Find a Lender

About

Contact

My Account

Pre-Approved Buildings for your Property

your project is here

Program launch. Data onboarding, software demonstrations, process testing, launch event, affirmative marketing workplan.

Enter an Address in Fayetteville AR

1 2 3 find your property

CANDIDATE BUILDING TYPES

Search a Map

pick a building

Search Buildings

get a permit

Contact a Planner

• Cottages w/ carriage variants. PATTERN ZONING | MBL PLANNING

• Guest suites / garage. • Detached fee simple, small and modest size.

Program platform. An online platform makes accessing and administering the program straightforward.

• Attached fee simple. • ADUs - attached and detached. • Duplexes. • Apartment houses (up to 4 units). • Residential and mixed-use walkups. • ACUs (Accessory Commercial Units). • Carriage buildings.

CANDIDATE SITE FORMATS • Fee-simple, primary dwelling (conventional). • Fee-simple courts, detached and attached. • Rear yard accessory structures. time-to-market in addition to direct savings.

It’s about the pattern. From a single building type four variations were ultimately pre-approved in Bryan, TX. These buildings are also pre-approved for construction in multiple site formats: as a primary dwelling, accessory unit, or pocket neighborhood. Images by MBL Planning, used with permission.

Prepared for Fayetteville, Georgia

Charrette Report — Page 20 of 20

CONTRIBUTORS R John Anderson, Anderson | Kim Architecture & Urban Design Hannah Carroll, Smith Planning Group Dennis Decker, b + c Studio Dan Osborne, MakeUP Design Operation Matthew Petty, The Infill Group Bob Smith, Smith Planning Group Randy Vinson, Live/Work Building Company

APPENDIX Credentials

2021 LCI STUDY

Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study for Downtown Fayetteville, Georgia September 2021

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Client

Denise Brookins | Director, Planning and Zoning David Rast | Director, Community Development

Mollie Bogle | Atlanta Regional Commission

Core Team Ray Gibson | City Manager Brian Wismer | Director, Economic Development Carl Martin | Local Property Owner

Project Lead Sheba Ross | Project Director Shelby Morris | Project Manager Doug Childers | Urban Planning Leader Marwah Garib | Urban Designer

Project Consultants Hayley Todd | Existing Conditions and Zoning Doug McClure | Landscape Architecture Russell Harrington | Landscape Architecture

Vickie Turner | Historian/Local Artist/Mainstreet

Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study for

David Burnett | Local Business Owner Matt Teague | Local Developer /Walton

Danny England | Existing Conditions and Character Analysis

Sarah Murphy | Local Resident/Planning Commission Chair

Downtown Fayetteville, Georgia September 2021

Bonita Askew Berry | Local Property/Sugar Hill Hazel Askew| Historian/Local Resident/Sugar Hill

Darrell Howard | Mobility Neil Desai | Zoning

Sonja Gibson | Local Resident/Villages/Business Owner Alfred Lee Dingler | Local Resident/Jeff Davis/ Business Owner

David Laube | Economic Development and Market Study Jordan Rowe | Economic Development and Market Study

Rev. Velma Grant | Pastor/Sugar Hill Rev. Allyson Lawrence | Fayetteville First United Methodist Katie Pace | Southern Conservation Trust

Caroline Evans | Community Engagement Amanda Hutton | Community Engagement

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

02 Analysis

01 Overview

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

03 Engagement

06 Implementation

04 Vision

05 Recommendations

200

104

Overview

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

01.1

Overview The LCI study is implementation-focused and hence features a multi-disciplinary team that will integrate urban planning & design, existing conditions, community engagement, market analysis, transportation, and zoning, in a collective vision for the Downtown Fayetteville study area. Key questions were asked from the perspective of these disciplines to kick-off the project and were accounted for in the final implementation matrix.

Project Profile

Process for the study: Investigate 01

Explore 2a

Existing Conditions Recommend 2b

housing variety

The Atlanta Regional Commission’s Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) is a grant program that incentivizes local jurisdictions to re-envision their communities as vibrant, walkable places that offer increased mobility options, encourage healthy lifestyles and provide improved access to jobs and services. The study area encompasses about 900 acres and addresses the Main Street area (sometimes referred to as the historic district) and includes downtown, and areas to Lafayette Avenue to the west, Gwinnett Street to the east, Georgia Avenue and North Jeff Davis Drive to the north and Grady Avenue and just north of Williamsburg Way to the south.

destination

A four-step process was established to acknowledge the work done through previous efforts and to ground the project by learning from precedents, prioritizing goals, developing actionable recommendations and documenting with clarity for an achievable outcome. The process hinged on community engagement with the goal to achieve sustainable outcomes using equitable decision-making methods, and deepen relationships and trust between government organizations, design teams and communities.

parks and recreation

Multi-use trails

placemaking parking

improved intersections

bike network

emphasize historic character

unified streetscape

How can we use current conditions to lead us to future possibilities?

VA L I D AT E

CONSTRAINTS

FRAMEWORK

CONNECTIVITY

PREVIOUS EFFORTS

ENVIRONMENTAL AND PHYSICAL

ZONING AND LAND USE

STREETS AND MOBILITY

MIX OF USES

C H A R ACT E R

O P E N S PAC E

SY N T H E S I S

MARKET STUDIES

ARCHITECTURAL VOCABULARY

PUBLIC PARKS AND ASSETS

INFERENCE

Community Engagement What involvement and engagement opportunities work well in Fayetteville?

offices

clear signage Prioritize walkability enhance pedestrian experience

Document 2c

GUIDE

I M AG I N E

ROA D M A P

ADVERTISE

PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CORE TEAMS

COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM

INPUT STRATEGY

INFORMATION EXCHANGE

LISTEN

I N T E R ACT

F E E D BAC K

COMMUNITY MEETINGS

CHARRETTE

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 9

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Market Analysis

Design Guidelines

How can we ensure that our plans are grounded in market and financial reality?

What are the components for a holistic solution that harmonizes the built environment and the public realm?

ASSESS

EXAMINE

FORECAST

DEMOGRAPHICS

LAND USE PERFORMANCE

SUPPLY AND DEMAND

I M PAC T

S T R AT E G Y

ZONING AND GUIDELINES

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

PRECEDENTS

NEIGHBORHOODS

IDENTITY

BENCHMARK ANALYSIS

CHARACTER

PLACEMAKING

G AT E WAY S

PEOPLE-FIRST

CLARITY

PORTALS

PUBLIC REALM

STREETSCAPE

E VA L U AT E

C O L L A B O R AT I O N

FRAMEWORK

MULTIPLE SCHEMES

PLAN DEVELOPMENT

STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES

Streets and Mobility

Zoning

How can we achieve balance between mobility and placemaking?

What method(s) will lead to the type of development and overall place envisioned for the Main Street District?

OPTIONS

M U LT I - M O D A L

E Q U I TA B L E

REFUGE

MOBILITY

CONNECTIVITY

ACCESSIBILITY

SAFETY

VEHICLES

IDENTITY

S T R AT E G Y

PARKING

PLACEMAKING

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

FRAMEWORK

USE BASED

CHARACTER BASED

TRANSECT BASED

FRAMEWORK

FORM BASED: TRANSECT

FORM BASED: FRONTAGE

FORM BASED: BUILDING TYPE

FRAMEWORK

AT T R I B U T E S

INFORM

OVERLAY

HISTORIC DESIGNATIONS AND DISTRICTS

DESIGN GUIDELINES

Analysis

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

02.1 Existing Conditions

STUDY AREA OVERVIEW

Previous Plan Comparative Narrative

N JEFF DAVIS ST

A background analysis was conducted to review relevant background information from previous and on-going plans and studies, planned infrastructure improvements, relevant regulatory documents, and existing conditions documentation of land use, physical design characteristics, transportation systems, environmental features, parks and open space systems, city needs, and historic resources. GIS based data was gathered and evaluated to understand demographics and health information.

W LANIER AVE

Analyzed Plans

E LANIER AVE STONEWALL AVE

•

2002 LCI Downtown Planning Study

•

2010 LCI Supplemental Study

•

2016 Market Study

•

2019 Paths Master Plan

GLYNN ST S

Recurring themes and goals amongst previous plans:

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Use code to enhance pedestrian experience

Unified streetscaping (improving aesthetics)

Permit variety of housing types in proximity to downtown core

Codify historic inspiration as a guide for new buildings

•

Emphasis on placemaking/Downtown as a destination

•

Specific marketing campaign for Downtown

Improve Aesthetics •

Parks, landscaping, trees

•

Emphasis on historic character

•

Unified signage standards referencing historic character

Acquire / Identify Parcels for Redevelopment •

Identify ownership

•

Focus on those located in proximity of Downtown core to create unified streetscape

Prioritize Walkability •

Comprehensive sidewalk network

•

Multi-use trails -- for improved connectivity with Fayetteville and Fayette County

•

A seat at the table for the Fayette County Plan

•

Enhance safety

Revitalize Downtown

0.25

0.50 Miles

•

Emphasize walkability in street grid and pedestrian scale

•

Improve zoning ordinance to permit a mixture of uses

Continuing Needs and Opportunities Moving Forward: •

Identify infill parcels and ownership for redevelopment opportunities

•

Create distinct character areas

•

Emphasis on parks and recreation

•

Facilitate better communication between public and city officials

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Context

Landmarks

Parks

Water Body

Schools

TRILITH STUDIOS

LAKE VICTOR

PIEDMONT FAYETTE HOSPITAL

WALKER LAKE FUN SPOT AMERICA THEME PARKS ATLANTA CITY OF LAFAYETTE LAKE

LAKE EDITH Y W H

S ILE 4M

LA NI ER

S MILE 3.75

ST S GLYNN

AV E

LAKE BENNETT FOWLER LAKE

E LA NIE R AV E

S ST NN GLY

+ D LV DB IEL F AY EM MI M JI

OLD FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE

R SD AVI FF D S JE

CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE BOUNDARY

ATLANTA

HARTSFIELD JACKSON ATLANTA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

FAYETTEVILLE

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Community Assets

Landmarks

Parks

Water Body

Schools

PYE LAKE SOUTHERN CRESCENT TECHNICAL COLLEGE

FAYETTEVILLE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

FAYETTE COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL

FAYETTE COUNTY ALTERNATIVE SCHOOL

SOUTHERN GROUND AMPHITHEATRE

LAFAYETTE ECENTER

FAYETTEVILLE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH

HOLLIDAY-DORSEY FIFE MUSEUM

FAYETTEVILLE FIRST UNITED METHODIST

WL AN IER

FAYETTEVILLE CITY CEMETERY

OLD TRAIN DEPOT

AV E

NEW FAYETTEVILLE CITY HALL AND PARK

G RA DY

AV E

EL AN IER

FAYETTE COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY SOUTHERN CONSERVATION TRUST

N YN GL

CHURCH STREET PARK

T SS VI A D FF JE

EDGEFIELD BAPTIST CHURCH

AV E

S ST

ISLAMIC COMMUNITY CENTER OF ATLANTA

STONEWALL AV E

FAYETTE COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING EXISTING FAYETTEVILLE CITY HALL

HERITAGE PARK

FAYETTE COUNTY PROBATE COURT

OLD FAYETTE COUNTY COURTHOUSE

KOREAN FAYETTEVILLE FIRST BAPTIST

WATER TOWER

FLIPPER CHAPEL AME

ATLANTA

HARTSFIELD JACKSON ATLANTA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT

MAY HARP PARK

FAYETTEVILLE

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Parks and Open Space Analysis

FO RR ES TA VE

HILLSDALE DR NG LY NN

Parks and open spaces serve all residents of the community, and provide opportunities for community members of various backgrounds to come together for a variety of purposes

JEFFERSON AVE

Introduction AVE HOOD

15 E UT IN M K AL W 5

The City of Fayetteville, GA has made many efforts over the previous years to improve their parks and open spaces, and intentionally plan how these parks and open spaces can compliment the surrounding built environment. This section will address the efforts that have been made in the past to improve parks and open spaces in the city, and what issues and opportunities still exist today.

E UT IN M

LAFAYETTE AVE

1 2

N JEFF DAVIS DR

E UT IN M

CHURCH ST

Parks and open spaces have been a critical aspect of successful community planning since the beginning of the 20th Century. Ever since the birth of community planning and city design, parks and open space have served as the “glue” that holds the city together by providing pedestrian and vehicle friendly linkages between important nodes in the city, promoting physical health and mental well being for the residents of the community, and providing space for public community events to take place which improves the quality of life for the community residents. Parks and open spaces serve all residents of the community, and provide opportunities for community members of various backgrounds to come together for a variety of purposes.

GA 54

R AV NIE E LA W LANIER AV W STONEWALL AVE

GA 54

2 1 | Church Street Park

2 | May Harp Park

FAYETTEVILLE CITY CEMETERY Y AD GR

E AV

JE FF

DA VI S

5 Minute Walk 10 Minute Walk

CONSERVATION TRUST

15 Minute Walk Existing Street

3 | Courthouse Square

4 | Heritage Park

S GL YNN ST

LVD IELD B MAYF JIMMIE

6 | New City Center Park

R YD DLE BRA

5 | Southern Ground Amphitheater

BEA UR EGA RD BLV D

Development Opportunity Existing Open Space

Proposed Park

Open Space

Water

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

The 2002 LCI study identified opportunities for public space, new development, and traffic calming mobility interventions that would be conducive to pedestrian connectivity, community events, and preservation of green space. 2002 LCI Study In 2002, the City of Fayetteville conducted an LCI Study, and as part of this study the community was engaged as to what issues and opportunities they saw the city facing. During this engagement, the community identified certain issues such as a need for a useful open space in Downtown Fayetteville, and the desire to provide a more pedestrian friendly environment downtown. Some of the opportunities the community identified include reduced traffic congestion, and increased facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, as well as added public open spaces and green spaces able to host cultural events. At the time of this study, only 3% of the total city acreage was dedicated to parks and open spaces. Some of these areas include a park downtown, a pocket park north of Lanier Avenue on Church St., a cemetery, and an amphitheater constructed in conjunction with The Villages development. This discussion led to the identification of certain future projects that could help add more park space and open space to Downtown Fayetteville including a new Fayetteville Village Green to be surrounded by mixed use development and pedestrian amenities which can be used to host community events, the development of a central open space on Church St. as part of a green way in the Main Street Residential District, preservation of existing green space along Beauregard Blvd., redevelopment of the city park by the county office building, develop a greenway system connecting major city landmarks and residential clusters, and construct landscaped entry gateways at major intersections and nodes into the downtown area.

2010 LCI Study In 2010, an LCI supplemental study was conducted that identified three different development areas within the city. One of these developments, called Market Place at Lafayette, proposed the development of an attractive storm water management area which separates it from the accessing road that also provides a usable green space for the users of the development. In 2016, a Downtown Market Study was conducted to identify the issues and opportunities for downtown development. As part of this study, it was identified there is a need for a downtown square to serve as a starting point for development. This square was proposed to be located by the existing green space surrounding the Old Fayetteville County Courthouse. This study also identified a need for greenway that links the downtown area to the surrounding residential areas of the city. In 2017 the City of Fayetteville conducted a downtown re-development plan identifying three separate parcels for redevelopment potential near Lanier Avenue and Stonewall Avenue. This study included a network of proposed streets to lay the foundation for the future development parcels improving efficiency of pedestrian transportation throughout the area. The proposed layout and design 2 added 6.56 acres of green space to the downtown area connected with pedestrian friendly amenities including street and parking lot trees, rooftop gardens, a village green, a storm water park, a pedestrian tree ally with string lights, open art plazas, bioswales, amphitheater lawn with fountains, tree bosques,rain gardens, and playgrounds.

2017 LCI Study A comprehensive plan for the City of Fayetteville was also produced in 2017, which identified a total of 279.42 acres of land (3.71%) dedicated to parks and open space. Although there have been many planning and design efforts since the 2002 LCI Study, the amount of land still dedicated to parks and open space in 2017 had not increased much since 2002. The Comprehensive Plan identified issues related to parks and open space including the need for more sidewalks and multi-use paths to improve connectivity for improved walk-ability, the need for pedestrian oriented development that creates a safe distinction between the pedestrian and vehicular environments, the need to improve aesthetics around the gateways leading into the downtown area, and the need to increase the amount of parks and green space in the downtown area. It also identified that as an opportunity the city had SPLOST funding available for land acquisition of park space, and expressed the community’s desire to improve parks and green space within the city in the community driven goals and objectives. The Comprehensive Plan also identified several projects that would increase the amount of parks and open space in the city including the construction of a new downtown park, a feasibility study for park water features, park improvements at the existing gazebo, park improvements at The Ridge, development of a city trails plan for connectivity, and the continued installation of street trees and landscaped medians. Some of the record of accomplishments identified in the Comprehensive Plan related to parks and open space include the implementation of the Open Space Plan for the development and preservation of parks and green spaces throughout the city, the identification of opportunities to provide green space connectivity, and the development of local and regional partnerships to preserve existing green spaces and develop a regional multi-use trail system.

2002 LCI Study Area

The 2017 LCI study produced a comprehensive plan for the city of Fayetteville and identified issues related to walkability and pedestrian access.

Within the same year, Fayette County voted to approve Special Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) which was meant to fund a variety of improvement projects throughout the city. Some of the projects related to parks and open spaces include the construction of a bridge crossing to connect the Fayette Piedmont Hospital to the existing path system, a master plan design for the expansion of the multi-use path systems, and landscaping medians on Hwy 85. 2010 LCI Area Potential Development Opportunities Map

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Lunch on the Lawn | Source: City of Fayetteville

2018 Capital Improvement The 2018 Capital Improvements Element further expands on how the city intends to provide future land for parks and open spaces with the use of impact fees for future development. It identifies the current parks located within the city as Jack Day Park, Burch Park, Jeff Davis Park, Patriot Park, and Church Street Park. It also identifies The Ridge as a large 308 acre conservation area. The trails located within the city include the Redwine Multiuse Path, the Patriot Park walking trail, and the Lester Road Multi-use Path. This study also identifies future growth projections for parks and open space to increase by approximately 22 acres by 2040 and conservation acres to increase by 234 acres, and identifies the funding methodology to accomplish this goal. One of the projects that this study identifies that will increase park space within the city is the addition of an 8 acre city park to be included within the design of a new City Hall building. The City of Fayetteville 2019 State of the City Address reinforced this desire by announcing the project for a new city center complex that includes amenities for the community to the public. The City of Fayetteville has completed many studies identifying the community’s desire for an increase in parks and open space, and these desires are now starting to be developed as the city plans to continue to grow and prosper. City of Fayetteville 2017 Comprehensive Plan Tax Allocation Districts

The 2018 Capital Improvement Study builds off of previous LCI studies through thoughtful research while also asking new, relevant questions to provoke innovative solutions for public park space.

The City of Fayetteville has completed many studies identifying the community’s desire for an increase in parks and open space, and these desires are now starting to be developed as the city plans to continue to grow and prosper.

City of Fayetteville 2017 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

2018 Master Path Plan Analysis In March of 2018, a community stakeholder meeting was conducted that focused on the Master Path Plan and the development of a county-wide network of sidewalks, side paths (bi-directionally multi-use path along side of roadways), greenway trails, and bicycle routes. This meeting brought a variety of community members from various backgrounds together in an effort to identify common community interests. Community desires for various locations for bicycle routes, pedestrian walkways, and golf cart facilities including sidepaths, greenway trails, shoulder bikeways, signed shared roadway, and sidewalks were discussed and cataloged. The meeting generated a significant amount of feedback for desired pathway connections. Common desired connection locations included a sidepath connections between Peachtree City and Fayetteville along Redwine Road, a sidepath on SR 54, and bicycle facilities on Bernhard Road and Brooks Woolsey Road. Common desired connection destinations include a regional trail connection in southern Peachtree City as well as connections to the Starr’s Mill school cluster as a starting point for the development of the Master Path Plan. The Master Path Plan includes design guidelines that cover the specifics of the path designs and how they should be constructed in relation to the existing environment. The Master Path Plan discusses a City Hall project that will update land-use, pedestrian transportation networks and traffic patterns within the downtown area, while at the same time being integrated with expansion efforts of paths and sidewalks throughout the city, including enhancing the network of streets connecting SR 54, SR 85, Beauregard Blvd, and Grady Avenue. The City of Fayetteville used SPLOST funding in 2018 to purchase approximately eight acres of land from the Fayette County Board of Education for the development of a city park adjacent to the Fayette County Public Library and new City Hall building providing many opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle connectivity.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Project Type Greenway Sidewalk Sidepath Signed Share the Road Existing Paths

“The MPP will connect population centers, schools, parks, commercial land use, and other recreational opportunities. The MPP will accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and golf cart users.”

Major Roads

Woolsey

Streets

Tyrone

Railroads

Peachtree City

Lakes

Fayetteville

Greenspace

Brooks

Recommendations Report November 2019

2019 Fayette Transportation Plan and Master Path Plan

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Path Connectivity Needs Population Centers •

Peachtree City/Tyrone

•

Fayetteville

•

Woolsey

•

NE Fayette County

Activity Centers •

Town Centers

•

Commercial Centers

RECOMMENDATIONS

Project Type Major Activity Centers Population Centers Path Connection Needs

Major Roads

Woolsey

Streets

Tyrone

Railroads

Peachtree City

Lakes

Fayetteville

Greenspace

Brooks

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Slope Analysis Map Slope analysis illustrates feasibility of future building sites.

0.25

0.5

1 Miles

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Mobility Mobility System Analysis

Purpose

Questions to Consider

•

To better understand the mobility systems of the LCI study area and the places that they serve within Downtown.

•

What gaps exist within the transportation system?

•

To understand the operational characteristics of the mobility network.

What information is missing from the existing conditions analysis?

•

Where can traveler safety be improved?

•

To serve as a basis for a discussion about changes and improvements to the mobility network.

•

Where are the opportunities to improve bicycle and pedestrian mobility?

•

Where are the opportunities to improve access and connections?

Roadway Facilities Map •

Depicts roadway functional classification within the study area

•

Illustrates signalized intersections within the study area

Traffic Volumes and Level of Service Map •

Illustrates roadway traffic volumes as identified by GDOT count stations.

•

Illustrates roadway level of service based on traffic volumes and roadway characteristics

Active Transportation Facilities Map

NORTH JEFF DAVIS DRIVE

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

•

Illustrates bike lanes, multi-use paths, and sidewalks

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Summary of Previous Studies

Previous Plans Comparative Analysis

Recurring Themes And Goals 1.

Aesthetics »

Improve downtown street-scape

Unify street-scape along travel corridors into Downtown

Prioritize connectivity and walk-ability »

Use redevelopment to create smaller blocks

Use redevelopment to develop downtown street grid

Between SR 54/Stonewall Avenue and Grady Avenue

Develop comprehensive sidewalk network

Connect with Fayette County multi-use trail system

Inter-parcel connectivity

Parking

2002 LCI Study

2019 Fayette Transportation Plan

Increased need/demand for parking downtown

Explore the potential for shared-use parking

Parking placement for new development

The City of Fayetteville undertook an LCI Study in 2002. The study identified a series of transportation improvements intended to improve connectivity and circulation within Fayetteville’s downtown area. The LCI recommendations mainly focused on congestion relief strategies, safety improvements, and non-motorized travel alternatives. Specifically, the study recommended implementing intersection and traffic signal improvements along SR 85/Glynn Street between LaFayette Avenue and SR 54/Stonewall Avenue. The study also recommended safety improvements for SR 85/Glynn Street, namely the installation of medians.

The Fayette Transportation Plan is Fayette County’s Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CTP) and identifies a set of short-term, intermediate, and long-range transportation system development opportunities. As it relates to the City of Fayetteville, specifically the LCI study area, the Fayette Transportation Plan primarily identifies opportunities to develop the County’s Master Path Plan. It envisions a network of multi-use side paths and trails that run through the Downtown, connecting to provide cross-county and regional movement. Additionally, the Fayette Transportation Plan lends support for the City of Fayetteville’s use of Special Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) program funding, and the development of the Fayetteville City Center.

Continuing Needs and Opportunities •

Continue operational improvements

•

Continue to enhance traveler safety

•

Develop a connected street network

•

Support redevelopment and place-making activities

•

Develop local bicycle network and infrastructure

•

Enhance pedestrian mobility

2010 LCI Supplemental Study The 2010 LCI Supplemental Study is an update to the 2002 LCI Study. Like the 2002 study, the 2010 LCI Supplemental addressed connectivity and circulation within Downtown Fayetteville. The LCI Supplemental placed an increased focused on walk-ability and access management. It also presented concept plans for:

Incorporate bicycle infrastructure

•

Extending Hillsdale Drive to SR 85/Glynn Street

Widen existing bike lanes from 4 to 6 feet

•

Extending Church Street to Kathi Avenue

Extend existing Class II bike facility to Jeff Davis

•

Connect existing bike facilities with the larger mobility network

Intersection improvements at SR 92/Forrest Avenue at SR 85/Glynn Street

•

Church Street at Kathi Avenue

•

Hood Avenue at SR 92/Forrest Avenue Roundabout

Identify additional bicycle infrastructure opportunities

2019 Traffic Engineering Study The 2019 Traffic Engineering Study is an operational analysis of several roadway intersections within the Fayetteville LCI area, focusing on the major roadways entering and exiting Downtown Fayetteville from the north. The Traffic Engineering Study is periodically updated and has been used to identify, prioritize, and program low-cost, easy to implement intersection and signal modifications. Referenced in the 2010 LCI Supplemental Study, the Traffic Engineering Study has been credited with improving vehicular flow through Downtown Fayetteville, reducing delay-based congestion, and improving roadway safety.

Operational and Safety Improvements »

Continue intersection improvements

Address access management along SR 54 and SR 85

Extend landscaped median on SR 85/Glynn Street South

Improve Beauregard Boulevard and SR 85/Glynn Street South intersection

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Grady Avenue

Roadway Network Inventory

Downtown Fayetteville’s roadway network is not comprised of the traditional grid pattern of streets. Instead, the LCI study area’s roadways are organized in loose hierarchical street classification system. These classifications - principal arterials, minor arterials, collectors, and local streets - define a roadway’s desired functional and operational characteristics. The Fayetteville LCI study area contains approximately 22 miles of total roadway. Principal and minor arterials, 4.1 miles and 2.5 miles respectively, serve as the primary access routes to Fayetteville’s downtown area, and are the principal vehicular travel routes into, out of, and through the LCI study area. Approximately 6.2 miles of collector roads and 9.2 miles of local streets provide for the study area’s internal circulation. Functionally classified roadways include:

Beauregard Boulevard Beauregard Boulevard is a two-lane minor arterial roadway with nodes within the LCI study area at SR 85/Glynn Street and Grady Avenue. Beauregard Boulevard is characterized by large lot residential development and undeveloped land parcels within the study area.

State Route 54/Lanier Avenue

LaFayette Avenue

State Route (SR) 54/Lanier Avenue is functionally classified as a principal arterial. For the entirety of its length across the middle of the LCI study area, SR 54 is a median divided facility. For approximately 1.15 miles through Downtown Fayetteville, SR 54 is split into a one-way pair of eastwest streets identified as Lanier Avenue (westbound) and Stonewall Avenue (eastbound). In addition to providing access and thru travel to Downtown, SR 54 connects to residential neighborhoods and commercial development at either end of the study area. West of SR 85/Glynn Road, SR 54/Lanier Avenue hosts a Class II bikeway.

LaFayette Avenue is an east-west roadway that connects SR 85/Glynn Street and SR 54/Lanier Avenue. Although classified as a local roadway by GDOT, the City of Fayetteville has identified LaFayette Avenue as a collector roadway. The facility is the primary access to the Villages at LaFayette, a planned community. Between SR 85/Glynn Street and Tiger Trail, LaFayette Avenue is a three-lane (two lanes westbound, one lane eastbound) roadway. It serves traffic related to the Fayette County Public Schools as both administrative functions, and the Fayette County High School are located along the street. West of Tiger Trail, LaFayette Avenue becomes a two-lane median divided roadway that primarily serves residential land uses within the Villages at LaFayette planned community. At Campaign Trail, LaFayette Avenue becomes a one-way roadway going westbound toward SR 54/Lanier Avenue. Eastbound oneway traffic travels along Campaign Trail through the Villages at LaFayette. On-street bike lanes are present on both LaFayette Avenue and Campaign Trail.

State Route 85/Glynn Street SR 85/Glynn Avenue traverses Fayetteville from north to south and is a five-lane (four-travel lanes and a two-way left-turn lane) roadway. It is functionally classified by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) as a principal arterial north of SR 54/Lanier Avenue. South of SR 54/Lanier Avenue, SR 85/Glynn Road is functionally classified as a minor arterial. Along the entirety of its length through the City of Fayetteville, SR 85 primarily serves various commercial land uses.

Jeff Davis Drive Jeff Davis Drive is a four-lane roadway facility that is functionally classified as a minor arterial roadway. Traversing the city from north to south, Jeff Davis Drive changes design cross-sections and development character several times within the LCI study area.

Through rethinking the role of existing roads, solutions are proposed that provide pedestrian connectivity, traffic-calming, and vehicle access where it is most necessary.

Grady Avenue is a two-lane major collector roadway that connects SR 54/Lanier Avenue with Beauregard Boulevard and SR 85/Glynn Street. Grady Avenue’s development character is variable over its length, with commercial and office developments located at its nodes with SR 54/ Lanier Avenue and SR 85/Glynn Street. Grady Avenue is characterized by residential development and large undeveloped parcels between its two major intersections.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

The LCI study area’s roadways are controlled by a variety of traffic control devices. Most intersections internal to residential neighborhoods within the study area are stop controlled by all-way signs. This is consistent with the low-speed and walkable nature of the study area’s neighborhoods. The LCI study area, however, does not have a consistent street grid, and the street network is reflective a suburban community whose development follows a linear path along major travel corridors. Traffic signals are present along arterial roadway that traverse the study area and bisect the downtown area. These signals help to facilitate higher volumes of traffic flow at major intersections.

Grady Ave.

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Roadway Operations

Since the early 2000s, traffic volumes on SR 54/Lanier Avenue and SR 85/Glynn Street have declined, and appear to have plateaued. 2019 Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) taken from GDOT’s Traffic Analysis and Data Application (TADA) system shows that AADT along SR 54/Lanier Avenue west of Downtown was 26,700 vehicles per day. West of SR 85/Glynn Street, the SR 54 one-way pair comprised of W. Lanier Avenue (eastbound) and Stonewall Avenue (westbound) has an AADT of 11,500 vehicles per day and 13,100 vehicles per day, respectively. East of SR 85/Glynn Street, Lanier Avenue has an AADT of 11,500 vehicles per day; Stonewall Avenue has an AADT of 10,300 vehicles per day. East of Downtown, SR 54/Lanier Avenue has an AADT of 24,000. SR 85/Glynn Street, between LaFayette Avenue and SR 54/ Lanier Avenue, has an AADT of 32,200 vehicles per day. SR 85, between Stonewall Avenue and Beauregard Boulevard, has an AADT of 25,200 vehicles per day. Between Beauregard Boulevard and Grady Avenue, SR 85 has an AADT of 22,200 vehicles per day. Jeff Davis Drive near Rabbit Run has an AADT of 17,700 vehicles per day. Grady Avenue near Bradford Square has an AADT of 13,000 vehicles per day. Grady Avenue near Beauregard Boulevard has an AADT of 10,900 vehicles per day. AADT data were evaluated using the Florida Department

Roadway Facilities in the Study Area

of Transportation’s General Annual Average Daily Volumes table. This tool is specific to signalized arterials in urbanized areas and considers roadway design characteristics such as thru travel lanes, medians, and exclusive turn lanes. It also considers speed characteristics, directionality, and roadway ownership. The table below illustrates the AADT versus the available capacity per the volume General Annual Average Daily Volumes.

Data shows that traffic volume has plateaued on major streets. Fayetteville moves forward by considering how streets are not only efficient, but also safe.

Route

Count Location

Capacity

AADT

LOS

SR 54/E. Lanier Ave

E. of Booker Ave

33,800

24,000

SR 54/E. Lanier Ave

E. of Jeff Davis Dr

12,480

11,800

SR 54/E. Lanier Ave

W. of Jeff Davis Dr

12,480

11,500

SR 54/W. Lanier Ave

W. of SR 85/Glynn St.

12,480

11,500

SR 54/W. Lanier Ave

W of Grady Ave

33,800

26,700

SR 54/Stonewall Ave W

W. of SR 85/Glynn St.

12,480

13,100

SR 54/Stonewall Ave E

E. of Jeff Davis Dr

12,480

12,300

SR 54/Stonewall Ave E

W. of Jeff Davis Dr

12,480

10,300

SR 85/Glynn St. N

N. of SR 54/Lanier Ave

33,800

32,200

SR 85/Glynn St. S

S. of SR 54/Stonewall Ave

33,800

25,200

SR 85/Glynn St. S

N of Beauregard Blvd

33,800

22,200

Jeff Davis Drive

Near Rabbit Run

30,420

17,700

Grady Ave

Near Bradford Square

10,920

13,000

Grady Ave

W. of Beauregard Blvd

10,920

10,900

Table 1. Roadway Volume vs. Capacity

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

ST AT ER OU TE 85 ,9 2

32,300 AADT

STATE ROUT E 54

24,000 AADT

26,700 ADT

25,200 AADT

Local Traffic Counts

Traffic Volume and Level of Service in the Study Area The 2019 Traffic Engineering Study went further to analyze roadway operations and evaluated several intersections within the LCI area. Because this evaluation process is ongoing and past improvements recommendations have been implemented, most of the intersections analyzed operate sufficiently under existing conditions. The SR 54/Lanier Avenue at Grady Avenue intersection and the SR 85/Glynn Street South at Beauregard Boulevard intersections were the two exceptions. Both intersections operate at a level of Service D, which is not bad but also not good. They are expected to experience significant delays under future conditions without any new development being added to them. The 2019 Traffic Engineering Study is included in the Appendix.

Traffic Volume and Level of Service in the Study Area

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Active Transportation Facilities

Pedestrian Accommodations Sidewalks or shared-use paths are generally present along all streets within the LCI study area, with a few exceptions. The pedestrian experience when traveling on these facilities varies greatly and is dependent on factors such as: •

Traffic volume

•

Sidewalk width and physical condition

•

Quality of the sidewalk surface

•

Obstructions

•

The presence of landscaping and street furniture

•

Public art (g) building frontages, and

•

Neighboring use

W. Lanier Avenue and Stonewall Avenue, between SR 85/ Glynn Avenue N. and Tiger Trail, features a pedestrian realm that accommodates employees and visitors to the area. Street furniture, e.g., sitting benches and landscaping, provide a comfortable pedestrian environment where people are encouraged to stroll, linger, and sit along W. Lanier Avenue and Stonewall Avenue. Sidewalks along the LCI area's other arterial and collector roadways and local streets also facilitate pedestrian travel. Marked crosswalks facilitate pedestrian crossings at intersections through downtown Fayetteville along the primary travel corridors. Generally, marked crosswalks are present on all legs of signalized or all-way stopcontrolled intersections. Some side-street stop-controlled intersections – LaFayette Avenue at SR 85/Glynn Street N. and Beauregard Boulevard/Redwine Road – are missing crosswalks to facilitate movements between sidewalk endings/beginnings.

Some of the pedestrian network challenges include gaps in the network, especially between facilities located on functionally classified roadways and local streets, and between regional facilities entering the study area from different directions. Identified challenges include the brick sidewalk pavers along both Lanier Avenue and Stonewall Avenue. While attractive and adding to the downtown area's historic charm, this decorative surface material could potentially pose risks to mobility challenged individuals, particularly to those who are unsteady on their feet or use mobility assistance devices such as walkers, canes, or wheelchairs. This is especially true if the pavers are not well maintained. Risks to travelers come from loose, tilted, or cracked pavers or large gaps between them. Another identified challenges to travelers using sidewalks and side paths, especially on local streets, is adequate maintenance (or lack thereof) of vegetation adjacent to the facilities. Overgrown bushes, low hanging tree branches, and grass growing onto the path can push travelers off the sidewalk/ sidepath and street.

Bicycle Facilities There are two Class II bicycle facilities within the LCI study area. Class II facilities, commonly referred to as bike lanes, are dedicated facilities for bicyclists immediately adjacent to automobile traffic. Class II facilities are identified with striping, pavement markings, and signage. The West Lanier Avenue bike lane extends approximately 1,500 feet from SR 85/Glynn Street North to Tiger Trail. The LaFayette Avenue bike lane extends from Tiger Trail to SR 54/W. Lanier Avenue, through the Villages at LaFayette community. Pedestrian and Bike Network in the LCI Study Area

The LCI study area ensures that the pedestrian experience is safe, comfortable, and continuous. Giving people the ability to walk or bike lowers traffic volume and enables them to be healthier through physical activity. LaFayette Ave. Bike Lane Photo Credit: Google Streetview

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

W. Lanier Ave. Bike Lane & Side Path Photo Credit: Google Streetview

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Bicyclists traveling within the LCI area can utilize the onstreet bicycle infrastructure, off-street infrastructure such as shared-use trail facilities, and bicycle-friendly street, i.e., roads that are low-volume and low-speed, to access and move around the study area. At present, there are no public bicycle parking or storage facilities, especially within the downtown area.

Parking

85/Glynn Street and Less Street, a total of twenty (20) onstreet parking spaces are available to the store front shops. Forty-eight (48) on-street parking spaces also are available around the Historic Courthouse. An estimated 340 parking spaces are available in public surface parking lots within downtown. This includes 224 parking spaces at the Fayette County Annex Complex, 20 spaces at the Holiday Dorsey Five Museum, and 28 spaces at 145 Lanier Avenue. Each of these is within walking distance to downtown attractions and restaurants.

The 2002 LCI Study discussed the need for additional public parking to support commercial and mixed-use land uses. As noted in that study, the existing parking supply for existing commercial and mixed-use parking was underutilized during peak demand periods by an estimated 40-50%. The subsequent 2010 LCI Supplemental Study recommended incorporating shared use parking for new development when feasible, reducing parking requirements as an incentive for redevelopment, and adding bicycle parking. Additionally, the 2010 study recommended making public parking more easily accessible. This sentiment was echoed by City of Fayetteville staff during the project kickoff meeting, particularly during discussions about creating and utilizing civic spaces. City staff shared plans for the new City Hall development pointed out that public parking will be available as a part of this project, renovations to the Fayetteville Library, and the development of the proposed City Center Parkway.

An estimated 340 parking spaces are available in public surface parking lots within downtown... Each of these is within walking distance to downtown attractions and restaurants.

A high-level windshield survey was performed of parking using Google maps and information obtained from the City of Fayetteville’s website. The survey was intended to identify existing on-street and public parking supply within Downtown and inform a census of public surface parking. Between SR 85/Glynn Street between Lanier Avenue and Stonewall Avenue and along Stonewall Avenue between SR

Public Parking in Downtown Fayetteville

Downtown Shops - Stonewall Parking

Fayette County Annex Parking

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

GLYNN ST

340 Publicly Accessible Parking Spaces Surface Lots (272 Parking Spaces)

On-Street Parking (68 Parking Spaces) Parking Count

28 7 W LANIER AVE

5 9

20 STONEWALL AVE W

Historic Courthouse Parking

In addition to the existing on-street and surface parking, the City of Fayetteville will expand its parking inventory in 2021 with the opening of its new City Hall complex. 218 parking spaces are included as a part of this facility’s development. The parking will be situated along two parallel driveways located on either side of the new complex. These driveways will enable entry and egress onto Stonewall Avenue and entry and egress onto a new east-west roadway, City Center Parkway, located south of the development. Parking along the driveways will be configured like head-in onstreet parking spaces and protected by curb-extensions that frame the driveways’ travel lanes. Eighttwo (82) parking along the new City Center Parkway also will be head-in parking protected from the travel way by curb extensions. In total, 300 new parking spaces will be created with the new City Hall development and the City Center Parkway’s first phase.

8 HWY 92

175

PKWY.

JOHNSON AVE 0

250

Future Downtown Parking

500 Feet

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

An additional 300 parking spaces will be added to Fayetteville’s downtown parking inventory with the opening of the new Fayetteville City Hall complex. 218 surface parking spaces are included on the City Hall campus. 82 on-street spaces are include in the first phase of the new City Center Parkway.

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

LCI Study Area Character Area

Built Environment and Zoning

Planned Development Recent Development

Existing Character Analysis

Open Spaces Floodplain Building Footprints

Purpose

Existing Map & Table

•

Commercial Residential

•

To gain a better understanding of the built and natural characteristics of the Downtown study area and the various places that they create within Downtown. To observe how recent and new developments impact or will impact the prevailing character of their surroundings.

Depict “character areas” based on common: building forms, orientation of buildings toward streets, setbacks, front yard treatment, street characteristics, property lines, and land uses.

•

The table assigns a number and descriptive name for each character area, along with identifying the type of place it is (a District, Corridor, Node, or Neighborhood), The numbers on the map correspond with those in the accompanying table.

•

The colors of the character areas correspond with the predominant land use (red for commercial, yellow for residential, purple for industrial, and brown for institutional) the predominant building type present, the zoning districts that currently apply, along with many character attributes.

To serve as a basis for a discussion with the City about the prevailing character areas and their future treatment through zoning.

Industrial Institutional

Existing Character Areas Map The numbers on the map correspond with those in the accompanying table. 0

0.25

1 Mile N

The Villages at Lafayette Park

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Character Area Description

No.

Character Area Name

Streets

Place Type

Predominant Building Type

Existing Zoning

Land Uses

Typical Parcel Size (ft)

Street CrossSection

Sidewalk Width (ft)

Streetscape Amenities

Building Setback (ft)

Front Yard

Building Dimensions

Landmarks

Old Town

N Glynn St & Stonewall Ave

District

Attached Downtown Row

C-1

Retail

22 X 85

P__@__P

Planters, Orn. Street lights, Trash Receptacles

N/A

2 Stories

Old Courthouse & Square

N Glynn Mixed

N Glynn St

Corridor

Commercial

C-1

Commercial, Residential, Vacant

95 X 200

__@__ __|__

7 Sb / 5 Nb

Pavers (Sb), Orn. Street lights (Sb)

30-66

Lawn, Parking

1-2 Stories

Church District

Lanier Ave, Stonewall Ave, Johnson Ave, Lee St, Church St

District

Churches, Garden Apartments

C-1

Religious, Hotel, Residential

Varies

Multiple Streets

Pavers, Orn. Street lights

0-56

None, Parking

N/A

First United Methodist Church, Holiday Inn Express

N Glynn Strip Commercial

N Jefferson

Corridor

Retail Pads

C-3, C-2, Dr-15

Retail

150 X 330

__|__

N/A

Lawn

1 Story

Ford Dealership

Church St Mixed Corridor

Booker Ave, Hill Street, Holly Ave

Corridor

Churches

Dr-15

Religious, Residential, Park

70 X 130

N/A

34-40

Lawn

1 Story

Church St Park

E Georgia Mixed Corridor

E Georgia Ave

Corridor

Detached Houses

Dr-15

Commercial, Government, Residential

150 X 140

N/A

Lawn, Parking

1-2 Stories

Post Office

N Jefferson Davis Office Corridor

N Jefferson Davis Dr

Corridor

Converted Houses

Rp, O-I, C-2, C-1

Profession Offices, Medical Offices

120 X 300

Grass Verge

Lawn

1-2 Stories

United Community Bank

Lanier/Booker Neighborhood

E Lanier Ave & Booker Ave, Hill St, Holly Ave

Neighborhood

Detached Houses

C-2, R-30, Dr-15, O-I

Residential

120 X 300

Multiple Streets

N/A

40-50

Lawn

1 Story

N/A

S Jefferson Davis Industrial Node

S Jefferson Davis Ave

Node

Industrial Garage

M-1

Industrial

360 X 230

__@__

N (Sb)

N/A

Grass Berm, Parking

1 Story

Mask Tire

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

__@__ __|__

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

No.

Character Area Name

Streets

Place Type

Predominant Building Type

Existing Zoning

Land Uses

Typical Parcel Size (ft)

Street CrossSection

Sidewalk Width (ft)

Streetscape Amenities

Building Setback (ft)

Front Yard

Building Dimensions

Landmarks

E Lanier & S Jefferson Corner

E Lanier Ave & S Jefferson Ave

Node

Gas Stations

C-3, C-2

Retail, Religious

238 X 245

__@__ ___

5, 5

Pavers

0-100

Parking

1 Story

Islamic Community Center

Old Train Depot

W Lanier Ave

Node

Attached Downtown Row

Retail, Commercial

27 X 245

_ _ _P

Pavers

N/A

1 Story

Water Tower

Courthouse Square

S Jefferson Davis Dr, Center Dr

District

Courthouses, Offices

C-1, O-I, R-22, Dr-15

Institutional

N/A

6, 4

N/A

Parking

3 Stories

Municipal Court

__|__ __

Lee St Homes

Lee St

Corridor

Detached Houses

C-3, C-1, Rp

Residential

115 X 160

4-5

Orn. Streetlights

20-60

Lawn

2 Stories

N/A

S Glynn Offices

S Glynn St

Corridor

Converted Houses

C-2, C-1, Rp

Commercial, Government

160 X 260

__@__

Pavers, Double-Arm Orn. Streetlights

45-50

Lawn

1-2 Stories

Fire Department

Beauregard Blvd Homes

Beauregard Blvd

Corridor

Detached Houses

C-3-, C-1, R-30

Residential

250 X 270

4 (Sb)

N/A

120

Lawn

2 Stories

Tree Cover

S Glynn Industrial Strip

S Glynn St

Corridor

Industrial Box

C-3, C-1, Rp

Commercial

280 X 250

__@__

7 (Nb), 5 (Sb)

N/A

30-100

Parking

1 Story

Fayette Mower

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

LAKESHO ONEOFFICE AND TWO RESIDENTIALRE DRIVE INSTITUTIONAL ANDFAMILY

RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL

RP C-3

RESIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL HIGHWA WAY COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY

RATFORD ATFORD WAY A

RMF-15 RESIDENTIAL C-1 MULTI-FAMILY DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL R-THC C-2

HA B ER SHAM HABERSH AM PLACE

C-2RUNNING COMMERCIAL BEAR TFR CTURING M-1 COMMUNITY MANUFA LIGHT MANUFACTURING A IL C-3M-2 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL HEAV A Y MANUFA F CTURING HEAVY MANUFACTURING

KELLY L DRIVE

GH W

NO RTH PAR PA AR DRI VE

HONEYSUCKLE LANE

HILLSDAL HILLSDALE L E DRIVE

RA B B

C AR O

R TH

HUNTERS WALK

PYE COURT CO

FEN W YCK COMMONS FENWYCK

COU

E AC N

EET

A E CIRC DGAT OO

E AT

0.25

0.50

IVE DR

PEC COU

WALT ON W

1 Miles

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

C-3 Highway Commercial

This district is created to provide and protect areas for community shopping and service facilities convenient to residential neighborhoods.

living environment for residents of the district.

This district is created to provide retail trade and service establishments compatible with surrounding residential and office-institutional areas, and for business activities which primarily cater to the traveling public. The C-3 district requires larger yard areas, greater setbacks, and lower building densities than are permitted in the downtown commercial district.

OI Office-Institutional

C-4 High Intensity Commercial

This district is created to provide areas in which business, professional, educational, and institutional uses can be compatibly mixed in close proximity to residential land uses. Intensive commercial land uses are restricted or prohibited so as to maintain a healthful living environment for residents

This district is created to provide a location for intense retail commercial land uses, requiring large tracts of land and a location away from residential land uses. The C-4 district allows for retail business with a gross floor area greater than 75,000 square feet; however, centers which have these large retail stores must conform to a higher level of development standards. Properties zoned C-4 must entirely abut a minimum of two, four-lane state highways. The four-lane section of the highway shall be at least five miles in length.

of adjacent residential districts.

MO Medical/Office This district is created to provide a campus like setting that allows for the establishment of local and regional medical centers. The medical/office zoning district also provides the opportunity for allied health services, as well as necessary support businesses, to locate within the MO district. This district is created to enhance and protect the central business district of the city by providing for those commercial uses requiring a central location.

GR CO

Y LI N DA W A KE DRIVE

LAURIEN S TR

Zoning Districts Located Within Downtown

C-1 Downtown Historic Mixed-Use District

VAR D L EV

AY G WA

SANDRA STREET

D EV AR UL

NE S

ER NT

INDUSTRIAL WAY A

LA ACL E

BAT A ES AV A ENUE

Y RD T YA COUR LA NE A A R B OR W AY

URE GA

MIR

R RT

WIL LIA MSBUR

L EARLY T C OUR

A ENUE AV AVENUE

ER D RI

EN COU RD

JACK JACK K D. D. DE TTMER I NG DETTMERIN G

C EN T

TA Y MAN PA P

MEDFORD DRIVE

Main Street Zoning

LON G LONG AV A AVEN ENUE UE E

RE REGA R D B E AU COURT

L EE EE ST ST REET EET

STREET SOUTH S OU T H YNN STREET GL G LYN

CO URT XTON COURT BRAXTON BRAX

E OW HT E H IG D R IV

C-2 Community, Commercial

This district is created to provide an area in which residential, business, professional, educational, and institutional uses can be compatibly mixed while maintaining a healthful

EA S T GA

The following district designations are from the City’s zoning regulations (Sec. 94-31) and are meant to be referenced with the Existing Zoning column in the Existing Character Areas Table.

RP Residential Professional

A ENUE Y AV LY L LL HOL HO

J OH NSON AVENUE JOHNSON VE N UE

E SPA PAR RRO ROW S C OV

WALKER

T EET RE TR ST LS L LL H HIIL

IL RA

N AV E

UE BOOK BO O KER R AV EN

ST STONEW N E WA STO ALL LL A AV V ENUE N U E EA

A AVENUE ENUE E WEST N EWALL AV ON S TO ST

RE UA

BENNET BENNET TT STREET STREET

E T

LAN LANIER NIER AVENUE AV ENUE WES WEST ST

ER IIE L AN

ST E

AVENUE EAST IA

T R EE S ST

TH PATH O NE N E PA

N PHE

EN UE

GEO

OW B RO O

CHURCH CHURCH STREET STREET

C CARVER ARVER S STREET TR REET

NO RT H D RIVE NORTH DAV IS DRIVE JEFF JEF F DAVIS

TI TI GER TRAIL R AIL TR

E LL SW OR PO TH INT E

LIN TO HA N RD CONCO CO N C O RD L HO L T R U O C COURT LL OW K PA RK D ON PARK CLAN CL A NDON AC E TERR TER R ACE

RT C O U RT A L COU O N IAL COL CO LONI

GN IIG PA

BRADFORD SQ

AMF M F OR D CA

WA S SH HIING NGT TON TO N STREET ET

C LE IRCLE

GWINNETT GW INN ETT STREET

PINE C

ENUE WE AV VENUE

Y FA

OV ER S T OV WE NS M MO NS CO MM

SHARON DRIVE

SID E TR EESIDE TREE CE ACE TERRA TERR

R MI LL ERMIL PEPPE PEPP NG A ND IING L LAND

CLAIRE AVENUE A

E R IAG L A NE

PINE S TR E

UE A ENU AV AVENU

VE NU E AVENUE RGI A A GEOR GEORGIA

BRENDA LANE

I T RUN

ITTANY CHASE BR

RUNNING BEAR TR A M-1OS LIGHT MANUFACTURING SPA P CE OPEN SPACE IL

GE ORGIA

Existing Zoning District Designations Study

A ENUE AV JEFFERSON AVENUE

A HI KAT

CONDITIONAL C-3 PROJECT PLANNEDWDEVELOPMENT IN O NA C-4PCD INTENSITY COMMERCIAL U E HIGH DR PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VEN I VE BP RD BUSINESS PARK REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

DEER TRAIL

DAV AVIS PL ACE

M DRIIVE

C C-3 PDP

URCHILL RT COUR

HABERSH A

MOC C-3 MEDICAL OFFICE C-3 CONDITIONAL WINLAKESHO RE DRIV ON OI C-4 OFFICE INSTITUTIONAL A D COMMERCIAL HIGHAND INTENSITY RI V E C-1BP DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL P RK BUSINESS PA PARK

RT NO

KAY LEE KAY COURT

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OFFICE MEDICAL

DR-15 OI

D R I VE

J EFF

CIRCLE DRIVE

R-70 MO

N ST R D RIV E EET DR

DW IN AY W

DANIEL COURT

GL YN

URT

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL RESIDENTIAL

J EFF F F DAV DAVIS IS

COMMERCE DRIV VE

DOG W O O D

M TI

MCIN TOSH CROSSING

NU E D AVE PCD

R-30 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-THC SINGLE RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM R-40 RP

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OD DRIVEPROJECT GLEWO TA N PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT VE RI D REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT D O O OPEN SPACE EW G ED W

G GILBERT ROA D

HEAVY MANUFACTURING

PDP

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY L RESIDENTIAL

R-15 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DR-15 SINGLE ONE AND TWO F MILY FA L RESIDENTIAL R-22 FAMILY RMF-15SINGLE MULT L I-FAMILY L RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL

M-2 E

R-10 R-70

CO U

R-30 SINGLE FAMILY L RESIDENTIAL Streets R-40 SINGLE FAMILY L RESIDENTIAL Main Street Parcels

The existing LCI study area has many zoning districts which makes it harder to create a unified vision of Downtown Fayetteville. Consolidating zoning districts is essential to implement the UDO plan.

M-1 Light Manufacturing This district is created to provide a location for those light industrial uses which are able to meet comparatively rigid specifications for nuisance-free operation and which do not create excessive noise, odor, smoke, or dust or possess other objectionable characteristics which might be detrimental to surrounding neighborhoods, or to the other uses permitted in the district.

MS Main Street Architectural Overlay This district is created to promote the beautification of the city, preserve the historic and distinctive architecture and design qualities of the downtown area of the city, and to recognize and protect the unique character and integrity of the downtown area while also allowing for productive land use. This district may overlay any zoning district.

OS Open Space This district is created to limit development on certain water bodies, watercourses, floodplains, wetlands, groundwater recharge areas, and lands which serve important environmental functions and provide recreational opportunities and open areas for residents. The district is also created to protect lands of natural beauty, tracts of forests, and areas of archaeological and historical significance; and to prevent commercial, residential, and Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

industrial development from encroaching into flood zones, lands with severe grades of 15 degrees and more, naturally dangerous areas, and to protect the undeveloped nature of lands within the district from the adverse impacts of development. No property shall be zoned OS when said property contains man-made water bodies individually in excess of 500 acres in size.

R-30 Medium Density Single Family Residential This district is created to provide single-family residential areas with minimum lot sizes of 30,000 square feet protected from the depreciating effects of small lot development and high density and from the encroachment of those uses which are incompatible with a desirable residential environment.

DR-15 Two-Family Residential This district is created to provide areas for high density oneand two-family residential uses with minimum lot sizes of 15,000 square feet for single-family residences and 18,000 square feet for duplexes.

Zoning Districts Not Located Within Downtown R-70 Low Density Single-Family Residential This district is created to provide single-family residential areas with a lot size of no less than 87,120 square feet protected from the depreciating effects of small lot development and high density and from the encroachment of those uses which are incompatible to desirable residential environment.

RMF-15 Multifamily Residential This district is created to provide orderly development of high-density residential areas for one-family, two-family, and multifamily dwellings with minimum lot sizes of 15,000 square feet for single-family detached dwellings and 8,000 square feet for first unit, 5,000 square feet for each additional unit for multifamily development, but in no event shall the number of bedrooms exceed 16 per acre.

R-THC Residential Townhouse-Condominium R-40 Low Density Single-Family Residential This district is created to provide single-family residential areas with a minimum lot size of 43,560 square feet, protected from the depreciating effects of small lot development and high density and from the encroachment of those uses which are incompatible to desirable residential environment.

R-22 Medium Density Single-Family Residential This district is created to provide single-family residential areas with minimum lot sizes of 22,500 square feet where a central system for the collection of sewage and distribution of water is provided. Said areas being protected from the depreciating effects of small lot development and high density and from the encroachment of those uses which are incompatible with a desirable residential environment.

This district is created to provide for high density, singlefamily, attached fee simple residential development. The minimum size of a R-THC development is five acres and the density of residential development shall be limited to a maximum of six dwelling units per acre.

MHP Mobile Home Park The mobile home district provides for the establishment of mobile home parks located on unsubdivided land which has single ownership and control, and for mobile home subdivisions where private lots are available for sale to individual mobile homeowners.

M-2 Heavy Manufacturing. This district is created to provide and protect areas for those industrial uses which cannot comply with the more restrictive requirements of the M-1 district.

R-15 High Density Single-Family Residential The Meridian Apartments located in the Planned Community Development zoning district (PCD)

This district is created to provide for site-built housing, or industrialized building which complies with all requirements of the zoning ordinance. With this district, the city seeks to provide for single-family residential areas with higher population densities and lot sizes of 15,000 square feet.

BP Business Park The business park zoning district is created to provide planned, mixed use development along major thoroughfare or expressway corridors, so that accesses onto these corridors are kept to a minimum in order to protect these corridors as expressways and so that persons entering the city along those corridors will receive a good first impression, and to maintain a quality appearance which will stabilize or increase property values.

Retail at Stonewall Avenue and Glynn Street located in the Downtown Commercial zoning district (C-1)

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

LCI Study Area Character Area Planned Development Recent Development

Recent Developments in Study Area

Open Spaces

RABBIT’S RUN

Floodplain Building Footprints

The following images depict representative building types of the “Recent Developments” as highlighted in the Existing Character Areas Map. The new developments that are currently under construction or planned may add new building types, architectural styles, and open spaces to Downtown. Furthermore, new developments outside of Downtown, such as Trilith, also will add new building types, architectural styles, and open spaces to the City.

Commercial

JEFFERSON INTOWN PLACE

Residential Industrial Institutional

SPRINGHILL SUITES

THE VILLAGES AT LAFAYETTE PARK

MERIDIAN ON THE SQUARE

Rabbit’s Run

The Village at Lafayette Park

MERIDIAN APARTMENTS FAYETTE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION

NEW CITY HALL AND PARK

WALTON

Fayette County Administration

The Meridian Apartments

SPARROW’S COVE

0.25

1 Mile N

Jefferson Intown Place

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Sparrow’s Cove

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

LCI Study Area Mixed Residential Med. Scale Commercial/Office Small Scale Commercial/Office

Study of Character based on Program

High-Intensity Commercial and Redevelopment Historic Core Downtown Gateway Established Neighborhood

The existing land uses and character of the study area has been extensively documented and described across a number of documents over the last 20 years: The 2003 Downtown LCI Planning study, the 2016 Conceptual Downtown Master Plan, and the 2017 Fayetteville Comprehensive Plan. While some new structures have been built in the study area during this time, the outdated zoning resolution from the 1990s still guides development and building form standards today. Thus, the existing character and land uses have not changed substantially since these studies were conducted. This hybrid map groups existing land uses according to geographical proximity and existing zoning. This map was created subjectively through a combination of on-theground observations of the study area, known patterns of existing zoning in the study area, and geographic proximity between similar uses and building forms. While not a perfect or scientific means of classification, breaking down the study area into thematic sections will help to identify specific goals and organize priorities in later phases of the study. Below is a description of the rationale behind each of the existing ‘character areas’ as defined by the existing character/existing land use hybrid map:

Historic Core This area is defined by the historic character of the structures, including the Old Fayette county courthouse. Land uses in this area include County and City government buildings, the library, and churches.

Small Scale Commercial and Office

Support/Services/Senior Uses

These areas are roughly bounded by Lanier Avenue and Stonewall Avenue on either side of the Historic Core district. Land uses in these areas consist of smaller commercial or office uses, which are often in repurposed single-family home structures.

Medium Scale Commercial and Office These areas are located further from the downtown core on the far eastern and western sides of the study area. Land uses in these areas consist of dedicated professional office parks and buildings that were constructed for commercial uses.

High-Intensity Commercial This area is located due north of the Historic Core district on either side of N Glynn Street. This area is characterized by the higher-intensity commercial uses such as drive-thrus, shopping centers, car-dealerships and other auto-oriented uses that require significant amounts of impervious coverage. The land use and character of the North Glynn corridor is in stark contrast with the Historic Core it abuts at the south end.

Established Neighborhoods This area is bounded by the edges of the study area on the south and east, by E Lanier Avenue to the north, and S Jeff Davis Drive to the west. Land uses in this area consist of smaller, single-family residential structures or compatible uses, such as schools.

Breaking down the study area into thematic sections helps to identify project goals and organize priorities in later phases of the LCI study. 0

0.25

1 Mile N

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Source: Atlanta Home Trends

Downtown Gateway The downtown gateway character areas are located along N Jeff Davis drive to the north and S Glynn Street to the south of the Historic Core character area. The northern extent of this character area is characterized by smaller businesses in detached or historic structures. The southern extent of this character area is characterized by older commercial uses on an auto-oriented scale. Both of these areas exist as geographical gateways to the Historic Core, and are grouped together under the assumption that the same type of redevelopment and emphasis on streetscaping, traffic calming, and walkability could be of benefit here.

PCD/Mixed Residential These are broad character areas located in the northwestern corner and northern extent of the study area. These areas are currently comprised of primarily residential uses with residential zoning districts, however, there are other uses mixed sporadically throughout. This district allow for a more specific, distinct planning vision to guide future development.

Support/Services/Senior Uses Historic Core

This character area is less categorically defined than others and is better defined in geographical terms. This character consists of the southeastern extent of the study area, roughly bounded by Lee Street on the west and Johnson Avenue to the north. Existing, larger-scale structures also help to define this character area, including the senior center, the Court building, and the sheriff’s department. south and east, by E Lanier Avenue to the north, and S Jeff Davis Drive to the west. Land uses in this area consist of smaller, single-family residential structures or compatible uses, such as schools.

Olf Fayette County Courthouse | Source: Shutterstock

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Existing Buildings on Abandoned lots and Vacant Lot Opportunities

2 3

4 1 2

Identification of sites where new development can occur indicates opportunities for immediate application of the LCI recommendations.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

02.2 Market Study Summary Of Forecast Demand By Product Type (2020-2025)

Small Lot Single Family Detached

Office

Demand in 2021-25: 100 units/year Estimated Pricing: $400,000 - $600,000 Estimated Density: 4-6 units/acre Parking: 2-car front/rear entry garages Notes: Strong land value, good transitional use, great for all household types. Likely to run into land limitations.

Demand in 2021-25: + / - 25,000 SF Estimated Pricing: $20-$25/SF Full Service Estimated Density: 10,000 SF/acre Parking: 4/1,000 SF Notes: Population servicing office uses including medical and smaller private firms.

Townhomes

Retail / Service

Demand in 2021-25: Estimated Pricing:

Demand in 2021-25: 90,000 - 140,000 SF Estimated Pricing: $20-25/SF NNN Estimated Density: 8,000 SF/acre Parking: 5/1,000 SF Notes: Potential for small-format grocer / hardware store, majority is F&B & service-oriented w/ pharmacy / drug store.

15 units/year $300,000 - $375,000 $425,000 - $475,000 Estimated Density: 8-14 units/acre Parking: 2-car front/rear entry garages Notes: Mix of conventional and luxury townhomes. High land value, limited depth. Good transitional use, great for ENs & starter families.

Rental Apartments Demand in 2021-25: Estimated Pricing:

250-300 units above pipeline. $1.45/SF | THs $2.15/SF | 55+ $1.75/SF | Conv. Estimated Density: 25-45 units/acre Parking: 1.5/unit OR 1/bed Notes: Opportunity to leverage existing downtown environment & provide for “missing middle” housing options & grow workforce housing.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Development Impacts

Single Family/ Townhomes

Multifamily Rental

Condo

Retail

Office

More residents frequenting establishments

More services / amenities in area

All development can remove unwanted uses, increase city tax digest/improve services, & increase property values Greatest retail support Pros

Low intensity use in/near neighborhoods More eyes on street, increased safety Opportunities for new residents / existing residents to downsize Strongest attainability

More eyes on street

More jobs Living wages Local jobs Workers frequent and support retail

Low intensity use in urban environment

More transient population

Increased Density

Might get undesirable retail

Does not provide significant retail support

Increased density

Often geared towards wealthy due costs

Jobs are not high wages

Creates dead zones at night

Cons

All uses will increase property values (higher taxes) and traffic

THE MERIDIAN APARTMENTS

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

COVID-19 Impact

•

The Atlanta metro lost over 100,000 jobs due to the pandemic

•

Much of these in retail, hospitality, and population servicing industries

•

Most jobs projected to recover starting in late 2021 and back to pre-pandemic levels by year end 2022

•

The for-sale residential market has remained strong particularly at higher sales prices result of historic low supply delivered since the Great Recession

•

The rental market metro-wide has remained strong with highest level of absorption in its history, however, rental rate growth has slowed and absorption has been strongest in the suburbs as well as value-oriented properties

•

Mixed-use environments both urban and suburban continue to be in high demand, with the lack of these environments in the suburbs pushing demand even further for suburban town centers

•

Rising home prices and a lack of supply coupled with changing tenure preferences has created new rental product types including professionally managed rental townhomes and rental single-family developments

•

The pandemic has exacerbated retail trends of the shift away from big box stores to more online shopping and less need for brick & mortar locations.

•

While many stores still desire a brick & mortar location to engage customers, these spaces need to be “right-sized” as there is less inventory need and a desire to keep absolute rents low

•

A result is an increasing mix of food & beverage as “anchors” to any retail development along with support from population servicing retail

•

Experiential / destination retail has become extremely important in creating successful retail environments

•

Similar to retail, the pandemic has exacerbated office trends that were already in place which were a shift to more remote / flexible work environments

•

While this might lead to less office space needed per employee this could be offset by a shift away from dense office settings

•

While more remote work scenarios could reduce demand for office space, this trend is very sector

•

Hospitality has been hit hardest by the pandemic and will take years to recover with many companies currently limiting business travel and large gatherings.

FROM FAYETTEVILLE CITY MANAGER’S WEEKLY REPORT

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

02.3 Lessons from Analysis

Market Analysis

Parks and Open Space

•

The City of Fayetteville has completed many studies identifying the community’s desire for an increase in parks and open space.

•

Open space aesthetics, identity, gateways, and streetscapes are a priority given previous studies. Next steps are to identify specific opportunities for existing open space improvements and locations for new proposed spaces.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

•

The analysis indicates significant demand for single family and attached townhouses. The identification, prioritization, and policy incentives that encourage the desired scale and character of development should be evaluated to align with the overall vision of the Downtown Fayetteville LCI Study.

•

Demand for office space is limited as only 19% of residents work in Fayetteville in comparison to 35% of residents that commute over 25 miles to work. Future studies should identify work and lifestyle changes as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Other Questions / Comments •

Fayetteville leadership should determine whether to prioritize attracting major employers or improving quality of life and local amenities to benefit local residents and attract others.

•

The LCI study should focus on engaging marginalized and underserved residents to be benefited by the plan without displacement.

Mobility •

Past analyses emphasize the need for infrastructure to optimize walking and biking. This LCI study should reinforce the Master Path Plan while considering a bold vision of a highly networked open space that is independent of the road system.

•

Community feedback for parking is pivotal for a deeper study and consideration.

Existing Conditions | Market Study | Lessons from Phase 1

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

03 70

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Engagement

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

03.1 Engagement Timeline Overview

The project process was divided into four phases as outlined below. Starting with outreach and communications activities to build study awareness and excitement within the community, laying the groundwork for meaningful input and community engagement during the next phases, and initiating a strong following by community members.

Investigate The study process began with a soft kick-off of the project via the City’s multiple communications channels. This work was carried out through the release of a study flyer in late December 2020 that communicated the project goals and process and informed the community of input opportunities that would debut in early 2021.

Explore In this phase, a virtual community charrette was conducted to craft a collective vision for the LCI study area.

Recommend The teams recommendations were presented to the community via a hybrid setting.

Document This phase was to document and finalize the recommendations including the community engagement process and input.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

03.2 Investigate Re-visit

Overview

Study Website Launch

The first few months of the LCI study process included a flurry of outreach and communications activities to help position the project for success. These activities focused on building study awareness and excitement within the community, laying the groundwork for meaningful input and community engagement during the next phase, and initiating a strong following by community members.

Early January 2021 saw the launch of the study website:

Soft Project Kick-off The study process began with a soft kick-off of the project via the City’s multiple communications channels. This work was carried out through the release of a study flyer in late December 2020 that communicated the project goals and process and informed the community of input opportunities that would debut in early 2021.

www.fayettevillelcistudy.com This site will serve as the information hub for study information as well as a centralized location for all outreach activities. The City’s Planning and Zoning page links directly to the site: https://fayetteville-ga.gov/city-departments/ community-development/planning-and-zoning/livablecenters-initiative-lci/, furthering ease of access to project information.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Photo Scavenger Hunt Initiation

Core Team Establishment & Welcome

Early January 2021 also marked the start of a fun, webbased photo scavenger hunt. Community members can take photos from anywhere in the Downtown study area, capturing characteristics they feel best fits with their response to the hashtags of:

The City established, confirmed, and welcomed a 17-member “Core Team” to serve as champions of the study process and help guide the plan’s outcomes. The project team delivered a formal welcome via email the first week of February, encouraging members to participate in the charrette and scavenger hunt while helping get the word out about the process.

#MoreOfThisDowntown – a photo to display something they like to see more of in Downtown #LessOfThisDowntown – a photo to display something they would like to see less of in Downtown #MyFayettevilleFavorite – a photo that shows their favorite place/thing in Fayetteville Participants submit responses via email or social media and are entered for a raffle prize from local businesses. Photos and raffle winners will be featured at the February Design Charette, creating a bridge between the project kick-off and the February community meetings.

Advertising and Communications Activities During the Investigate stage, the study, its goals, and current/upcoming activities were promoted in multiple ways, including via the City’s Facebook and Instagram accounts, Next Door, weekly eblasts, and monthly City News publication. The team also established a project updates email sign-up on the study website and sent out its first update to the group.

Charrette Save the Date & Promotions The Community Design Charrette – a community work session where community members are asked to roll up their sleeves and help plan for Downtown’s next phase – was scheduled for February 11th and 12th. An online registration tool was established on the project website – giving community members the option to participate in one or both 1.5-hour sessions (to be held on Thursday evening and Friday mid-day).

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Questions from Analysis and Site Visits

Questions

Targeted towards Community

Targeted towards Client

What are the community acceptable levels of density?

Targeted towards Community

Questions

Targeted towards Client

What are some of your favorite downtowns in Georgia or in other states and why?

What are the positive and negative characteristics of the existing parks and open spaces? What is desirable, what is undesirable?

What activities do you want to take place within future and existing parks and open space (recreation, community gathering, event planning, physical health, economic development, nature appreciation, etc.)?

How should the character areas be treated where there has been recent new development or where there is development planned?

What types of amenities and nodes are desired for greenspace connections (pocket parks, bike paths, walking trails, multi-use pathways, seating areas, water features, plazas, community gathering spaces with commercial partnership, dog parks, etc.)?

How do you interpret density –by height or other? How does the community feel about rental product versus ownership product? Does this vary by product type? (Rental townhomes / cottages vs conventional apartments) Are there demographics and/or household types / housing types missing in the community? x Young professionals? Opportunity for households to downsize? Would the community support a shared centralized parking deck? x

A centralized shared parking deck would unlock the development potential of many sites given the costs of parking and current rent levels of many uses

What types of retail and/or services do you have to leave the community for? And where do you go for this retail and / or services?

What is Fayetteville missing?

In 5 years from now what other Atlanta regional community do you envision Fayetteville looking like?

What character areas should be preserved?

How should the character areas be treated where there has been recent new development or where there is development planned?

The 2018 Future Land Use Map shows much of the Downtown study area as “Walkable MixedUse.” Is this desirable and feasible given the Existing Character Map and Table? Should the Downtown study area be more variable in character?

What parts of the downtown area should be preserved into the future?

What parts of the downtown area do you want to see change or improve in the future?

What is your opinion of the new residential development that’s taken place in downtown Fayetteville? (i.e., The Village, The Meridian, scattered new housing subdivisions). Could you see yourself moving there soon or in the future? If you already live in downtown, what made you choose to live there?

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

03.2 Explore Re-Engage + Focus

Virtual Community Design Charrette (February 11-12, 2021)

Overview A virtual community charrette was conducted on February 11th and 12th, 2021 to craft a collective vision for the downtown study area of Fayetteville by taking the lessons learned from history and past efforts and reimagine a future that engages all the stakeholders and is healthy for the environment and the community. Participants shared input on areas to preserve and change as well as perspectives on future land uses, Downtown access and mobility, and open space. Both meetings were conducted virtually via zoom.

Re-engage The first day was to re-engage the community..

Focus The second day was built on discussion and input provided and collected from the first day.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Photo Scavenger Hunt

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

PRESERVE

•

Existing parks, open and green spaces such as courthouse square and the amphitheater.

•

Current community events and activities.

Existing local businesses and restaurants and shops.

CHANGE CHANGE •

Heritage Park and May Hart parks need updates and improvements.

•

Current park network lacks connectivity.

IMAGINE •

•

OPEN SPACES

•

Less chains and big businesses.

•

Less car dealerships.

IMAGINE

USES

More parks and open spaces with programming and memorial spaces (sports courts, equipment, roller skating, arts, veteran and African American memorial space). More community events such as fests, community swaps, car shows, movie nights. Dedicated multi-use paths connecting to activity nodes and green network to enhance connectivity and pedestrian and bike safety.

•

More local small businesses, shopping and restaurants in downtown.

•

Mixed income housing for different demographics (affordable, middle income, young and older families).

•

Mixed-use developments and diversity in uses and amenities (commercial, office + housing).

•

New uses such as meeting space, art gallery, outdoor dining in downtown.

•

Attract residents and businesses to downtown.

PRESERVE •

CHANGE •

Less auto-centric; more pedestrian and bike friendly by improving safety and infrastructure.

•

Less traffic congestion and high speeds in downtown.

•

Parking in downtown is limited, need clear signing to make it less confusing.

IMAGINE

PRESERVE

Senior services have good programs, but could be built up and improved.

•

More parking in downtown.

•

Relieving traffic through road diets.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

•

MOBILITY

BUILDINGS

Preserve historic character and old buildings.

CHANGE •

Old houses are deteriorated, lack of maintenance,

•

Downtown shops are vacant and need activity.

IMAGINE •

Infill developments to provide density and walkable to downtown.

•

Re-purpose unused buildings re-purpose and improve existing buildings.

•

New developments to be compatible with historic character

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

What is your vision for Fayetteville?

“Preserve neighborhood and small town feel.”

“No jobs for young professionals; current commute time is very long.”

“Fayetteville as an inviting, affordable and authentic town with a sense of pride.”

“Fayetteville should be the heart not an artery.”

“Pinterest Worthy.”

“Infill Development.”

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

“Providing growth opportunities.”

“Need sustainability element to be incorporated into plan!”

“Repurpose unused property and buildings.”

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

The Birth of ‘moving Fayetteville Forward’

Survey Results

During the community charrette, participants were asked for suggestions regarding naming the LCI initiative. The top choice was Fayetteville Forward. The word ‘moving’ was later added by the team to suggest active motion.

TOP PLACES TO GO DOWNTOWN

TOP PRIORITY

1. Restaurants and Bars 2. Fayette County Public Library 3. Courthouse Square

57%

WANT TO SEE MORE VARIETY DOWNTOWN

Expand and connect to Fayetteville multi-use path network

33%

49%

24%

WANT TO EXPAND DEDICATED BIKE LANES

WANT MORE GREENSPACE DOWNTOWN

WANT TO EXTEND SIDEWALKS TO ADDRESS GAPS IN THE SIDEWALK NETWORK

YES

82%

WANT MORE SHOPS AND RESTAURANTS DOWNTOWN

Mobility

Downtown

To additional off-street parking

TOP PRIORITY

To the addition of a parking deck

More patios and outdoor cafe dining

WHAT WE HEARD ONLINE AND PAPER SURVEY

Suggestion Boxes Designed by Local Artists

29%

Open Spaces

Housing

Want to see more recreational activities

42%

Are supportive of adding more cottages on limited sized lots as a housing option

39%

Want to see more pop-up markets and food booths

TOP HOUSING OPTIONS

1. Cottages 2. Townhomes 3. Entry level housing

YOU WANT TO SEE MORE

Input boxes were designed and decorated by a group of Fayetteville local artists. The boxes were used to receive feedback from the community and were strategically places in accessible locations in the city including the Fayette County Library, City Hall and Church Street Park.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

1. Multi-use Pathways 2. Pocket Parks 3. Water Features

TOP PRIORITY

23%

WANT MORE OPEN SPACE

21%

WANT MORE LIGHTING

Keep Downtown Authentic

40%

Of people thought empty-nesters could utilize additional housing options

TOP PRIORITY More afforable housing options for young professionals Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

04.3 Recommend and Document

Hybrid Community Meeting A Community Town Hall meeting was attended by elected officials and several local residents in June 2021. Presenters reported on months of research and community feedback and gave recommendations to the City regarding many quality-of-life infrastructure improvements . Participants engaged in-person and online. Part 1 of the meeting focused on the Presentation of Project Overview and Progress including Connections and Nodes, Mobility , Codifying the place and the impact of feedback and preferences. Part 2 engaged the audience online through break-out rooms and in-person through large printed boards to garner feedback and preferences. This section highlights the main takeaways from the Explore and Recommend Community Meeting.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

MIXED-USE MULTIF FAM MILY HOUSING

MULTIFAMILY HOU USING

Lower scale and aesthetiic sim milar to image (B) are most preferre ed esp pecia ally with restaurants and active ro oo oftop ftop sp spaces. paces. Large monolithic developm ments are not desired (as in images A and d E) E). Glass and contemporary styles / matterials are not preferred (as in im mage D).

General push back reg garding tall and big buildings. Modern n aesthetic desired, how wever, not too eclectic as in ima age G.

OFFICE

Note: Images highlighted in green indicate most desired and images indicated in red were the least desired images.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Small scale office buildings with 1-3 stories serving small businesses are mostly prefered, (ssim milar to image E). Unlike images ((B),(C) and (G), contemporary faca fac ades with less glass and modern brick patterns are preferred (Similar to images A and D). General support for adaptive reuse.

RETAIL + ACTIVE EDGE Wid de sidewalks, overhangs and d outdoor dining spaces are d desired. The group liked morre colorful facades, such as in image (F). Collonade sttructures are generally not preferred.

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

“Future materiality should complement and bllend with current charactter and herrittage of Fayettteville.”

General Comments

“More natu ural settin ngs.”

PUBLIC REAL LM: PARKS + OPE EN SPACES There is a gene eral apprehension towarrds large paved areas. Sidew walks and buffers with more e treess and landscape were preferred.

NO Too much concrete, gardenstyle apartment buildings, large im mpervious surfaces, overpowering buildings. “Active rooftop spa aces and usab ble parkletts will be wo onderful”

“Build upon current small town feel, yet modern modernize!” nize e!

YES PUBLIC REALM: SIDE EWALKS, BIKE PATHS + STREET FURNITURE S

Note: Images highlighted in green indicate most desired and images indicated in red were the least desired images.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Mosst participants indicated a desire to have a more active urban feel as well as separating cyclists c ycl and pedestrians with wide planting buffers.

Quaint architectural style, diverse flexible spaces, contextsensitive wayfinding, Brick facades.

“L Lov ve the iidea of planning a space s for activities such c as food trucks or open o air markkets.”

Investigate | Explore | Recommend + Document

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

04 96

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Vision

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

04.1 The Big Idea

RESPECT

NATURE

moving Fayetteville Forward

Maintain the authenticity of Fayetteville Preserve natural assets Leverage Parks, landscaping, trees

Vision

Elevate access for improved mental health and emotional well-being Emphasize historic character Unify signage standards referencing historic character

Through deep community engagement, this project was named: moving Fayetteville Forward. In doing a vested exploration of what the opportunities are for Downtown Fayetteville, it was determined that the movement that was desired needed to be multidirectional. To demonstrate this aspiration , the team tapped into the visual of a compass to create the guiding principles that will illustrate the priorities of the study and identify the performance metrics that will help maintain the accountability of the process for the Livable Centers Initiative.

The Vision for moving Fayetteville Forward is to reimagine the possibilities in Downtown through catalytic equitable placemaking, enhanced legibility of the built environment, and creative guidelines for healthy, sustainable developments that will empower its diverse communities.

PRIORITIZE

REVITALIZE

WALKABILITY

ECONOMY Diversify economy

Improve walk scores

Imagine new developments

Integrate sidewalks with

creatively to revitalize the

public realm

economy

Incorporate Multi-use trails

Strengthen economic impact by

and improve connectivity with

mixing uses

Fayetteville and Fayette County

Plan feasible developments

Focus on Downtown core

aligned with market study

accessibility to create unified

Promote small businesses and

streetscape

art+culture organizations

Guiding Principles ENHANCE The guiding principles for a project are tenets that will be a tool for decision making and accountability. The cardinal directions of North, South, East and West of a compass have been adapted to indicate the priorities of the study: Nature, Social, Economy and Walkability.

SOCIAL Emphasize spaces for community interaction Enhance safety

This aligns with the goals that the Atlanta Regional Commission has while investing in such initiatives for the cities. The guiding principles inform an actionable framework on which the recommendations are built. Character themes portray the individual identity of different zones in the area where key nodes are inserted for the community to meaningfully gather. The places and spaces are intentionally connected through a network of links that offer the legibility and access indicated in the over-arching vision.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Empower Community - led action Celebrate Social, racial and intergenerational diversity Promote shared, flexible spaces

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

The Framework

ST D B LV

T S G

LY N

N S

RD GA

T N S

LY N

LEY

S G

Existing Open Space

D B LV

Proposed Park

YFIEL

Proposed Inner Loop

IE MA

JIMM

Proposed Outer Loop

S G LY

D B LV

YFIEL

IE MA

JIMM

LEY

NN ST

B LV

LEY

Existing Open Space

ELD

Proposed Nodes

YFI

heritage of Fayetteville’s 200 years of existence.

MIE

GA 54

R A

IE LAN

W S TO N E WA L L AV E

The Root speaks to the rich foundation set in this area by the Sugar Hill community, the religious institutions and the civic organizations. It indicates growth that speaks to the dichotomy of the present and the future that is deeply rooted in the

W L A N I E R AV

GA 54

JIM

GA 54

B LV

R A

IE LAN

N L A FAY E T T E AV E

O ER

Outer Loop 4.0 Miles

GA 54

E S TO N E WA L L AV E

J E F F E R S O N AV E

G EO R G I A AV E

W L A N I E R AV

new developments like Trilith. It lends itself to be characterized by innovation

CHURCH ST

L A FAY E T T E AV E

E L A N I E R AV

GA 54

western portion of the study area is closer in proximity to both natural assets and

G EO R G I A AV E

CORE

W S TO N E WA L L AV E

The Edge mirrors the historical aspect of the root by being a play of the phrase - at the Leading edge. This

Inner Core Loop 2.2 Miles

H O O D AV E

GA 54

THE

H O O D AV E

L A FAY E T T E AV E

W L A N I E R AV

J E F F E R S O N AV E

LAGE

The Core pays homage to the history of Fayetteville with the preservation of many notable places of interest. It is also home to the new government buildings that together with the local businesses shape the main street.

HILLSDALE DR

N J E F F D AV I S D R

HILLSDALE DR

N YN GL

CHURCH ST

E VIL

THE THRESHOLD

H O O D AV E

to nature

HILLSDALE DR

J E F F E R S O N AV E

just right for communities to thrive

this area echoes the homely features of walkable urbanism with connections

CHURCH ST

Preserving the character set by the Villages at LaFayette,

N J E F F D AV I S D R

this area serves as a portal to the new downtown district with its mix of uses that are

N J E F F D AV I S D R

A Threshold is the entrance or start of something and

as it becomes the nexxus where creative mixed use developments can be featured.

IDENTIFY CHARACTER THEMES

Areas distinguished by common characteristics based on physical environment analysis and community perception

100

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

GATHER

CONNECT

NODES

LINKS

Strategic focus points for orientation, pause, celebration and engagement. New nodes provide placemaking opportunities unique to each character area.

Routes along which people move throughout the city that offer legibility and access.

101

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

05 102

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Recommendations

103

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

FO RR ES TA VE

ST NG LY NN

Recommendations

HILLSDALE DR

20 MI NU TE

JEFFERSON AVE

15 MI NU TE AVE HOOD

10 MI NU TE

As stated earlier in this document, Fayetteville needs more programmed open spaces. In addition to preserving the existing parks and open spaces, there are four proposed new parks as shown on the map on the opposite page.

5M INU TE

The analysis below shows how the proposed parks close the walkshed gaps with the LCI study area. This ensures all of the residents of the LCI study area are within at least 15 minute walk to a park or programmed open space. The next spread details the proposed parks and public spaces as well as streetscape enhancements.

WA LK

5 N GLYNN ST

CHURCH ST

Introduction

N JEFF DAVIS DR

05.1 Parks and Open Space

LAFAYETTE AVE

GA 54

R AV NIE E LA

2 W LANIER AV

BOOKER AV

W STONEWALL AVE

GA 54

Legend 5 Minute Walk

Legend

PLANNED CITY PARK

10 Minute Walk

Y AD GR

15 Minute Walk

E AV

Existing Open Space Proposed Open Space

DA VI S

S GL YNN ST

BEA UR EGA RD BLV D

R YD DLE BRA

LVD IELD B MAYF JIMMIE

Walkshed Analysis of Proposed Parks and Open Spaces within the LCI boundary.

Four new parks are proposed to ensure all residents of the study area are within a 15-minute walk to a park.

5 Minute Walk 10 Minute Walk 15 Minute Walk

20 Minute Walk Existing Street Development Opportunity

Existing Street

Walkshed Analysis of Existing Parks and Open Spaces

JE FF

Existing Open Space

Water

Existing Park

Proposed Park

Open Space

Water

Proposed Parks and Open Spaces 104

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

105

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Southern Conservation Trust Preserve

Continue Preservation of forest land next to the Southern Conservation Trust. The vacant parcel west of the Southern Conservation Trust could be developed in a way where conditions exist requiring the developer to connect trail systems in the development by the stream to the Southern Conservation Trust as well as the planned community green space on the Fisher Avenue extension.

•

Outdoor education opportunities

•

Natural walking trails that take advantage of the stream.

•

Health and exercise

•

Disc golf

•

Playgrounds for children

The vacant space along E Lanier Avenue and S Jeff Davis Drive, and also along Booker Avenue, provide an excellent opportunity to provide transition space between the residential community in this area to the downtown commercial area. This could be accomplished in a variety of ways, but adding public park space in this area that provides a variety of functions would work well.

•

Walking trails

•

Community event space

•

Playground for children

•

Dog park

•

Mixed use of small scale commercial (dining and or shopping) on the edges facing the street.

•

A place for people to enjoy the city before or after going to an event at the amphitheater.

•

Pedestrian connection through the residential area linking this vacant area to the downtown.

Potential Public Gathering space / small park The vacant spaces between E Lanier Avenue and E Stonewall Ave provide a great opportunity for a mixed-use development that provides an open park space linkage between the two streets.

106

•

Playgrounds for children

•

Dog Park

•

Open spaces for community events

•

Physical and mental health

•

This would also potentially serve as a node of connection between the enhanced pedestrian gateway along N Jeff Davis Drive and the residential community.

•

Small scale commercial development for the use of restaurants or shopping could also be incorporated into the park space.

•

Abernathy Greenway along Abernathy Road in Roswell is a good example of a liner park alongside of a vehicular roadway.

Outdoor Public / Park Space to transition between amphitheater & downtown The vacant lot adjacent to the existing amphitheater provides a great opportunity to create linkage between the amphitheater and the residential area leading to downtown. This could be done with a combination of park space that is more of a natural feel than a developed feel with the following programming:

Transitional Park

•

Open green spaces provide opportunities for community events close to the downtown area.

•

Adding mixed use options makes the place more easily inhabitable which creates public interest.

•

Potential to be used as a public park when not being used for community events.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Pocket Park •

Public space node

•

Gateway to north 85 corridor

•

Possible location for a community garden, playground for children or other neighborhood initiatives.

Streetscape The historic homes purposed for commercial use along N Jeff Davis Drive provide a good opportunity to begin a gateway into the downtown area. Pedestrian activity could be enhanced with more of a separation between the sidewalk and the road with enhanced low maintenance landscaping within the landscape strip. •

Seating nodes within the enhanced pedestrian pathways should be designed appropriately to connect to the local businesses. Perhaps there is an incentive for business owners to provide enhanced seating nodes along the sidewalk that lead into their place of business and also provide a nice feature for the users of the sidewalk. Pocket parks with private partnership

•

There was strong desire for more local outdoor dining options. The large front yards of these old historic homes facing N Jeff Davis provide a great opportunity to meet this desire.

•

Historic Roswell, GA on Canton Street is good example of this.

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

107

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Recommendations

HOOD AVE

More tourists and locals are expected to visit and live in the city’s downtown area with this influx in population, creating a need for better and safer downtown amenities to support its residents and visitors. There is a need for public spaces where people can interact and define the community’s aesthetic quality, economic activity, health, and sustainability. New design strategies should therefore be implemented to develop a strong framework for the infrastructure amenities needed to get people out of their cars to socialize, interact with their environment, and discover other mobility options.

GA 54

R AV NIE E LA W LANIER AV W STONEWALL AVE

GA 54

Existing Pedestrian and Cycling Network

Legend

Existing Sidewalk

Existing Open Space

Existing Street

Water

JE FF

DA VI S

Existing trail Proposed Outer Loop Proposed Inner Loop Existing sidewalk Master Path Plan Recommendation Development opportunity

S GL YNN ST

Existing Open Space

BEA UR EGA RD BLV D

Existing Bike Lane

LVD IELD B MAYF JIMMIE

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

LAFAYETTE AVE

R YD DLE BRA

108

Advocates for (re)developing Fayetteville’s core transportation network to work for the city’s residents, businesses, and visitors. This requires flexibility in its design application and implementation so that mobility priorities and guidance for transportation investments are identified to improve resident’s quality of life and access to goods or services.

CHURCH ST

GEORGIA AVE

E AV

Defines ideal standards for Complete Streets in local areas. “Complete Streets” refer to the concept that roadways should be designed with all users in mind, not just motorists. These standards apply context-sensitive design approaches to roadway redesign that enable safe, convenient, and comfortable travel or access for users of all ages and abilities regardless of their mode of transportation. This effort will support walking and bicycling within Fayetteville.

Outer Loop 4.0 Miles

Y AD GR

Recognizes the physical constraints, context, and character of the surrounding built and natural environment. It recommends policies and projects that strengthen the pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicle transportation network within the LCI study area.

JEFFERSON AVE

Inner Core Loop 2.2 Miles

A Mobility Framework, detailed below, was formulated by NV5 to guide the future development and growth of Downtown Fayetteville. The overarching goal of this framework is to implement the desired public infrastructure investments within the city’s existing specifications for streets and roadways. These investments are needed to support more private developments in the downtown area and ensure all users of transportation networks leading to or from these developments can travel safely, reliably, and independently between them in adequate and accessible ways. The proposed framework should be used to rethink how existing street networks and public rights-of-way can be re-purposed or better utilized to move Fayetteville Forward into a future and prosperous community.

HILLSDALE DR

N JEFF DAVIS DR

FO RR ES TA VE

Introduction

The proposed Mobility Framework for Fayetteville:

NG LY NN

05.2 Mobility

Proposed Park Existing Park

Active Mobility Masterplan N

Existing Open Space

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

109

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Inner and Outer Loop Segments These three Mobility Framework guidelines will assist city staff with identifying a street design hierarchy so that mobility investments and place-making strategies are prioritized and applied within the LCI study area. Doing so will create unique pedestrian and storefront opportunities in targeted redevelopment locations as well as present several project recommendations that can enhance local mobility. This includes improved pedestrian and bicycle capacities through downtown, connecting residential and commercial areas with parks and open space, and creating stronger linkages to neighboring communities. Applying these approaches to Downtown Fayetteville will position the city for any future public transit investments and advance the city’s livability goals.

The Inner and Outer Loops are an assemblage of existing sidewalks and trails that enable travelers to walk, run, or bike around downtown Fayetteville’s inner core, connecting with the city’s cultural and historic assets. The loop system aims to connect the different sections of the downtown mixed use district through a cohesive pedestrian and cyclist paths that connect to the existing and proposed open spaces. As both loops path through the various character theme areas (see Section 04: Vision) , the trails would have a similar character in the respective areas as detailed below.

Purpose And Application The Outer Loop is envisioned to be identified by a unique wayfinding signage system and divided into two (2) distinctive segments: the Community Trail and the Ecology Trail.

The recommendations within the Mobility Framework are intended to provide a broad vision for streets within downtown Fayetteville and the LCI study area. It is intended to supplement and provide a baseline for decision-making on a case-by-case basis using the professional judgment of the designer. The recommendations provided herein offer directions for incorporating Complete Street principles and practices, especially as the city looks to finalize its Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) and update its Public Works Design Manual, other standards, and practices. Although these street typologies are focused on the LCI study area, they also may have wider application.

This section would have opportunities to highlight local art, artists and community members and groups including veterans and civil rights activists.

The built up character of the Fayetteville’s downtown area present unique challenges for implementing changes to its streets. However, new development on vacant parcels and redevelopment of existing land offer opportunities few cities will experience to remake their street system. It should be noted that implementation of the Mobility Framework’s recommendations is not one size fits all, and the recommendations provide a range of feasible, cost-effective approaches to achieving mobility facility design objectives. The street typologies presented are intended to illustrate how different travel modes can be balanced within an existing right-of-way while minimizing modification of the curb and drainage system, thereby minimizing cost of implementation. At the same time the street typologies offer preferred dimensions and treatments that may only be applicable when a roadway is being rebuilt. In practice, a specific design may more strongly emphasize some street design objectives while providing baseline treatments for others.

Trail Loops Character Map Photo Courtsey of Pannier Graphics.com

Project decisions will continue to be made through the combination of expert and community input, City Council direction, available resources, site conditions and other factors. Opportunities to reduce environmental impacts should be routinely considered, along with other project objectives. Broadly speaking, the city will seek to cost-effectively maximize the benefits to the public, to distribute street improvements equitably and to serve all members of the community.

Outer Loop: Ecology Trail Segment (The Edge + The Village) This section connects Fayette Elementary School and the Fayette County High school to the Southern Conservation Trust passing along the Pye Lake Watershed. This section of the outer loop would have synergy with the schools, including students using it for commute, opportunities for student work exhibitions. Also, there is an opportunity to connect with Southern Conservation Trust educational mission by providing educational markers and signage of natural landscapes such as flood plains and wetlands, as well as habitats and ecosystems.

Southern Conservation Trust Trail Trailhead’s are an important introduction to a facility. Their design can either support an overall theme for a trail or convey a story for a trail segment. Trailheads often include amenities such as trail maps, benches, trash receptacles, portalets , bike repair stations, etc. They also can be designed so that they provide parking for hikers who might arrive by car.

Outer Loop: Community Trail Segment (The Root)

Inner Loop: Historic Core Trail Segment (The Core) This inner loop is envisioned to be identified by a unique wayfinding signage system, emphasized by markers and signage of historic properties, landmark and events.

110

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

111

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Major Type 1: Thoroughfare Major Type 2: Commercial Street Major Type 2: Commercial Boulevard Major Type 3: Mixed-Use

Framework

Commercial Street Type 2: Main Street

NG LY NN

Roadway Network Policy Recommendations

Commercial Street Type 1: Connector

Commercial Street Type 3: Commercial Alley

FO RR ES TA VE

Residential Street Residential Boulevard

HILLSDALE DR

N PARK DR

RABBIT’S RUN

Shared Public Way

JEFFERSON AVE

Typical

KATHI AVE

Policy Recommendations HOOD AVE

Adopt a Complete Street Policy “Complete streets” refers to the concept that roadways should be designed with all users in mind, not just motorists. The policy should include language that addresses all users and travel modes, applies to all types of transportation projects, recognizes the importance of a complete street network, directs designers to use the latest design guidance, identifies specific implementation steps, and creates measurable performance standards to evaluate whether the policy is meeting its goals.

HOO D AV E

LAFAYETTE AVE

LEE ST

S GLYNN ST

1 Unified Development Ordinance (Draft), City of Fayetteville, GA. Chapter 300 - Land Development. Article 1. Street, Sidewalks, and Public Paces. Section 301.1-301.4. pp. 103-112. City of Fayetteville, GA, January 2021.

BE AU RE GA RD BLV D

Minor Streets. Minor Streets are used for local circulation in residential areas providing access to abutting property.

N JEFF DAVIS DR

JOHNSON AVE

CITY CENTER PKWY

VD D BL FIEL MAY MIE JIM

HOLLY AVE

JOHNSON AVE

HERATIGE PKWY

E AV

Collector Streets. Collector Streets channel local traffic into the major/minor collector and arterial system. Collectors provide circulation within residential subdivisions or commercial and industrial areas.

AVE KER BOO

HILL ST

W STONEWALL AVE

GA 54

Y AD GR

V IER A EE E LAN AV L AL W NE O ST

W LANIER AV

The City of Fayetteville, through their Unified Development Ordinance (UDO), prepared a simplified three (3) tiered street hierarchy, classifying all streets, roads, and highways1 as: Major Streets. Major Streets are intended to provide swift and safe movement of traffic through the community.

GEORGIA AVE

GA 54

A Street Typology can augment the traditional roadway functional classification method by providing a user-oriented classification system that goes beyond considering the street system as a mere conveyor of automobiles. The typology classification system focuses on contextual approaches to roadways that consider nearby land uses and multiple user groups that create a sense of place rather than solely focusing on traffic volumes and speeds as functional roadway design parameters.

CHURCH ST

Street Typologies

UDO Streets

GEORGIA AVE

TIGER TRAIL

The traditional functional classifications of streets provide a hierarchy that correlates traffic flow to land access. Traffic volume, speed, and level of service provide the basis for roadway design criteria. However, this classification system falls short in considering non-vehicular users of the public right-of-way (pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit) and is void of context for how the street impacts adjacent land uses and vice versa.

LAFAYETTE A

Establish a Street Typology

FENWYCK CMNS

JE FF

DA VI S

R YD DLE BRA

New Street Typologies

112

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

113

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

UDO Street Types The UDO street hierarchy establishes prerequisite minimums for roadway and street design to include dimensional requirements for right-of-way (ROW), surface pavement, and sidewalks. The UDO street hierarchy also establishes access requirements. It is within the boundaries of the UDO street hierarchy and typologies that the Fayetteville LCI’s proposed Mobility Framework sits.

Commercial Street Type 1: Connector

Industrial Streets. A street serving primarily industrial developments.

Commercial Streets. A street serving primarily commercial development.

Residential Streets. A street primarily function to provide access to residential uses.

Alleys. A public thoroughfare or way that provides a secondary means of access to abutting property.

Commercial

Major Streets. A street that provides swift and safe movements of traffic through the community. Commercial Street Type 2: Main Street

Commercial Street Type 3: Commercial Alley

Description

Transportation Function

Residential Street

UDO Street Types

Industrial

Mobility Framework Streets. The Mobility Framework’s proposes eleven (11) street design typologies for four (4) of the five (5) UDO street typologies (Industrial Streets were not included). The design variations have been matched to their principal UDO street typology to provide continuity between the UDO right-of-way and minimum pavement width requirements, and the Framework’s street design concepts. Each of the street typology variations is intended to provide design flexibility and to inform the reimagining and overall (re)design of streets, specifically within the LCI study area. Table 1 illustrates how the street design variations align with the City of Fayetteville’s existing UDO street classification hierarchy and street typology.

Transportation Function

Collector Streets

In addition to establishing a street hierarchy, the UDO also establishes five (5) street typologies. They include: 1.

Description

N/A

A secondary street network characterized by moderate traffic emphasizing moving people through and between neighborhood and access to property.

Emphasizes throughput

Streets characterized by a diverse mix of retail and office fronting the street, heavy foot traffic, and people using several types of transportation to circulate.

Balances access and throughput; pedestrians are priority

Small scale pedestrian-oriented streets characterized by low traffic and low speeds, a diverse mix of retail and office fronting the street, heavy foot traffic, bikes, and both nonmotorized and micro-mobility travel modes

Emphasizes access

N/A

Streets primarily serving residential areas characterized by relatively low traffic and low speeds, housing, separated walkways, and sometimes on-street parking

Emphasizes access; pedestrians are priority

Residential Street

Residential Boulevard

Major Streets Minor Streets

Major Thoroughfare

Major Type 2A:

Major Type 2B: Major Boulevard

Auto-oriented street characterized by large scale commercial land uses and moderate to high amounts of traffic that emphasizes throughput. Auto-oriented street characterized by a mix of smaller scaled commercial land uses and housing, moderate to high amounts of traffic, and that seeks to balance throughput and access.

Emphasizes throughput

Balances access and throughput

Residential Street

Streets primarily serving residential areas characterized by relatively low traffic and low speeds, housing, separated walkways, and sometimes on-street parking

Emphasizes access

Residential Alley

A small-scale street or alley with no curbs primarily used for vehicular access to adjacent residential properties either through individual garages, shared surface parking, or sharedmulti vehicle parking facilities.

Emphasizes access

Shared Public Way

A small-scale pedestrian-oriented street or alley with no curbs or separate areas for various types of transportation characterized by delivery vehicles, heavy foot traffic, bikes, and both and non-motorized and micro-mobility travel modes.

Alleys

Major Streets

Major Commercial

Auto-oriented street characterized by moderate to high amounts of traffic, and emphasis on throughput.

Residential Street

Major Type 1:

Major Type 3: Mixed-Use

Street characterized by a diverse mix of retail, housing, office and/or institutional land uses serving people using several transportation modes to circulate, but with increased motor vehicle demand.

Balances access and throughput

Emphasizes non-motorized access; pedestrians are priority

Table 1. UDO/Mobility Framework Street Typology Matrix

114

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

115

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Place Types

Street Type Selection & Design

Place types represent the context of the surrounding area and are simplified categories that combine land use, development patterns, and density. Identifying the most appropriate place type—considering the existing and future context of an area—is the first step in selecting an appropriate street type. Individual projects may pass through several place types, which may require transitioning between multiple street types along the corridor.

The conventional approach to street design is based primarily on a roadway’s functional classification (arterial, collector, local, etc.). Functional classification is a surrogate for motor vehicle traffic volume and speed. Higher classifications (e.g., arterial streets) tend to carry higher volumes of traffic at higher speeds. Lower classifications (e.g., local streets) tend to carry lower volumes of traffic at lower speeds.1 However, there are several limitations to this approach, primarily:

The Fayetteville LCI area includes a variety of development patterns and land uses. A highly-simplified set of place types has been assembled in an attempt to capture and summarize development characteristics and describe their mobility attributes. The proposed zoning districts and place types are presented in Table 2 below along with descriptions of the idealized mobility characteristics.

Lack of Context Sensitivity

DMU Sub-District(s)

Place Type Activity Center

Historic Core

Mobility Description Areas with high amounts of circulation across and along streets, with a high proportion of people accessing buildings by walking or on bike

Mixed-Use Core Mixed-Use

Areas or corridors with a mix of uses, with people accessing buildings using multiple modes of transportation

Residential Neighborhood

Areas with single and multi-family homes, oftentimes with adjacent schools and parks

Neighborhood Residential

The City of Fayetteville anticipates adopting new character-based zoning districts within the LCI study area as a part of this work effort. The zoning districts encompass several place types and potential future land uses. Note, however, that place types relate to, but do not replace, the city’s zoning districts.

Step 2 - Transportation Function The current approach assumes a constant relationship between the amount of car traffic and the function of the street. However, two streets can carry the same amount of traffic but serve different functions. Streets through activity centers located near Fayetteville’s downtown core might emphasize access and lower speeds, while streets along the LCI study area’s periphery might emphasize throughput (the quick and efficient movement of people) at higher speeds.

Preparing for the Future Gateway Commercial Boulevard Commercial

Place types represent the context of the surrounding area and are simplified categories that reflect land use, development patterns, and density. The first step in selecting the appropriate street type is identifying the most appropriate place type. Planners and/or designers should take into consideration both the existing and future context of an area. Keep in mind that individual street projects may pass through multiple place types. This means that it may be necessary to transition between multiple street types along the corridor.

Access versus Throughput

Transitional Residential Mixed Use Neighborhood

The current approach lacks a consistent method for making street designs respond appropriately to the surrounding context. Take for example SR 54/Lanier Avenue West and North Jeff Davis Drive. Both roadways are classified as major streets, but exist in vastly different development contexts and should thus be designed differently. Under the current approach, it can be challenging to design major streets that support walkable, vibrant places.

Step 1 - Place Type

Commercial Center/Corridor

Areas oriented toward automobile traffic, with parking lots placed between streets and buildings

Table 2. Place Types

As Fayetteville continues to grow, it is important that streets are designed to be compatible with new development types (ex. walkable mixed use). The current street design approach is less conducive to designing streets that respond to and support such development patterns. Note: The Mobility Framework’s street typologies do not replace the traditional functional classification system which should still be used for federal funding and design purposes or where the city code requires it be utilized. All design parameters are subject to engineering review to ensure the safety and functionality of each system.

Street Type Selection Approach The recommended approach to street design will first take into consideration (1) the existing hierarchical street classification; (2) the context of the surrounding area (in the case of a greenfield or redevelopment project – the expected context of the surrounding area), and; (3) the intended function of the street. Ideally, this approach will result in streets designed to serve all anticipated users. The street type selection approach is comprised of three steps.

The transportation function of a street is determined first by identifying place type and secondly by conventional factors (e.g., traffic demand). Transportation function exists on a spectrum with one end emphasizing throughput and the other end emphasizing local access and small-scale, localized circulation. Throughput describes the efficient movement of people at greater distances, often at higher speeds. Safely maximizing throughput typically requires physically separating modes and limiting the number of intersections and driveways along a corridor. Access describes peoples’ ability to reach destinations and individual properties along a street by any mode. Access-oriented streets are typically lower-speed with higher levels of foot traffic. Transportation function may be determined by answering the following questions: »

Are there several destinations along the street?

How much foot or bike traffic (currently or potentially) is present?

Is the street an important cross-town travel link?

Step 3 - Street Types Street types, as applied herein, represent common combinations of place types and transportation functions. The street types presented within the Mobility Framework provide, offering a shortcut to address common street design situations with flexibility so that the LCI’s objectives might be implemented as envisioned. The street cross-section layouts included herein serve as starting points for the design of individual streets and include a range of parameters and set of priorities for the inclusion of various street elements (e.g., bike lanes versus on-street parking).

1 Street Types Selection and Design Parameters. Complete Street Ames. June 15, 2018.

116

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

117

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Street Type Application The relationship between these place type, street function, and street type is shown in Figure 1. Street types are selected by first identifying the appropriate place type for the context, choosing the appropriate transportation function, and then selecting the resulting street type produced by the matrix. In some situations, multiple street type options are appropriate. Selecting between the multiple options requires considering the fine-grained context and constraints within the corridor.

Throughput Emphasis

Major Type 3: Mixed-Use Activity Center

N/A

Commercial Street Type 2: Main Street

Mixed-Use

Major Type 3: Mixed-Use

N/A

Commercial Street Type 2: Main Street

# of Travel Lanes

Pavement Width (min)

Center Turn Lane / Median

Bikeway Type

On-Street Parking

Place-Type

Major Street Type 1: Thoroughfare

80 ft

2-6

24 ft

Standard

Bike lane or shareduse path

None

Commercial Center/ Corridor

80 ft

2-4

24 ft

Optional

Bike lane or shareduse path

Optional

Commercial Center/ Corridor

Major Street Type 2B: Major Boulevard

Emphasis Access Commercial Street Type 3: Commercial Alley

Major Street Type 3 Mixed-Use

Shared Public Way

Commercial Street Type 3: Commercial Alley

Commercial Street

Residential Boulevard

Type 1: Connector

80 ft

60 ft

Shared Public Way

2-4

24 ft

Residential

Commercial Street Type 1: Connector

60’

Residential Street Residential Alley

Optional

Not preferred

Shared roadway or

Optional, parallel pref.

shared-use path

Commercial Center/ Corridor

Bike lane or

Commercial Center/ Corridor

None Shared roadway

Residential

26 ft

Type 2: Main Street

Optional, Not preferred

Bike lane or Shared roadway

Parallel pref., angled

Major Type 1: Thoroughfare

Residential Boulevard

Major Type 2: Major Commercial

Major Type 3: Mixed-Use Commercial Street Type 1: Connector

Commercial Street Type 2: Main Street

Type 3: Commercial Alley

Activity Center 50’

No Centerline

20 ft

Not compatible

Shared roadway

Case-by-case design flexibility is built into the Mobility Framework and can be applied to any of the included street typologies by shifting street elements within the UDO right-of-way standards. The design parameters established by the UDO for each street type include minimum values which in most cases can accommodate the desired street design. In cases where values outside of the parameters are necessary or desirable to accommodate elements such as bicycles, paths, and on-street parking, the design engineer should consider and balance the needs of all modes, emphasizing safety above all else, and especially pedestrians and bicyclists. As mentioned in Step 1, land use contexts (and therefore place types) can change across the length of a corridor, and multiple street types may be applied to different segments of a single roadway. For example, a corridor may be primarily categorized as an Arterial Street, however a commercial node along it may result in a segment being classified as a Mixed Use Street. The street design elements will change accordingly, reflecting the designated street type and its economic and mobility objectives.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Mixed-Use Commercial Center/ Corridor

Industrial Street

N/A

Residential Street

50 ft

No Centerline

20 ft

Not compatible

Shared roadway

Nondelineated

Residential

Residential Boulevard

50 ft

No Centerline

20 ft

Standard

Shared roadway

Nondelineated

Table 3. Place Types

118

None

Commercial Street Type 3: Commercial Alley Street

Mixed-Use Commercial Center/ Corridor

Commercial Street Commercial Center/ Corridor

Mixed-Use

Activity Center

Commercial Street Major Type 2: Major Boulevard

Activity Center

Bike lane or

Types

Place Type

Major Type 2: Major Boulevard

ROW Width (min)

Major Street Type 2A: Major Commercial

Transportation Function Balanced Access and Throughput

Mobility Framework Street Types

Residential Alley

20 ft

No Centerline

10 ft

Not compatible

N/A

None

Shared Public Way

20 ft

No Centerline

10 ft

Not compatible

N/A

None

Mixed-Use Residential Residential Activity Center Mixed-Use

Table 3. Street Typology Standards

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

119

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

1. MAJOR STREET

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TWTL

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

PROPERTY LINE 4 FT

11 FT

UTILITY / 6 FT SIDEWALK PLANTING BUFFER

SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TWTL

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

4 FT UTILITY / 6 FT PLANTING SIDEWALK BUFFER

80 FT ROW

PROPERTY LINE

12 FT TRAVEL SIDEWALK LANE + GREEN BUFFER

PROPERTY LINE

9 FT

PROPERTY LINE

1.1 Thoroughfare

Major Street Type 1: Thoroughfares Typical

1.1.1 Description Thoroughfares are are characterized by their size, high traffic volumes of fast-moving traffic, and emphasis on through-traffic.

Glynn Street North of Hood Ave Existing Condition

1.1.3 Place Type Commercial Center/Corridor

Major Street Thoroughfare Street Section Example

1.1.5 Transportation Function

1.1.7 Local Examples

Throughput Emphasis

SR 85/Glynn St north of Hood Ave

SR 85/Glynn St south of Beauregard Blvd

1.1.2 Priority Design User

1.1.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

1.1.6 Considerations

Vehicles

Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

Traffic volume and speeds

(Future) Public Transit

Boulevard Commercial (DMU-BC)

Access management (driveway consolidation) Bicycle mobility and safety Pedestrian comfort and safety Future transit service access/mobility

120

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

121

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

1. MAJOR STREET

9 FT

12 FT TRAVEL SIDEWALK LANE + GREEN BUFFER

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TWTL

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

11 FT

PROPERTY LINE

1.2A Major Commercial

6 FT 12 FT 6 FT UTILITY / SHARED TRAVEL LANE SIDEWALK PLANTING BUFFER

SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TWTL

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

6 FT 6 FT UTILITY / PLANTING SIDEWALK BUFFER

80 FT ROW

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview Major Street 1.2A Major Commercial Typical

South Jeff Davis Existing Condition.

1.2A.1 Description Major Commercial Streets are are characterized by their size, high traffic volumes, fast-moving traffic, emphasis on through-traffic, and adjacency to dense concentrations of commercial land uses.

1.2A.3 Place Type Commercial Center/Corridor

Major Commercial Street Section and Plan

1.2A.5 Transportation Function

1.2A.7 Local Examples

Throughput Emphasis

SR 85/Glynn St between Hood Ave to LaFayette Ave

Jeff Davis Dr between Jefferson Ave and Fenwyck Comns

Jeff Davis Dr. between Johnson Ave and Jimmie Mayfield Blvd

1.2A.2 Priority Design User

1.2A.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

1.2A.6 Considerations

Vehicles

Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

Traffic volume and speeds

(Future) Public Transit

Boulevard Commercial (DMU-BC)

Access management (driveway consolidation) Bicycle mobility and safety Pedestrian comfort and safety Future transit service access / mobility

122

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

123

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

1. MAJOR STREET

8 FT

SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

14 FT MEDIAN

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

10 FT

PROPERTY LINE

1.2B Major Boulevard

8 FT SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

6 FT GREEN BUFFER

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

8 FT MEDIAN

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

6 FT GREEN BUFFER

8 FT SIDEWALK

80 FT ROW

PROPERTY LINE

Major Street Type 1.2B: Major Boulevard Typical

North Jeff Davis Existing Condition.

1.2B.1 Description

1.2B.3 Place Type

Major Boulevard is are characterized by its size, high traffic volumes, fastmoving traffic, adjacency to dense concentrations of commercial land uses, and a center median. Major Boulevards emphasis both access to property and vehicular mobility.

Mixed-use

1.2B.2 Priority Design User

1.2B.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

Major Boulevard Section and Plan

1.2B.5 Transportation Function

1.2B.7 Local Examples

Access and Throughput Balance

Jeff Davis Dr from SR 85 to Jefferson Ave

Jeff Davis Dr from Fenwyck Comns to Johnson Ave

SR 54 from East Study Area Boundary to Rising Star Montessori Academy

SR 54 from West Study Area Boundary to LaFayette Ave

Residential

1.2B.6 Considerations Traffic volume and speeds Vehicles

Mixed-Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Access management (driveway consolidation)

Non-motorized Travelers

Mixed-Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Bicycle mobility and safety

Transitional Residential (DMU-TR)

Pedestrian comfort and safety Future transit service access / mobility

124

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

125

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

1. MAJOR STREET

14 FT SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

15 FT TURN LANE

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TURN LANE

9 FT

PROPERTY LINE

1.3 Mixed-Use

6 FT SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

12 FT 6 FT UTILITY / SHARED TRAVEL LANE PLANTING BUFFER

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TWTL

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

80 FT ROW

6 FT 6 FT UTILITY / SIDEWALK PLANTING BUFFER

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview

Major Street Type 1.3: Mixed-Use Typical

Mixed-Use Streets are are characterized by their emphasis on access to property and vehicular mobility and serve a variety of land uses ranging from low-intensity industrial uses to residences, shops, services, and offices. Mixed-use streets’ land uses and development character are constantly changing.

Vehicles Non-motorized Travelers (Future) Public Transit

Stonewall Ave West Existing Condition.

1.3.1 Description

1.3.2 Priority Design User

PROPERTY LINE

Mixed-Use Street Section and Plan

1.3.3 Place Type

1.3.5 Transportation Function

Activity Center

Access and Throughput Balance

Design flexibility to support land development Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing Integration of civic/public and green spaces

Mixed-use Commercial Center / Corridor

1.3.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

1.3.6 Considerations

1.3.7 Local Examples

Traffic volume and speeds

Jeff Davis between Our Father’s House Florist and Johnson Ave

Local business access and freight loading/unloading

SR 85/Glynn St between LaFayette Ave and Beauregard Blvd

Access management to minimize vehicle/pedestrian conflicts

SR 54/Lanier Ave between Rising Star Montessori Academy and LaFayette Ave

SR 54/Stonewall Ave between LaFayette Ave and Booker Ave

Historic Core (DMU-HC) Mixed-Use Core (DMU-MUC) Bicycle mobility and safety Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC) Pedestrian comfort and safety

126

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

127

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

2. COMMERCIAL STREET

PROPERTY LINE

2.1 Connector

7 12 FT SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

2 1

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

12 FT TWTL

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

10 FT SIDEWALK

12 FT SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

8 FT UTILITY / PLANTING BUFFER

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

8 FT UTILITY / PLANTING BUFFER

10 FT SIDEWALK

60 FT ROW

12 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview Commercial Street Type 2.1: Connector Typical

LaFayette Ave Existing Condition.

2.1.1 Description Connectors are streets that move people through and between neighborhoods. They connect to surrounding areas and land uses together. Connectors provide continuous walking and bicycling routes, becoming a secondary network of streets to the arterial street systems.

Connector Section and Plan

2.1.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

Efficient vehicle movements/vehicle progression

Transitional Residential (DMU-TR)

Access management to minimize vehicle/pedestrian conflicts

Mixed-Use Neighorbohood (DMU-MUN)

Bicycle mobility and safety

Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

Pedestrian comfort and safety

2.1.2 Priority Design User

2.1.5 Transportation Function

Vehicles

Throughput Emphasis

City Center Pkwy | from City Hall East Driveway to SR 85/Glynn St South (Future)

Grady Ave | from SR 54 to SR 85/Glynn St South

North Park Drive | from SR 85/Glynn Street North to North Jeff Davis Drive

Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing

Kathi Ave/Hood Ave/Forrest Ave | from Hood/Forrest Ave Roundabout to N. Jeff Davis Drive

2.1.7 Local Examples

Georgia Avenue | from SR 85/Glynn Street North to Church Street

S. Jeff Davis Drive from Jimmie Mayfield Boulevard to End of Study Area

LaFayette Avenue Extension | from SR 85/Glynn Street North to Church Street (Future)

LaFayette Avenue Extension | from SR 54-Stonewall Avenue to City Center Parkway

Tiger Trail from SR 54/Stonewall Ave to Hood Ave

2.1.3 Place Type

2.1.6 Considerations

LaFayette Ave from Fayette County BOE Driveway to Tiger Trail

Residential

Property Access

City Center Pkwy | from Grady Ave to City Hall West Driveway (Future)

Commercial Center / Corridor

Traffic Speeds

128

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

129

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

2. COMMERCIAL STREET

6 FT

18 FT PARKING

SIDEWALK

16 FT SHARED TRAVEL WAY

10 FT PARALLEL PARKING

10 FT

PROPERTY LINE

2.2 Main Street

8 FT SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK

6 FT GREEN BUFFER

10 FT PARKING LANE

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

6 FT GREEN BUFFER

8 FT SIDEWALK

60 FT ROW

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview

Commercial Street Type 2: Main Street Typical

2.2.1 Description Main Streets are defined by the character of the varied land uses surrounding them. These are generally oriented towards non-motorized travel and commercial store frontages serving people conducting daily errands, meeting with friends, shopping, and playing. Main Streets should comfortably accommodate many users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers.

Lee Street North of Stonewell Ave Existing Condition.

Main Street Section and Plan

2.2.3 Place Type

2.2.5 Transportation Function

2.2.7 Local Examples

Activity Center

Access and Throughput Balance

Church St from SR 85 to Georgia Ave

Mixed-Use

Access Emphasis (in commercial corridors / nodes)

Church St from North of SR 54/Lanier Ave to SR 54/Stonewall Ave

Lee St from SR 54/Lanier Ave to Johnson Ave

LaFayette Ave from SR 85/Glynn St North to Fayette County BOE Driveway

City Center Pkwy from City Hall West Driveway to City Hall East Driveway (Future)

Commercial Center / Corridor

2.2.6 Considerations 2.2.2 Priority Design User

PROPERTY LINE

2.2.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts Local business access and deliveries

Vehicles

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Non-motorized Travelers

Mixed-Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Pedestrian comfort and safety Design flexibility to support land development Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing

130

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

131

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

2. COMMERCIAL STREET

6 FT

18 FT PARKING

26 FT SHARED TRAVEL WAY

PROPERTY LINE

2.3 Commercial Alley

10 FT SIDE PATH

SIDEWALK

6 FT FURNITURE ZONE

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

6 FT FURNITURE ZONE

8 FT SIDEWALK

50 FT ROW

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview Commercial Street Type 2.3: Commercial Alley Typical

2.3.1 Description Commercial Alleys are low-speed small-scale streets oriented towards pedestrians and adjacent commercial land uses. Vehicles may use Commercial Alleys, but typicaly only in small numbers.

Bennett Street North of Stonewall Ave Existing Condition.

Commercial Alley Section and Plan

2.3.3 Place Type

2.2.5 Transportation Function

2.2.7 Local Examples

Activity Center

Access Emphasis

Mixed-Use 2

Twisted Taco Alley from SR 54 W. Lanier Ave to SR 54 W Stonewall Ave Johnson Ave from SR 85/Glynn St South to Lee St

2.3.2 Priority Design User

2.3.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

2.2.6 Considerations

Bennett St from SR 54 W. Lanier Ave to SR 54 W Stonewall Ave

Non-motorized Travelers

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Local business access and deliveries

City Hall Exit Extension from SR 54 W. Lanier Ave to SR 54 W Stonewall Ave

Mixed-Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Pedestrian comfort and safety Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing

132

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

133

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

3. RESIDENTIAL STREET

PROPERTY LINE

3.1 Residential Street

4 1

12 FT SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

26 FT SHARED TRAVEL WAY

12 FT SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

10 FT SIDE PATH

5 FT UTILITY / PLANTING BUFFER

10 FT TRAVEL LANE

50 FT ROW

5 FT UTILITY / PLANTING BUFFER

10 FT SIDE PATH

10 3

PROPERTY LINE

9 8

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview Residential Street Type 3.1: Residential Street Typical

3.1.1 Description Residential Streets primarily serve neighborhoods. They are quieter than mixed-use and connector streets, and have relatively low traffic volumes and low speeds. Though they have minimal activity relative to other street types, Residential Streets play a key role in supporting the social life of a neighborhood.

3.1.2 Priority Design User

Church Street North of Lanier Ave Existing Condition.

Residential Street Section and Plan

3.1.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

3.1.6 Considerations

Transitional Residential (DMU-TR)

Traffic Speeds

Mixed-Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Property Access

Neighborhood Residential (DMU-NR)

Pedestrian comfort and safety

Open Space / Conservation

Integration of Public and Green Spaces Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing

Non-motorized Travelers

3.1.3 Place Type

3.1.5 Transportation Function Access Emphasis

3.1.7 Local Examples 1

Georgia Ave from Church St to East Study Area Boundary

Church St from Georgia Ave to North of SR 54/Lanier Ave

Residential

134

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Lee St from Johnson Ave to Roadway End

LaFayette Ave from SR 54/Lanier Ave to Tiger Trail

Booker Ave from SR 54 to SR 54

Hillsdale Drive | from North Jeff Davis to East Study Area Boundary

North Park

East/West Johnson Avenue from Johnson Avenue to Jeff Davis Drive

North/South Johnson Avenue from Johnson Avenue to Jeff Davis Drive

Holly Avenue

Hill Street

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

135

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

3. RESIDENTIAL STREET

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

VARIES GREEN BUFFER

PROPERTY LINE 5 FT SIDEWALK

3 FT GREEN / UTILITY BUFFER

14 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

6 FT MEDIAN

14 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

50 FT ROW

3 FT GREEN / UTILITY BUFFER

5 FT SIDEWALK

PROPERTY LINE

12 FT TRAVEL LANE

PROPERTY LINE

11 FT SIDEWALK + GREEN BUFFER

PROPERTY LINE

3.2 Residential Boulevard

Image via Google Streetview Residential Street 3.2: Residential Boulevard

Typical

3.2.1 Description Residential Boulevards primarily serve neighborhoods. They are quieter than mixed-use and connector streets, and have relatively low traffic volumes and low speeds. Like Residential Streets, Residential Boulevards play a key role in supporting the social life of a neighborhood.

Beauregard Boulevard North of Grady Avenue Existing Condition.

Residential Boulevard Section and Plan

3.2.3 Place Type

3.2.5 Transportation Function

Residential

Access Emphasis

3.2.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

3.2.6 Considerations

Transitional Residential (DMU-TR)

Traffic Speeds

Mixed-Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Business Access

Neighborhood Residential (DMU-NR)

Bicycle mobility and safety

Open Space / Conservation

Pedestrian comfort and safety

3.2.7 Local Examples 1

Beauregard Boulevard | from City Center Parkway to Grady Avenue

3.2.2 Priority Design User Non-motorized Travelers

Integration of Public and Green Spaces Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing 136

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

137

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

4. ALLEYS

Residential Alleys are small-scale streets that typically only carry low numbers of vehicles accessing adjacent properties.

4.1.5 Transportation Function Access Emphasis

PROPERTY LINE

4.1.1 Description

PROPERTY LINE

4.1 Residential Alley

Note: This street typology to be incorporated in new developments or subdivisions.

4.1.6 Considerations

Vehicles

Residential Density

2 FT 6 INCHES ZONE

Residential

Integration of informal recreational / gathering spaces Property access and deliveries

4.1.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

Lighting Utility services, e.g., Trash pickup

PROPERTY LINE

Sight lines/visibility

2 FT 6 INCHES ZONE

20 FT ROW

Accessibility / connectivity at more than one street

4.1.3 Place Type

15 FT SHARED TRAVEL LANE

PROPERTY LINE

4.1.2 Priority Design User

Mixed-Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN) Neighborhood Residential (DMU-NR) Transitional Residential (DMU-TR)

4.1.7 Local Examples Any new residential neighborhood or subdivision to include mixeduse development

Residential Alley Section and Plan

138

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

139

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

4. ALLEYS

PROPERTY LINE

4.2 Shared Public Way

20 FT SHARED TRAVEL WAY

5 FT CLEAR ZONE

10 FT SHARED TRAVEL WAY

5 FT CLEAR ZONE

PROPERTY LINE

20 FT ROW

PROPERTY LINE

Image via Google Streetview Street Type 4.1: Shared Public Way Typical

Heritage Parkway Existing Condition.

4.2.1 Description

Shared Public Way Section and Plan

4.2.3 Place Type

4.2.5 Transportation Function

4.2.7 Local Examples

Shared public ways are public right-of-ways designed for pedestrian use. Small delivery vehicles and bicycles are also permitted to share the open space, but are not the emphasized user of these areas.

Activity Center

Access Emphasis

4.2.2 Priority Design User

4.2.4 Zoning DMU Sub-Districts

4.2.6 Considerations

Pedestrians

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Local business access and deliveries

Mixed-Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Pedestrian comfort and safety

Mixed-Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Aesthetics, lighting, and street furnishing

140

Mixed-Use

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Heritage Pkwy from SR 54/Stonewall Ave to SR 85/Glynn St South

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

141

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Recommendations

NG LY NN

05.3 Capital Improvements

In the absence of a Fayetteville street-specific design manual, the Mobility Framework recommends the Georgia Department of Transportation’s (GDOT) Pedestrian and Streetscape Guide be used to provide direction with best design practices for streets and roadways intended to support multi-modal travel. Further, the GDOT Plan Development Process1 and Plan Presentation Guide2 should also be consulted to ensure consistency across federal-aid, state and locally-funded transportation and streetscape projects.

HILLSDALE DR

N JEFF DAVIS DR

FO RR ES TA VE

HOOD AVE

JEFFERSON AVE

The recommendations that follow are based on existing transportation conditions analyzed and input gathered by the LCI project’s core team from public in-person and virtual meetings with the local community.

New Roadway Connections

Complete Street Enhancements

Paths & Trails

Pedestrian Safety Projects

Inner and Outer Pedestrian Loops for Circulation Flow

CHURCH ST

Implement the following Capital Improvement Projects:

LAFAYETTE AVE

GA 54

R AV NIE E LA W LANIER AV W STONEWALL AVE

Descriptions for potential projects associated with each improvement project type, mentioned above, are illustrated in the image to the right and also detailed in the following pages.

GA 54

Y AD GR

S GL YNN ST

DA VI S

LVD IELD B MAYF JIMMIE

R YD DLE BRA

State of Georgia Department of Transportation (2021). Plan Development Process Rev 3.3. Available from: http://www.dot. ga.gov/PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/PDP/PDP.pdf 2 State of Georgia Department of Transportation (2017). Plan Presentation Guide Rev 2.8. Available from: http://www.dot.ga.gov/ PartnerSmart/DesignManuals/Plan/Plan_Presentation_Guide.pdf

BEA UR EGA RD BLV D

E AV Roadway Projects 1

JE FF

Complete Streets Projects Trail and Path Projects Pedestrian Safety Projects

Capital Improvement Projects N

142

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

143

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

New Roadway Connections No.

Project Name

From

Description

City Center Parkway

Fisher Ave at SR 85/Glynn St S

Grady Ave

New roadway serving the Fayetteville City Hall complex, Walton Fayetteville Development and undeveloped land parcel

Beauregard Blvd Realignment

Beauregard Blvd

City Center Parkway

Realignment of Beauregard Boulevard from SR 85/Glynn Street to City Center Parkway

Fisher Avenue Extension

Lee St

Johnson Ave

Extend existing Fisher Avenue from Lee Street termini to Johnson Avenue

LaFayette Avenue South Extension

SR 54/Lanier Ave W

City Center Pkwy

New roadway connecting existing LaFayette Avenue Magnolia Office Park to City Center Parkway

LaFayette Avenue East Extension

SR 85/Glynn St

Church Ave

Extend existing LaFayette Avenue from SR 85/Glynn Street to Church Street

City Hall Drive Extension

SR 54/Lanier Ave W

SR 54/Stonewall Ave

New roadway connecting SR 54 /Lanier Avenue westbound to existing City Hall Driveway

Fayetteville Alleyway Project

SR 54/Lanier Ave W

SR 54/Stonewall Ave

New Alleyway between SR 54/Lanier Avenue and SR 54/ Stonewall Avenue, behind retail buildings.

4 1

3 2

Roadway Project

Complete Streets Enhancements No.

Project Name

From

Description

Hood Avenue/Kathi Avenue

SR 85/Glynn St N

Jeff Davis Dr

Bike lane / sharrow

West Georgia Avenue

SR 85/Glynn St N

Jeff Davis Dr

Close sidewalk gaps; sharrow

LaFayette Avenue

Campaign Tr

Church St

Bike lane / sharrow

Johnson Avenue

SR 85/Glynn St S

Jeff Davis Dr

Close sidewalk gaps; add sharrow

Tiger Trail

Hood Ave

SR 54 / Stonewall Ave W

Close sidewalk gap between Lanier Ave and Stonewall Ave; add sharrow

Church Avenue

Georgia Ave

SR 54 / Lanier Ave E

Sidewalk repair/improvement; sharrow

Jeff Davis Drive

Kathi Ave

Jimmie Mayfield Blvd

Upgrade sidewalk to sidepath; widen planting strip buffer; sharrow; formalize median with raised curb

Booker Avenue

SR 54 / Lanier Ave W

East Fayette Elementary

Sidewalk repair / improvement; pedestrian crossing at SR 54/ Stonewall Ave E

Heritage Parkway Shared Street

SR 54 / Stonewall Ave E

SR 85 / Glynn St S

Formalize as Commercial Shared Public Way

6 9 3

8 4

Complete Streets

144

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

145

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Paths and Trails No.

Project Name

From

Description

Church Street Park Path

Church Street Park

Jeff Davis Dr

Multi-use pathway

Pye Lake Trail

City Center Pkwy

Pye Lake

Greenway trail, multi-use trail; side path

Bradford - Manassas Trail

City Center Pkwy

The Ridge Nature Preserve

Extend existing Fisher Avenue from Lee Street termini to Johnson Avenue

Southern Conservation Trust

City Center Pkwy

Grady Ave

Multi-use trail

City Center Trailhead

Pye Lake Trail at City Center Pkwy

Bradford-Manassas Trail at City Center Pkwy

Trailhead with parking

Booker Avenue Path

SR 54/Stonewall Ave E

Jeff Davis Dr / Booker Ave

Multi-use pathway

Fayetteville First Baptist Path

SR 54/Stonewall Ave E

Jeff Davis Dr

Multi-use pathway

Inner and Outer Loop Project

Assemblage of existing and proposed sidewalks and trails that enable travelers to walk, run, or bike around downtown Fayetteville’s inner core. For description of the project, see page 111.

Paths and Trail

Pedestrian Safety Projects No.

Project Name

From

Description

Ped Crossing Improvement

SR 54 / Lanier Ave W

Grady Ave

High-visibility crosswalk

Ped Crossing Improvement

SR 54 / Lanier Ave W

SR 85 / Glynn St S

High-visibility crosswalk; signal improvement

Ped Crossing Improvement

SR 54 / Stonewall Ave W

SR 85 / Glynn St S

High-visibility crosswalk; signal improvement

4 3

Pedestrian Safety Projects

146

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

147

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Other Project Recommendations

IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS: PUBLIC SPACES Existing 1.

Rabbits Run

Fenwyck Clubhouse

May Harp Park

Church Street Park

Historic Fayette County Courthouse Lawn

Heritage Park Gazebo

Southern Ground Amphitheater

Pursue Shared Parking Ordinances

Fayetteville City Cemetery

The City of Fayetteville should pursue shared parking agreements with the Fayette County Annex, the Fayetteville First Baptist Church, First United Methodist Church, and the Fayetteville First United Methodist Church as a cost-effective alternative to the construction of a new structured parking facility. Additional analysis of Downtown Fayetteville’s parking inventory and parking demands is needed to determine existing parking demand peak hours, surplus and deficits in available spaces, and optimal time frames for public or private events.

Heritage Park Lawn

Establish Street Frontage Typologies, Improve Public Space Domains Street Frontage Typologies are inherent to identifying the function and purpose of streets in their area. Frontage Types are integral in creating the appropriate nexus between public and private realms within streets and blocks. Frontages types regulate how the private realm relates to the public domain, ensuring harmony between the two. Frontage type regulations determine what building types, public realm elements, and building elements are permitted or required based on the street’s development character. Frontage typologies include standards for sidewalks, street furniture, landscaping, outdoor retail displays, cafe areas, utilities, etc. Such standards allow the vision and goals articulated herein to be realized over time through incremental development practices and changing architectural styles and materials. The Built Environment and Zoning recommendations describe the frontage typologies and their locational application in more detail.

2 7 4 5 6 8 9

10. Fayette County Superior Courthouse Lawn 11.

Winesap Way Public Space

Proposed

5 1.

City Hall Greenway

Tiger Trail Park

Southern Conservancy Park

Booker Pocket Parks

Kathi Park

Stonewall Park

4 6 3

Existing Public Spaces Proposed Public Spaces Existing Open Space

148

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

149

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Improvement Projects: Street Parking 5 No.

Street Parking Locations and Spaces

Existing

Proposed

City Hall, Entrance Drive

112

City Hall, Exit Drive

City Center Parkway

123

Glynn Street, southbound direction

Glynn Street, northbound direction

Stonewall Street, facing courthouse

Stonewall Street, facing storefronts

Lee Street, facing courthouse

Lee Street, facing UMC

Lee Street, facing storefronts

366

Total Available Parking Spaces

9 10

6 1

7 2

Street Parking

Existing Public Spaces Proposed Public Spaces Existing Open Space Typical/Conventional Street

Improvement Projects: Shared Parking No.

Surface Parking Locations and Spaces

Existing Public Spaces

Proposed Shared Spaces

Library Lot

157

Fayette County Facility Lot

206

Lanier Avenue Lot

Fayetteville FBC Lot

Fayetteville UMC Lot 1

Fayetteville UMC Lot 2

Fayetteville UMC Lot 3

185

580

Total Available Parking Spaces

3 7 5

6 4 2

Street Parking Shared Surface Lot Parking Existing Public Spaces Proposed Public Spaces

1 Existing Open Space

ACRE 0.25

150

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Typical/Conventional Street

MILES

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

151

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Circulation Flow Summary

NEW STREET TYPOLOGIES

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS

152

PUBLIC DOMAIN & PARKING

Arterial

Neighborhood

Typical

Roadway Projects

Trail and Path Projects

Outer Trail Loop

Street Parking

Proposed Public Spaces

Outer Trail Loop

Mixed-Use

Main Street

Outer Trail Loop

Complete Streets Projects

Pedestrian Safety Projects

Inner Trail Loop

Shared Surface Lot Parking

Existing Open Space

Inner Trail Loop

Commercial Boulevard

Commercial Alley

Inner Trail Loop

Existing Public Spaces

Typical/Conventional Street

Connector

Shared Public Way

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

153

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Downtown Mixed Use District (DMU) The study area scope for the Livable Centers Initiative

05.4 Built Environment Zoning Update Overview

Introduction Purpose

Structure & Organization The Downtown Mixed Use Zoning Code is not a conventional zoning code like the zoning in other parts of the City. The subdistricts within Downtown Mixed Use Zoning Code are based on the existing and/or future character and built form of sections of Downtown rather than on the predominant type of land use permitted in that area. The Downtown Mixed Use Zoning Code regulates more aspects of the built environment than a conventional zoning code typically regulates. Each subdistrict has an intent statement that describes the general vision for the future of that subdistrict with respect to development, scale, open spaces, and other attributes. The opposite page show the proposed zoning map. The next pages describe the intents of each zoning district and the permitted building types within each district as well as outline the regulations within each zoning sub-district and provide architectural character references.

How To Apply The Development Guidelines?

Character Themes

LCI ZONING

The Downtown Mixed Use Zoning Code is intended to implement the overall aims of the Downtown Mixed Use District as set forth in the Unified Development Ordinance (cite), which is based on the City’s 2017 Comprehensive Plan vision for walkable, mixed use Downtown. The subdistricts that comprise the Downtown Mixed Use Zoning Code have their roots in the analyses depicted in the Moving Fayetteville Forward Living Cities Initiative Plan.

Themes for 5 sectors that reflect the past, the present and the future of the study area

Downtown Sub-districts (DMU- ) Classification of districts within the DMU that will codify the development pattern

The LCI Zoning encompasses four layers: the overall Downtown Mixed Use District, the character themes outlined in Section 04: Vision, the Downtown Sub-Districts, and the Regulations for each Permitted Building Type within a Sub-District. For each zoning district , development guidelines are detailed pertaining to the following: Zoning District Intent - The intent of the zoning regulations with respect to the form and character of development. Character Reference Area - The character(s) of the zoning district Adjacent Street Typologies - Which street typologies outlined in the mobility section are proposed within the said zoning district to understand the synergies between the street typologies, permitted building types and uses. Character Reference - This section outlines the desired building character in the district including architectural design guidelines. Permitted Building Types - This is a list of building typologies permitted Building Placement - Location of the building on the lot, including setbacks.

Building Types + Regulations Guidelines for the various aspects of site, buildings, open spaces and detail design

Building Form - Recommended height and massing of a building Site and Parking Access - Pedestrian and vehicular access to the building including parking and entrance location Supplemental Standards from Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) - Other relevant standards that should be followed in accordance to the UDO.

154

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

The four layers of Fayetteville LCI zoning

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

155

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Zoning Map Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC) Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

The following sub-districts are established for development within downtown areas and are collectively called the Downtown Mixed Use Zoning Code. These sub-districts achieve the purpose of consolidation while also maintaining the characteristic features of the different areas.

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

NG LY NN

Boulevard Commercial (DMU-BC)

Historic Core (DMU-HC) Transition Residential (DMU-TR)

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

Neighborhood Residential (DMU-NR)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Open Space District (DMU-OS)

Boulevard Commercial (DMU-BC)

Retain Existing Zoning

Transition Residential (DMU-TR)

Neighborhood Residential (DMU-NR)

Open Space Conservation

FO RR ES TA VE

HILLSDALE DR

N JEFF DAVIS DR

HOOD AVE

JEFFERSON AVE

SSTT R RATFORD ATFORD WAY WAY A

RUNNING M-1 LIGHT MANUFA CTURING BEAR TFR A M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING IL

HI H IG GH HW W

KELLY L DRIVE KELLY DRIVE

HEAV A Y MANUFA F CTURING HEAVY MANUFACTURING

PDP PDP

PLANNED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROJECT

PCDE PCD VENU

PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT PLANNED COMMUNITY

OPEN SPACE SPA P CE OPEN

HUNTERS WALK HUNTERS WALK FEN W YCK COMMONS COMMONS FENWYCK

P RK PA

GWINNETT GW INN ETT STREET STREET

PIN PINEECC

HH UU

S S

EET

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

RMF-15 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOUSE CONDOMINIUM RESIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL

EN CO DEN RD AR A

MEDICAL OFFICE

URTY CO COUR LA N LA A R BOR A RB

LAKESHORE DRIV OFFICE AND INSTITUTIONAL

C-1

DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL

C-2

COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL

C-3

HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL

C C-3

CONDITIONAL C-3 WI N ON A D HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL RI V E BUSINESS PARK

C-4 BP

RUNNING BEAR TR A M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING IL M-2

HEAVY MANUFACTURING

PDP

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

UE PCD EN O D AV

Y AY LI N N DA DA W WA LI

Existing Zoning Map 156

PPLL AACC EE

LLA AN NEE

M M EE AAD DO OW WB BR RO OOO

LAURIEN S TR

R ER TE N NT

ONE AND TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

UE E NU A EN AV LY AVE HOLL LLY HO R ER WE OW RT TO U RT T H E H E CO OU IV IG DR IV HIG K C H K DR

CCLL AARR EENN DDOO NN

CHURCH CHURCH STREET STREET JACK JACK K D. D. DETTMERING DE TTMER I NG

LLEE EE ST STR REET EET

STREET SOUTH N STREET S OU T H NN GLY G LYN

REG GA ARD URE RD E AU B BEA UR RTT OU C CO

VA R

MEDFORD DRIVE

A WAY G WAY BURG WILL IAMS IAMSBUR WILL

A ENUE AV AVENUE

CE NT CE NT ER ER DR DR I VE I VE

WALKE WALKER R

LY Y RL EARL EA T URT COUR CO

L ON G LONG A ENUE AV E AVENUE

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

DR-15

PLANNED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT

OPEN SPACE

R YD DLE BRA

VEE SPA SPA PAR OV RRO ROW CO WS SC

Y Y A AV VE EN NU UE E

BENNETT BENNET TT STREET STREET

G G R RA AD D

NO RT H D RIVE NORTH DAV IS DRIVE JEFF JEF F DAVIS

TI TIG R AIL TR GER ER TRAIL

J OH NS ON A E N UE JOHNSON AV VENUE

R-70

GA 54

JE FF

DA VI S

LD BLVD MAYFIE JIMMIE

CO URT XTON COURT BRAXTON BRAX

WALL AV A EWALL ENUE E WEST NE AVENUE WEST S TON STO

T ST S TON E WA STO NEW LL AV EA AS AV E ALL ENUE N UE E

G G

UE BOO KE BOO KER V EN EN UE R AV AV A R

T ET EET RE TR L SST LLL IL H HI

IILL RRAA TT

LAN NIER A V ENUE WEST WES ST LANIER AVENUE

R R

U EN NU AV VE ER RA N IIE LA AN L

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

E AV

D D

G N NG M MEE E E TT

C AC LA PL P

R-40

W STONEWALL AVE

R-THC

ST EA A ST EE E

RA T

TERRAC TER R ACEE

T T O NE P AT H H O NE PAT

EET ET TR E STR SS NS HE EN PH EP S TE ST

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

Y AD GR

N GN AIIG PPA M M CCAA

DRIVE

OV E R ST ER ES T OV WE W NS O NS MO OM MM CO C

AV A VE UE EN NU E

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

R-30

LEE ST

EELLLL SSW WO O PPO OIN I NTT RRTTH H EE C O U RTT N IA L COUR COLO CO LONIAL LLIN IN NTT HHAA OONN D R CONCORD CO N C O LL HHOO LL T R U CO COURT LLLL OOW W K PA RK ON PARK CLAND CL A NDON

ID E TR EESIDE TREES E TER R AC CE TERRA

WAS SHIN HINGT WAS TON N GTO N STR STREE ET EET

EAST ENUE EAST AVENUE IA AV GIA RG R

R-22

W LANIER AV

E E T TT TE E

O EO G GE

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

YY FFAA D SS RD LLAA CCAAMF OR MF O

MI LL PEPPER MILL PEPPER G LA ND I N G LANDIN

CARVER CARVER STR REET STREET

LE CLE RC IIR

SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL

R-15

R AV NIE E LA

AVE NU E RGI A AVENUE GEOR GEORGIA

R-10

GA 54

GE ORG GE ORGIA ENUE W IA A WE AV VENUE ES T ST

LAFAYETTE AVE F

PYE PYE COURT CO

OS OS

Main Street Parcels

ITTANY CHASE CHASE RITTANY BR B

UE A ENU AV AVENUE

Streets

GE L L AN AGE ANE RIA E C AR AR RI C

N N O O R R T TH H

M TI

REDEVELOPMENT REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DISTRICT

JEFFERSON AVENUE A ENUE AV JEFFERSON

M DRI DRIIV VE M E

A AY Y9 92 2

Legend

TT REEE PINE PINE ST STRE

RD RD

RA R BB AB BIT IT RUN RUN

NOR TH NOR ARK TH PA PARK DRIV DRIV E E

A HI KAT KATHI

M-2 M-2

ABERSH AA H HABERSH

BP BP

HA B ER SHAM HABERSHAM PLACE PLACE

CHURCH ST

CONDITIONAL C-3 CONDITIONAL C-3 WIN ON A D HIGH HIGH INTENSITY INTENSITY COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL RIV E BUSINESS P RK BUSINESS PA PARK

C-4 C-4

HILLSDAL L E DRIVE DRIVE HILLSDALE

S GL YNN ST

C C-3 C C-3

RCHILL URCHILL H U COUR CH T C RT COUR

BEA UR EGA RD BLV D

HIGHWA WAY COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL

COMMUNITY COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL

C-3 C-3

HONEYSUCKLE HONEYSUCKLE LANE LANE

CIRCLE DRIVE

C-2 C-2

G G

DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL

F DA A VIS AV IS PL PLAC ACE E

INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL WAY WAY A

LAKESHORE DRIVE E OFFICE AND AND INSTITUTIONAL INSTITUTIONAL OFFICE

C-1 C-1

AY LEE K EE KAYL RT COURT COU

E DRIVE

OI OI

G GLL YYN NN N

MEDICAL OFFICE MEDICAL OFFICE

JJE EFF F F DAV DAVIS IS

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL

MO MO

DD AARR W DDW AAYY

RP RP

SST D RIIV DR VE

The existing and new zoning maps have been illustrated for comparison so that the changes can be tracked as the ordinance gets enforced. The following pages are a comprehensive guide to both public officials and private developers to ensure that all new development is cohesive and represents the vision of the livable centers initiative both in the built environment and the public realm.

Proposed Zoning Map Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

157

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Zoning Intent

Zoning District

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Character Theme Area

The Core

The Edge, The Core, The Gateway, The Root

The Gateway, The Edge, The Root

The Root, The Edge

Intent

The intent of this subdistrict is to preserve the historic character and scale of this area as expressed through the form and architecture of the existing historic building stock. New development in this area will be scaled and designed to complement the buildings located around the Old Fayette County Courthouse.

The intent of this subdistrict is to continue the evolution of this part of Downtown, in combination with the Historic Core, as the center of civic, commercial, social, cultural, and spiritual life in the City, where people can undertake a wide variety of activities, enjoy public open spaces, and walk safely and comfortably. New development in this district may be scaled slightly larger than the traditional mixed use buildings in the Historic Core and include a mix of uses with commercial activity on the ground level and residential units on upper levels.

These subdistricts are located at or near the edges of Downtown along one of the major corridors. The intent of this subdistrict is to encourage the development of prominent buildings with attractive facades and appealing commercial uses that would create a lively ambiance as people arrive into Downtown.

The intent of this subdistrict is to create pocket neighborhoods where a sufficient amount of land is available. Pocket neighborhoods are primarily residential in nature, consisting of a variety of residential building types along with some mixed use buildings with community-serving amenities, all of which are situated within a network of shared open spaces.

Zoning District

Boulevard Commercial (DMU-BC)

Transition Residential (DMU-TR)

Neighborhood Residential (DMU-NR)

Open Space District (DMU-OS)

Character Theme Area

The Gateway

The Edge, The Core, The Gateway, The Root, the Village

The Root, The Gateway

The Edge

Intent

The intent of this subdistrict is to preserve the existing character and form of the buildings and landscapes of the section of the N. Jeff Davis Drive corridor that is characterized by converted or purpose-built buildings with residential architectural styles containing commercial uses.

The intent of this subdistrict is to serve as a transition between a mixed use or commercial district and a low-intensity residential area through the development of multi-unit residential buildings.

The intent of this subdistrict is to preserve the character and scale of longstanding residential neighborhoods of detached houses while allowing for new residential building types including cottage houses, cottage courts, and duplexes

This district is intended to protect and preserve valued environmental, scenic, and historic resources within the city, as well as to accommodate agricultural and horticultural uses that require areas of open land on which to operate in order to minimize potential impacts upon neighboring uses.

158

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

159

Residential Building Types

Open Space District

Neighborhood Residential (DMUNR)

Transition Residential (DMUTR)

Boulevard Commercial (DMUBC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Building Matrix

Gateway Commericlal (DMU-GC)

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Open Space District

Neighborhood Residential (DMUNR)

Transition Residential (DMUTR)

Boulevard Commercial (DMUBC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Gateway Commericlal (DMU-GC)

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Building Matrix

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Residential Building Types

HOUSE

DUPLEX

A detached structure consisting of one residential unit located on a lot.

A structure on a lot consisting of two residential units attached vertically or stacked horizontally.

CARRIAGE HOUSE

MULTIPLEX (FOURPLEX)

An accessory residential unit located to the side or rear of a house on the same lot.

A detached structure on a lot containing four dwelling units, two on the ground floor and two on the second floor, with shared or individual entrances from the street.

Image Credit: Platt Builders

COTTAGE COURT

MULTIPLEX (FIVE TO TWELVE)

A series of detached houses arranged around a shared open space.

A detached structure on a lot containing from five to twelve dwelling units, two on the ground floor and two on the second floor, with shared or individual entrances from the street.

Image Credit: rosschapin.com

Note: Building Type Guidelines should be studied along with Zoning District Guidelines. (insert link)

160

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

161

Residential Building Types

Open Space District

Neighborhood Residential (DMUNR)

Transition Residential (DMUTR)

Boulevard Commercial (DMUBC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Gateway Commericlal (DMU-GC)

Building Matrix

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Open Space District

Neighborhood Residential (DMUNR)

Transition Residential (DMUTR)

Boulevard Commercial (DMUBC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Gateway Commericlal (DMU-GC)

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Building Matrix

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Mixed Use Building Types

TOWNHOUSES (ATTACHED)

MAIN STREET BUILDING

Three or more residential units that are attached vertically and that each have separate entrances.

An attached 2- to 3-story building with ground floor commercial space and residential or commercial space on upper floors.

TOWNHOUSES (STACKED)

LIVE/WORK BUILDING

Three or more residential units that arestacked horizontally.

An attached or detached structure consisting of one residential unit above or behind a fire-separated, flexible ground floor with a nonresidential use.

COURTYARD BUILDING

A building with ground floor commercial use and residential units on upper floors.

Multiple attached or stacked residential units with access from a shared courtyard.

MIXED USE BUILDING

Credits: Missing Middle Housing

Note: Building Type Guidelines should be checked along with zoning districts. (insert link)

162

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

163

Commercial Building Types COMMERICAL HOUSE A converted house or purpose-built building designed like a house that contains a commercial use.

Open Space District

Neighborhood Residential (DMUNR)

Transition Residential (DMUTR)

Boulevard Commercial (DMUBC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Gateway Commericlal (DMU-GC)

FLEX COMMERCIAL BUILDING A building with taller ceilings than a typical commercial building that can accommodate a variety of commercial and light industrial activities.

COMMERCIAL BUILDING (PROMINENT) A stately commercial building, typically a bank, designed with traditional architectural features.

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Building Matrix

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Open Space District

Neighborhood Residential (DMUNR)

Transition Residential (DMUTR)

Boulevard Commercial (DMUBC)

Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN)

Gateway Commericlal (DMU-GC)

Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Building Matrix

Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Public Building Types CIVIC BUILDING (SMALL) A minor government or institutional building.

COMMERCIAL BUILDING (SMALL) A single-story building containing a commercial use.

CIVIC BUILDING (PROMINENT) A distinctive government or institutional building.

MIXED COMMERCIAL BUILDING A two-story building consisting of the same or multiple commercial uses.

164

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Note: Building Type Guidelines should be checked along with zoning districts. (insert link)

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

165

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

Building Design Principles

•

Monotnous repetition of the same architecture expression is discouraged, especially any wall surface over 30 feet in length should include at least one change in plane. Larger buildings shall be divided into bays of 25 to 40 foot widths that are articulated by pilasters, piers, differentiation in material, texture, or color, or by variations in the wall plane.

•

Styles that are not recommended include faux colonial reproductions employing the use of false columns and accent pieces along storefronts.

•

Materials should be selected based on their visual characteristics, quality, and durability. Carbon sequestering (the process of capturing and storing atmospheric carbon dioxide to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere with the goal of reducing global climate change), urban heat island reducing, and locally sourced/ ethically made materials are ideal like lighter colored pavements/ white sealed asphalt where applicable. For examples of preferred materials, visit the mindful materials resource. The mindful materials Library aggregates product sustainability information while minimizing redundant effort on the part of both manufacturers and designers. Building Materials: Primary Materials: Not less than 80 percent of each street-facing Facade shall be constructed of one or more primary materials comprised of tested and proven, high quality, durable, and natural products. For Facades over 100 square feet, more than one Primary Material shall be used. Changes between Primary Materials must occur only at inside corners. The following are considered acceptable Primary Materials: Brick masonry; Native stone; Glass curtain wall. Accent Materials: The following Accent Materials may make up no more than 20% of the surface area on each Façade. Accent Materials are limited to: Pre-cast masonry (for trim and cornice elements only); Gypsum Reinforced Fiber Concrete (GFRC—for trim elements only); Recycled Metal (for beams, lintels, trim elements and ornamentation, and exterior architectural metal panels and cladding only); Glass block.

Buildings design should take into account the following design principles as per the UDO: a.

Size - the relationship of the project to its site.

Scale - the relationship of the building to those around it.

Massing - the relationship of the building’s various parts to each other.

Fenestration - the placement of windows and doors.

Rhythm - the relationship of fenestration, recesses and projection.

Setback - the relation to setback of immediate surroundings.

Materials - their compatibility with the surrounding developments.

Context - the overall relationship of the project to its surroundings.

General Design Guidelines The following guidelines apply to all districts : •

A building’s massing should relate to its site location, use, and architectural context. The massing of a building can be defined as the overall geometry (length, width and height) of its perceived form. Massing is a significant factor that contributes to establishing the character of a specific building. Of particular importance in defining the massing of a building is the overall height of the form, both actual and perceived, as well as the geometry of the roof.

•

Continuous, street-facing facades shall have additional design elements such as variations in the width, height, and rhythm at the street level to add interest, enhance the building appearance, establish greater depth in the facade, and enliven the pedestrian realm. Blank walls that can be seen from any street (public or private) are prohibited.

•

Façade composition and color should be mindful of the existing context with no sharp contrast.

•

Roofs shall be expressed in a visually interesting manner that complements the existing buildings. With the exception of singlefamily residences, the use of awnings on buildings is encouraged to provide protection from sun, wind, and rain, and to improve aesthetics of the building exterior.

•

Franchise architecture for single or multiple buildings within a development should be avoided in order to create buildings that complement one another. Franchises or national chains should follow the guidelines to be compatible with the development in which it is located, utilizing similar architectural design, building materials or color selections to blend with the surrounding development.

166

•

These materials should not be used without prior approval: Metal building without a masonry base course or other architectural features; Prefabricated steel panels; Highly reflective, shiny, or mirrorlike materials; Mill-finish (non-colored) aluminum metal windows or doorframes; Aluminum, vinyl or fiberglass siding or roofing materials; Un-faced or painted concrete block; Pre-cast concrete panels or exposed, unfinished foundation walls; or Exposed plywood or particle board.

The Zoning ordinance and Design guidelines for each district have been graphically respresented in response to this vision. This provides a toolkit not only for developers and investors targeting specific development opportunities, but also for the Planning & Facilities Department of the City Of Fayetteville in terms of the permiting and approval process. The sheets are intended to be read in conjunction with the Unified Development Ordinance as they mutually inform each other.

The architecture and landscape design should represent cues from local climate, topography, history, and character, and incorporate modern, climate-sensitive, and environmentally-conscious design considerations to create healthier, more productive, and more sustainable places to live, work, play and rest.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

167

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

1. Historic Core (DMU-HC) 1.05 Character

Potential Public Gathering Space

Reference: Rear Parking

se d-U xe i M 3: pe Ty r jo Ma

Co mm erc ial Str ee t

jor Ma

1.01 Intent

Typ e2 :M ain Str ee t

se d-U xe Mi : 3 pe Ty

Design Guidelines: Massing & Scale

Facade Composition

•

The preservation of existing historical building massing should be prioritized where possible.

•

Fenestration rhythm should not be extreme in difference to the existing vernacular of adjacent buildings.

•

When applicable, adaptive reuse should be considered after the structural integrity can be assessed.

•

Trim materials, glass, and details should appropriately match the character and quality of existing historic facades.

1.04 Street Typologies

•

Buildings need to conform to a three-part – base, middle, top – configuration.

•

High transparency at the ground level with visual connection to activity is strongly recommended in this district.

Major Type 1.3: Mixed-Use

•

Buildings shall feature an architecturally distinct base to address and enhance the meeting of the building and ground.

Common* * Except for Attached Townhouses open space requirement is Private space

Commercial Street Type 2.2: Main Street

1.02 Character Areas

•

Commercial Street Type 2.3: Commercial Alley Residential Street Type 3.1 Residential Street

•

168

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Roof Lines •

Roof forms of new buildings should be kept consistent with existing buildings. Gabled and hipped roofs are not appropriate for new structures in this district.

•

Gutters and downspouts of new construction should be kept consistent in appearance with historic gutters and downspouts. They should not obstruct windows or architectural details.

The massing of new construction in this district must be in the interest of walkability; ex. no large set backs from the sidewalk

Active Frontage The Core

Discouraged

Front Setbacks minimal to encourage building interaction with street

1.03 Open Space The intent of this subdistrict is to preserve the historic character and scale of this area as expressed through the form and architecture of the existing historic building stock. New development in this area will be scaled and designed to complement the buildings located around the Old Fayette County Courthouse.

Recommended

Storefront windows shall utilize a bulkhead or other design feature to transition the building to the ground and establish depth and interest in the façade. Building entrances shall be easily identifiable. When appropriate, buildings should incorporate changes in mass, surface, lighting, or finish to emphasize entranceways. Buildings should incorporate alcoves, arcade, awnings, covered walkways, porticoes, or roofs that protect pedestrians from the rain and sun.

Style & Materiality •

New construction shall utilize materials common on surrounding historic buildings where possible.

•

Innovative use of regular materials such as brick and stone is encouraged but not required. For example, An expressive pattern can be created in the front façade by offsetting the bricks used to create the typical bond, so they project from the surface or different color combinations can be used.

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

169

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

1. Historic Core (DMU-HC)

Lot Limit

C Street Typology as shown in 1.04

Lot Limit

F E

B D

1.06 Permitted Bldg. Types

1.07 Building Placement A

1.08 Building Form

1.09 Site/Parking Access & Open Space

Front Setback (min/max)

Side Setback (min)

Rear Setback (min)

Front Lot Line Coverage (min)

Building Height (min/max)

Building Width (max)

Impervious Coverage of Lot (max)

Vehicular Access

Parking Location & Type

Pedestrian Access

Commercial Building (Small)

0 ft/10 ft

5 ft

15 ft

75%

1.5 stories

150 ft

80%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Commercial Building (Prominent)

0 ft/10 ft

10 ft

15 ft

75%

2 stories / 2.5 stories

150 ft

80%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Main Street Building / Live/Work Building

0 ft/10 ft

5 ft

90%

2 stories / 3 stories

150 ft

90%

Rear Alley or Side Street

Rear Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Civic Building (Small)

0 ft/10 ft

10 ft

N/A

1.5 stories / 2 stories

N/A

80%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Civic Building (Prominent)

0 ft/10 ft

15 ft

N/A

2.5 stories / 5 stories

N/A

60%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Townhouses (Attached)

0 ft/10 ft

0 ft between units, 10 ft min between buildings

25 ft

85%

2 stories / 3 stories

150 ft

70%

Rear Alley or Side Street

Rear Yard

Primary Entrances from Front

Multiplex (Fourplex)

0 ft/10 ft

5 ft

25 ft

85%

2 stories / 2.5 stories

50 ft

70%

Rear Alley Side Street

Rear Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

1.10 Supplemental Standards A. See Article 6. of UDO (Conditional Uses) for Conditional Uses. B. See Section 401.23. of UDO (Projections into Required Yards.) for Structural and Architectural Projections. C. See Section 401.29. of UDO (Accessory Buildings.) for Accessory Building Regulations. 170

D. See Section 401.35. of UDO (Fences and Walls) for Fencing and Wall Regulations.

G. See Section 402.43 of UDO (Loading area requirements) for Loading Requirements

E. See Section 401.36. of UDO (Height Exceptions.) for Height Limitation Exceptions.

H. See Section 403.19 of UDO (Site Design.) for Landscaping Requirements

F. See Section 402.8 of UDO (Off-street automobile parking) for Off-Street Parking Requirements

I. See Section 404.13. of UDO (Screening of Utilities and Trash Enclosures - Design Standards) for Screening Standards.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

J. See Chapter 400, Article 5. of UDO (Building and Site Lighting) of for Lighting and Fixture Requirements, Illumination Levels, and Fixture Mounting Height. H. See Section 406.18. of UDO (Signange - Downtown Mixed Use District) for Signage Regulations and Requirements

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

171

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

2. Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC) 2.05 Character Reference Active Roof

Mixed-Use Commercial Building

Reference:

Ma jor Ty pe 3: Mi xe dUs e

Rear Parking

Recommended

Discouraged

Proposed Transitional Park

Corner Plaza Pocket Park

Mixed-Use Commercial Live-Work

se d-U xe i M 3: pe Ty r o j Ma Mixed-Use Commercial

Rear Parking

2.01 Intent

2.03 Open Space The intent of this subdistrict is to continue the evolution of this part of Downtown, in combination with the Historic Core, as the center of civic, commercial, social, cultural, and spiritual life in the City, where people can undertake a wide variety of activities, enjoy public open spaces, and walk safely and comfortably. New development in this district may be scaled slightly larger than the traditional mixed use buildings in the Historic Core and include a mix of uses with commercial activity on the ground level and residential units on upper levels.

Common* * Except for Mixed Use Building open space requirement is Common (at top of building)

Massing & Scale

Major Type 1.2A: Major Commercial

The Edge

Residential Street Type 3.1: Residential Street

The Root

Residential Street Type 3.2: Residential Boulevard

The Threshold

Alley Type 4.2: Shared Public Way

Development located at signalized intersections of major streets shall include pedestrian-oriented, community serving commercial uses such as a bookstore, coffee shop, or local market.

•

Buildings shall be designed to accommodate a minimum first floor finished ceiling height of twelve feet (12’) to allow for retail commercial uses at the ground floor. The minimum interior depth of these commercial spaces shall be 25 feet.

•

Upper floors of mixed-use buildings shall be stepped back when adjacent to single-family residences to ensure and protect privacy.

Variations in the width, height, and rhythm of street-facing facades are encouraged along any block face.

•

Street-facing facades shall have additional design elements at the street level to add interest, enhance the building appearance, establish greater depth in the facade and enliven the pedestrian realm.

•

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

In order to integrate new buildings with the existing urban fabric, new buildings are encouraged to incorporate pocket parks and attractive plaza areas between buildings that allow light to reach adjacent buildings.

Active Frontage

•

172

Upper stories, which are less likely to be occupied by retail tenants may have a smaller percentage of window opening area with window proportions different from ground level.

•

Commercial Street Type 2.1: Connector Commercial Street Type 2.3: Commercial Alley

The fenestration at the first floor of Mixed Use Core buildings should be composed of a 70% of window area in order to promote pedestrian-oriented uses with a high degree of transparency along the street. Uses shall be readily discernible to passers-by. Visually extend interior spaces outside through paving and glazing to create the concept of an indoor/ outdoor room

Buildings shall be located, designed, and programmed to activate open spaces, promote pedestrian activities, provide visual interest, and create an enjoyable, vibrant, and mixed- use environment

Major Type 1.2B: Major Boulevard

The Core

•

2.04 Street Typologies

Major Type 1.3: Mixed-Use

2.02 Character Areas

Design Guidelines:

Storefront windows shall utilize a bulkhead or other design feature to transition the building to the ground and establish depth and interest in the facade. Entrances have to be definied. Provide a transitional design feature(s) such as an opaque wooden barrier between public spaces and residential spaces at the ground floor to distinguish between the public and private realms.

Facade Composition

Roof Lines • •

Green roofs and gardens are highly encouraged. Activate any podium upper level with open stairwells and lively programs (Ex. Restaurants, entertainment, retail, etc.)

Style & Materiality • •

This district can include a mix of architecture styles ranging from contemporary to traditional. The monotonous repetition of details on the building facade is not recommended.

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

173

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

2. Mixed Use Core (DMU-MUC)

Lot Limit

C Street Typology as shown in 2.04

Lot Limit

B D

2.06 Permitted Bldg. Types

2.07 Building Placement A

2.08 Building Form

2.09 Site/Parking Access

Front Setback (min/max)

Side Setback (min)

Rear Setback (min)

Front Lot Line Coverage (min)

Building Height (min/max)

Building Width (max)

Impervious Coverage of Lot (max)

Vehicular Access

Parking Location & Type

Pedestrian Access

Mixed Commercial Building

5 ft / 15 ft

5 ft

75%

2 stories / 3 stories

200 ft

75%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Commercial Building (Prominent)

10 ft / 20 ft

10 ft

15 ft

N/A

2 stories / 2.5 stories

200 ft

75%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Mixed Use Building

5ft / 15 ft

10 ft

25 ft

90%

3 stories / 5 stories

200 ft

90%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front or Corner

Live/Work Building

5 ft / 15 ft

5 ft

90%

2 stories / 3 stories

200 ft

90%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Civic Building (Prominent)

20 ft / No max

15 ft

5 ft

90%

3 stories / 4 stories

200 ft

70%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front or Side

Multiplex (Five to Twelve)

5ft / 15 ft

5 ft

25 ft

N/A

2 stories / 2.5 stories

80 ft

70%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard

Primary Entrances from Front

Townhouses (Stacked)

5ft / 15 ft

5 ft

25 ft

N/A

3 stories / 4 stories

200 ft

70%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

2.10 Supplemental Standards A. See Article 6. of UDO (Conditional Uses) for Conditional Uses. B. See Section 401.23. of UDO (Projections into Required Yards.) for Structural and Architectural Projections. C. See Section 401.29. of UDO (Accessory Buildings.) for Accessory Building Regulations. 174

D. See Section 401.35. of UDO (Fences and Walls) for Fencing and Wall Regulations.

G. See Section 402.43 of UDO (Loading area requirements) for Loading Requirements

E. See Section 401.36. of UDO (Height Exceptions.) for Height Limitation Exceptions.

H. See Section 403.19 of UDO (Site Design.) for Landscaping Requirements

F. See Section 402.8 of UDO (Off-street automobile parking) for OffStreet Parking Requirements

I. See Section 404.13. of UDO (Screening of Utilities and Trash Enclosures - Design Standards) for Screening Standards.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

175

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

3. Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

jor Ma

e Typ

ard lev ou B l ia erc mm o 2: C

(Prominent) Commercial Building

Front Vehicular Entrance with side parking to improve pedestrian experience

3.05 Character Reference Reference: Recommended

Public Plaza Activates the Street

Discouraged

Rear Parking

Primary Pedestrian Entrance from Front Plaza

Re sid en tia lS tre et

3.01 Intent

Side Vehicular Entrance

3.03 Open Space These subdistricts are located at or near the edges of Downtown along one of the major corridors. The intent of this subdistrict is to encourage the development of prominent buildings with attractive facades and appealing commercial uses that would create a lively ambiance as people arrive into Downtown.

Common

Design Guidelines: Massing & Scale

Facade Composition

•

Storefront windows shall utilize a bulkhead or other design feature to transition the building to the ground and establish depth and interest in the façade.

•

Provide human scaled architectural features is particularly important in areas where pedestrian activity is occurring or encouraged. The highest level of detail shall occur close to pedestrian areas, near streets and entries and around the ground floor.

Activate Frontage

3.04 Street Typologies

•

For buildings on a parcel abutting a primary street, the primary building entrance must face either: a.The primary street sidewalk; or b. A pedestrian-oriented outdoor space such as a public square, plaza, or courtyard

•

The ground-floor building walls facing a primary street shall provide transparent windows or doors with views into the building for a minimum of 60% of the building frontage between 2½ and 7 feet above the sidewalk and 90% of the transparent windows or doors area shall remain clear to allow views into the building unless the proposed use has unique operational characteristics which preclude building openings.

Major Type 1.1: Thoroughfare

3.02 Character Areas

Major Type 1.2A: Major Commercial Major Type 1.2B: Major Boulevard

The Threshold

Major Type 1.3: Mixed-Use

The Edge

Commercial Street Type 2.1: Connector

The Root

•

176

Building widths have to be broken into multiples of 50’ along major street and 100’ along secondary street to respond to pedestrian scale. For maximum width, refer zoning table.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Buildings shall feature an architecturally distinct base to address and enhance the meeting of the building and ground. Building entrances shall be easily identifiable. When appropriate, buildings should incorporate changes in mass, surface, lighting, or finish to emphasize entranceways.

Roof Lines •

Green roofs and use of solar panels are highly encouraged in these low scale buildings.

•

Activate any podium upper level with open stairwells and lively programs (Ex. Restaurants, entertainment, retail, etc.)

•

Roof forms may be flat or sloped. All flat roofs shall employ trim, variation in brick coursing, a projecting cornice or projecting parapet to visually “cap” the building.

Style & Materiality •

This district should have a predominant architecture style that is contemporary and less traditional

•

The monotonous repetition of details on the building facade is not recommended and visual interest with mix of two primary materials is encouraged.

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

177

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

3. Gateway Commercial (DMU-GC)

Lot Limit

Street Typology as shown in 3.04

Lot Limit

B A

D B

3.06 Permitted Bldg. Types

3.07 Building Placement A

3.08 Building Form

3.09 Site/Parking Access

Front Setback (min)

Side Setback (min)

Rear Setback (min)

Front Lot Line Coverage (min)

Building Height (min/max)

Building Width (max)

Impervious Coverage of Lot (max)

Vehicular Access

Parking Location & Type

Pedestrian Access

Commercial Building (Small)

30 ft

15 ft

40%

1 story / 1.5 stories

N/A

60%

Side Street or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Commercial Building (Prominent)

30 ft

15 ft

40%

2 stories / 2.5 stories

N/A

60%

Side Street or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Mixed Commercial Building

30 ft

15 ft

40%

2 stories / 3 stories

N/A

60%

Side Street or Front

Rear Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

Flex Commercial Building

30 ft

15 ft

40%

1 story / 3 stories

N/A

60%

Side Street or Front

Rear Yard, Side Yard

Primary Entrance from Front

3.10 Supplemental Standards A. See Article 6. of UDO (Conditional Uses) for Conditional Uses. B. See Section 401.23. of UDO (Projections into Required Yards.) for Structural and Architectural Projections. C. See Section 401.29. of UDO (Accessory Buildings.) for Accessory Building Regulations.

178

D. See Section 401.35. of UDO (Fences and Walls) for Fencing and Wall Regulations.

G. See Section 402.43 of UDO (Loading area requirements) for Loading Requirements

E. See Section 401.36. of UDO (Height Exceptions.) for Height Limitation Exceptions.

H. See Section 403-19 of UDO (Site Design.) for Landscaping Requirements

F. See Section 402.8 of UDO (Off-street automobile parking) for OffStreet Parking Requirements

I. See Section 404.13. of UDO (Screening of Utilities and Trash Enclosures - Design Standards) for Screening Standards.

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

J. See Chapter 400, Article 5. of UDO (Building and Site Lighting) of for Lighting and Fixture Requirements, Illumination Levels, and Fixture Mounting Height. H. See Section 406.17. of UDO (Signange - Downtown Mixed Use District) for Signage Regulations and Requirements

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

179

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

4. Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN) 4.05 Character Reference

Access to trails and active spaces through network of walkways

Reference: Common spaces / Neighborhood green

Recommended

Discouraged

Community amenity building

St re et

Ty pe 1: Co nn ec to r

Cluster and courtyard configuration

4.01 Intent The intent of this subdistrict is to create pocket neighborhoods where a sufficient amount of land is available. Pocket neighborhoods are primarily residential in nature, consisting of a variety of residential building types along with some mixed use buildings with community-serving amenities, all of which are situated within a network of shared open spaces.

4.02 Character Areas

Image Credit: rosschapin.com

Co m m er cia l

Buildings oriented towards central common spaces

4.03 Open Space

Design Guidelines:

Open space that is commonly owned and managed by all residents of a pocket neighborhood is a key feature in fostering community. It is intended that it be adequately sized and centrally located with individual dwelling entrances oriented towards the open space.

Massing & Scale

Facade Composition

•

Each cluster shall contain a minimum of four and a maximum of twelve dwellings to encourage a sense of community.

•

It is recommended to raise cottages off the ground. When cottages are clustered close together, a few steps up to a porch allows for a visual separation between community space and private space.

Nested Houses configuration is encouraged to increase privacy in a cluster. Layout of homes should be with an open side and a closed side so that neighboring homes ‘nest’ together - with no window peering into a neighbor’s living space.

•

Fenestration rhythm should not be extreme in difference to the adjacent development. For example mixed use buildings should follow the windows and opening style of adjacent residential buildings. Trim materials, glass, and details should complement the character and quality of the residential vernacular.

At least 75 percent of the dwelling units of a pocket neighborhood shall abut a common open space; and all of the dwelling units shall be within 60 feet walking distance measured from the nearest entrance of the dwelling along the shortest safe walking route to the nearest point of the common open space. The common open space shall have dwellings abutting at least two sides.

Activate Frontage •

From each residential unit, clear access to any existing/future trail and sidewalk network is strongly recommended.

•

Every dwelling shall have a covered entry porch oriented toward the common open space or street. This porch shall be open on at least two sides, and shall not be enclosed. An exception is in mixed-use buildings that may have covered entry porches located off of an access alley lane

•

Gabled and hipped roofs are permitted. A mix of flat and sloped roofs are encouraged for diversity.

•

High transparency at the ground level with visual connection to activity is strongly recommended in this district for mixed use buildings

•

Gutters and downspouts of new construction should be kept consistent in appearance with other residential buildings in this district.

•

For residential units on the ground level, direct access to the sidewalk is recommended but not required.

4.04 Street Typologies

The Edge

Major Type 1.2B: Major Boulevard

The Root

Commercial Street Type 2.1: Connector Residential Street Type 3.1: Residential Street Alley Type 4.1: Residential Alley

Roof Lines

Style & Materiality •

New construction following a specific architectural vernacular is not required but should respect the existing buildings in the area.

•

Use of transparent material including but not limited to glass should be limited in this district for residential uses.

Alley Type 4.2: Shared Public Way

180

HKS | PEC | Office of Design | NV5 | Noell Consulting Group | Blue Cypress

Parks and Open Space | Mobility | Capital Improvement | Built Environment

181

Downtown Fayetteville Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) Study

4. Mixed Use Neighborhood (DMU-MUN) C C

Street Typology as shown in 4.04

Lot Limit

B D A

4.06 Permitted Bldg. Types

4.07 Building Placement

4.08 Building Form D

4.09 Site/Parking Access & Open Space

Front Lot Line Coverage (min)

Building Height (min/max)

Building Width (max)

Impervious Coverage of Lot (max)

25 ft

N/A

2 stories / 4 stories

150 ft

5 ft

25 ft

N/A

1.5 stories / 2 stories

10 ft

5 ft

25 ft

N/A

Multiplex (Five to Twelve)

10 ft

5 ft

25 ft

Townhouses (Attached)

10 ft

Townhouses (Stacked)

10 ft

Courtyard Building

10 ft

Note: No more than 20% of lots in this district may be developed as duplexes to promote diverse housing

Front Setback from Common Open Space or Street (min)

Side Setback (min)

Rear Setback (min)

Mixed Use Building

10 ft

Duplex

10 ft

Multiplex (Fourplex)

Vehicular Access

Parking Location & Type

Pedestrian Access

75%

Rear Alley, Side Street, or Front

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrance from Front

50 ft

75%

Rear Alley

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrance from Front

2 stories / 2.5 stories

50 ft

75%

Rear Alley

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrance from Front

N/A

2 stories / 2.5 stories

80 ft

75%

Rear Alley

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrance from Front

25 ft

N/A

2 stories / 3 stories

150 ft

75%

Rear Alley

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrance from Front

10 ft

25 ft

N/A

3 stories / 3.5 stories

150 ft

75%

Rear Alley

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrance from Front

10 ft

25 ft

N/A

3 stories / 3.5 stories

100 ft

75%

Rear Alley

Rear Yard or Shared Facility

Primary Entrances from Front

4.10 Supplemental Standards A. See Article 6. of UDO (Conditional Uses) for Conditional Uses. B. See Section 401.23. of UDO (Projections into Required Yards.) for Structural and Architectural Projections. C. See Section 401.29. of UDO (Accessory Buildings.) for Accessory Building Regulations.

182