June, 2020
City of Fayetteville North Carolina
Future Land Use Plan
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government, and its page numbers are that section's own. We have pinned 1 slot here, so an element absent from this file may simply not have been reviewed yet.
June, 2020
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Purpose/Overview ................................................................1 Planning Process ................................................................3 District Meetings Summary .................................................3 Future Land Use Map and Character Area Descriptions .........10 Future Land Use Goals and Recommendations ...................14 Future Land Use Goals ...................................................23 Land Use Policies and Strategies ...................................24 Implementation Recommendations ................................37 Community Profile.............................................................44
⬚ figure
Prepared by the Development Services Department with assistance from:
⬚ figure ⬚ figure
⬚ figure ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP
Mayor Mitch Colvin Mayor Pro Tem Kathy Jensen (1) Shakeyla Ingram (2) Tisha Waddell (3) D.J. Haire (4) Johnny Dawkins (5) Christopher Davis (6) Larry Wright (7) Courtney Banks-McLaughlin (8) Yvonne Kinston (9)
Dan Culliton (2) William Joseph Leon Crisp (6) Theodore Mohn (8) James William Arp, Jr. (9)
Marsha Bryant Christopher Davis Mike Dobs Michael King Raymond Makar Steven McMillian LTC(R) Alicia Moore Lakeisha Payton Rishi Shah
Jack Cox George “Mike” Dudley Joseph Humphries Marshall Isler Barbara James Clabon Lowe Perry Massey Teddy Warner
Dr. Gerald Newton, AICP Development Services Director Taurus Freeman Planning & Zoning Divisional Manager Marsha Bryant Development Advocate
Thank you for your contributions in crafting this plan for the City of Fayetteville.
Future land use maps, along with comprehensive plans, are the primary tools used by local governments to provide land use guidance to staff, appointed, and elected officials, and for decisions regarding long-term land use (rezonings, special use permits, etc.). The preparation of Fayetteville’s future land use map update provided an opportunity for the community, staff, stakeholders and others to participate in a city-wide conversation about development pressures facing land within Fayetteville’s municipal limits and within its municipal influence area (MIA). In addition to a map with designated future land uses, character area descriptions and policy recommendations are provided to assist with implementation. This plan communicates to the public and the development community the desired future land use of areas and the type and form of development that should occur. The planning process for this update lasted approximately six months. During that time there were a series of public involvement meetings that included:
Additional public input was received through a city-led survey effort. The survey was an opportunity for residents unable to attend public meetings to provide input on concerns and development preferences, all of which helped in the crafting of the land use map and supporting character area descriptions.
Section 1, Planning Process, describes information gleaned from public input meetings and survey results. Section 2, Future Land Use Map and Character Areas, outlines the guiding land use map for the city as well as Character Area descriptions. Section 3, Goals and Policies, provides specific guidance and recommendations on land use-related issues such as community reinvestment and smart growth. Section 4, Implementation, offers up six big ideas related to the map update and potential to spur positive change in the City. Section 5, Community Profile, provides background information on land use, demographics and economics data.
Fayetteville’s future land use map update provided an opportunity for the community, staff, stakeholders and others to participate in a city-wide conversation.
This map update was meant to bring together a cohesive vision for the future growth and development of Fayetteville. Fayetteville’s population has risen steadily over the years, and because of its proximity to one of the Nation’s largest military bases, its economy has been largely sheltered from recessions in years past. Over the years, a number of small area plans have been developed to guide growth and development. Recently a city-wide strategic plan included a recommendation to develop strategic land use policy to support quality development. This effort builds on that recommendation.
⬚ figure
Figure 1: Previous Plans 1983-2017
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 3
As part of the public engagement process for the Fayetteville Future Land Use Map, a series of public meetings were conducted throughout City Council Districts during March and April 2019. A meeting was also held in September to provide a chance for members of the public to comment on the draft plan. The results of these meetings, shown below, provide valuable insight about priorities and goals for future development in Fayetteville and the results will inform the creation of Fayetteville’s Future Land Use Map. Additional outreach is expected to occur as part of a broader effort to create a city-wide Comprehensive Plan beginning in 2020.
To learn about specific land use issues and preferences among the various neighborhoods in Fayetteville, the nine City Council Districts were consolidated into groups and a public meeting was held to hear from area residents. Several city council members attended the meetings for their districts. All meetings began at 6:00 p.m. and took place at city-owned recreation centers.
The meetings were held in a casual open-house format to allow participants the opportunity to provide feedback at their own pace. Each district meeting began with a brief presentation highlighting the need for a future land use map and explaining the planning process. Following the presentation, participants visited stations where they expressed their opinions about land use and development via hands-on activities. Activities at each station were facilitated by consultants from Stewart and Crawford Design and City of Fayetteville Staff.
A meeting was held at City Hall in September of 2019 to unveil the draft Future Land Use map and recommendations. Public comments were collected and used to revise draft recommendations prior to approval of the Planning Commission and City Council.
⬚ figure
Figure 2: Image from District Meetings
| City Council Districts | Meeting Date | Meeting Location |
|---|---|---|
| District 1(Kathy Jensen) & District 3 (Tisha Waddell) | 3/19/2019 | College Lake Recreation Center, 4945 Rosehill Rd. |
| District 4 (D.J. Haire), District 7 (Larry Wright) & District 9 (Jim Arp) | 3/21/2019 | EE Miller Recreation Center, 1347 Rim Rd. |
| District 6 (Bill Crisp) & District 8 (Ted Mohn) | 4/3/2019 | Lake Rim Recreation Center, 1455 Hoke Loop Rd. |
| District 2 (Dan Culliton) & District 5 (Johnny Dawkins) | 4/4/2019 | Myers Recreation Center, 1015 Rochester Dr. |
Table 1: District Meeting Locations
To gain an understanding of the development styles that people prefer, meeting attendees were asked to give feedback on images depicting specific building types for residential, neighborhood, commercial, and office & industrial development.
Residential design style preferences show split support for low-density single-family development and medium density single family development. In terms of neighborhood character and design, there was strong preference for mixed use areas and for conservation subdivisions (subdivisions with smaller lots but more open space and parks).
Participants preferred developments with larger amounts of open space (aka "conservation subdivisions") over conventional subdivision design by 2 to 1.
⬚ figure
Low Density Residential
⬚ figure
Walkable Mixed Use
⬚ figure
Medium Density Residential
⬚ figure
Conservation Subdivisions
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 5
Strong preference was shown for commercial/residential mixed-use development and Lifestyle Centers—commercial centers with architectural detail, outdoor seating and landscaping. For office and industry, there was a very strong preference for infill and re-use and support for office and technology centers.
⬚ figure
Mixed-Use Development Precedent: Baxter Village, Fort Mill, SC
⬚ figure
Lifestyle Center Precedent: Colony Place, Charlotte, NC
⬚ figure
Infill & Reuse Precedent: Rocky Mills, Rocky Mount, NC
Meeting attendees showed mixed support for apartments, duplexes and townhomes with most people indicating such development is appropriate only in certain places. In general, respondents indicated support for office and industrial development (other than infill and reuse) in certain places only. This is especially true for manufacturing and industrial development.
In terms of residential preferences, people indicated a lack of interest in Traditional Neighborhood Design, however this could be due to the fact that there are not many local examples. Overall, people were supportive of commercial development, but the least preferred type was Neighborhood Commercial.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
These images capture the results of the visual preference exercise from the first community meeting. Votes were tallied from all four meetings and summarized to determine community preference for different types of land uses and development designs.
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 7
During the public meetings attendees participated in a map-based exercise to convey what parts or aspects of their neighborhoods and districts they wanted to keep (support or preserve), toss (change) and what they wanted to see created. A summary of findings from these activities is included below.
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Meeting attendees viewed maps of their district and offered ideas on what to preserve, change or create to improve quality of life .
Create
⬚ figure
Greenways, trails and sidewalks were mentioned as a priority for many residents during the public meetings.
An online, public survey was conducted over a period of a month to gauge public priorities and perspectives related to development types and land uses. These results helped inform the development of strategies to further the public vision for their community. Highlights include:
Safe and Secure Community*
Desirable Place to Live, Work and Recreate*
High Quality Built Environment*
Encourage redevelopment in areas of decline**
Improve transportation and options such as sidewalks and bike lanes**
Improve the appearance of new and existing development**
Strategic Goal Priorities ** Ten-year priorities
The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) as well as the goals, policies, and strategies that supplement it, are presented in a way that acknowledges Fayetteville’s existing land use character and past planning efforts while offering up policy guidance and solutions for sustainable growth in the future.
Along with existing land use, land supply, and suitability analysis, plans from the city’s past planning efforts were taken into consideration when drafting this map. To compare against the last city-wide land use planning effort, the Cumberland County 2010 Land Use Plan contained 19 distinct future land use districts, including 5 districts for land on Fort Bragg. This plan identifies 15 future land use districts (referred to as character areas) and refrains from assigning any future land use categories on the base.
Many of the proposed character areas are new, as the prior land use plan had more a more traditional, Euclidean approach to land use types that did not include mixed use designations. The new character areas avoid a traditional approach of separating different uses in most districts and instead reflect a trend of mixing uses in appropriate areas and scales.
Rural and less intensive uses will be found east of the Cape Fear River, where a lack of utility availability and poor soils will continue to hinder development. Neighborhood mixed use centers are in areas one might expect such as Haymount, but also designated in areas that may see future development like north Ramsey Street. “Commercial Strip Redevelopment” areas are composed of areas like Eutaw Shopping Center and Bragg Boulevard as it approaches downtown Fayetteville. The commercial and retail area centered around Cross Creek Mall and Skibo Road corridor is designated as a “Regional Center”.
Fayetteville’s FLUM is a tool to meet the needs of current and future residents. The new FLUM will supersede all prior land use plan recommendations to serve as both visual and policy guidance for land use planning moving forward in the City.
⬚ figure
A Future Land Use Map (described in more detail later) is one way of guiding development decisions in the City.
Figure 3: Future Land Use Map
⬚ figure
Note: Area maps are included in this report beginning on page 16. A larger format version of this map is maintained by the Planning Dept.
Fayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 12
⬚ figure
Intense commercial, retail, service. Many 5+ story buildings (esp. in core). Dense residential uses, stacked vertically and urban neighborhoods on edges.
⬚ figure
Commercial centers with regional draw. >400,000 sqft nonresidential leasable space. Some 5+ story buildings, hotels, institutional uses possible or clusters of lower density, large-scale commercial uses. Some residential, but only on upper floors or as multi-family structures on edges.
⬚ figure
150,000-400,000 sqft nonresidential leasable space. Vertically mixed uses (3-5 stories). Ground floors mainly nonresidential, upper floors office (or maybe residential). High density residential and multi-family inter-mixed. Single family on edges.
⬚ figure
Neighborhood-scale commercial uses. Horizontal mix of uses; vertically in key locations. Buildings 1-3 stories. Smaller-scale multi-family, attached and small lot single family. Lower density on edges.
⬚ figure
High intensity nonresidential uses often near major intersections and highway interchanges (hotels, gas stations, big box retail, fast food). Redevelopment not likely to include residential. Buffers for adjacent uses.
⬚ figure
Commercial mixed use area that encourages higher density residential redevelopment as part of the land use mix to spur private investment. Target areas are clusters of underutilized commercial strip properties.
⬚ figure
High intensity nonresidential uses with high impact or likelihood for nuisance. Regional employment centers including larger industrial uses or business parks.
⬚ figure
Medium intensity nonresidential uses. Light industrial, office, flexspaces, warehousing, large schools/institutions. Businesses or buildings grouped, sometimes in business parks. This area also includes utilities and city services.
⬚ figure
Areas generally not suited for development due to site constraints or environmental/cultural importance. These areas may include passive or active recreation amenities or reserved open space, such as undisturbed floodplain.
⬚ figure
Townhomes and apartments in 3-5 story buildings with some very small single family lots possible. Typically, 5-16 dwellings per acre. Active, compact neighborhoods walkable to adjacent commercial centers.
⬚ figure
Primarily single family residential neighborhoods with small lots (3-6 dwellings per acre). Duplex or townhomes interspersed; low-rise apartments possible. Mostly auto-oriented, but some walkable neighborhoods and destinations
⬚ figure
This area allows higher density redevelopment and "missing middle" housing to increase private reinvestment and revitalize neighborhoods. Target areas include clusters of vacant and/or underutilized parcels. Policies focus on neighorhood improvement and reinvestment.
⬚ figure
Mainly single family residential with some accessory dwellings; occaission-aly with duplexes (if isolated) or townhomes. Lots typically 1-4 dwellings per acre. Suburban, auto-oriented character with utility services.
⬚ figure
Clustered residential or conservation subdivisions that reserve significant land for open space. Generally, 1-2 dwelling units per acre. Potential for utility service or septic systems.
⬚ figure
Primarily working lands (farms, silviculture, etc.) with occasional single family residential. No utility service (especially lack of sewer). Density typically much less than 1 dwelling per acre. Poorly connected road network.
Figure 4: Downtown Fayetteville
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 16
Figure 5: Eastern Fayetteville
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 17
Figure 6: North of I-295
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 18
Figure 7: Bragg Boulevard to Ramsey Street
⬚ figure
| FUTURE LAND USE | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| PARKOS - PARK / OPEN SPACE | MDR - MEDIUM DENSITY | ||
| RU - RURAL | NIR - NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT | ||
| OSS - OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISIONS | HDR - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL | ||
| LDR - LOW DENSITY | NMU - NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE | ||
| CSR - COMMERCIAL STRIP REDEVELOPMENT | |||
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 19
Figure 8: Southern Fayetteville
⬚ figure
FUTURE LAND USE
| PARKOS - PARK / OPEN SPACE | MDR - MEDIUM DENSITY | CC - COMMUNITY CENTER |
| RU - RURAL | NIR - NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT | RC - REGIONAL CENTER |
| OSS - OPEN SPACE SUBDIVISIONS | HDR - HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL | DTMXU - DOWNTOWN |
| LDR - LOW DENSITY | NMU - NEIGHBORHOOD MIXED USE | OI - OFFICE / INSTITUTIONAL |
| CSR - COMMERCIAL STRIP REDEVELOPMENT | HC - HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL | |
| EC - INDUSTRIAL / EMPLOYMENT |
CONTEXT
| County Boundary | |
| City Limits | |
| Municipal Influence Area | |
| Fort Bragg | |
| Railroad Track |
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 20
Figure 9: Cross Creek Mall Area
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 21
Figure 10: West Fayetteville
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 22
GOAL #1: FOCUS VALUE AND INVESTMENT AROUND INFRASTRUCTURE AND STRATEGIC NODES
GOAL #2: PROMOTE COMPATIBLE ECONOMIC AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN KEY IDENTIFIED AREAS
GOAL #3: ENCOURAGE REDEVELOPMENT OF STRIP COMMERCIAL AREAS
GOAL #4: FOSTER SAFE, STABLE, AND ATTRACTIVE NEIGHBORHOODS
GOAL #5: PRESERVE AND ENHANCE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES THROUGH OPEN SPACE PROTECTION
GOAL #6: COMPLIMENT AND CAPITALIZE ON THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF MILITARY INSTALLATIONS AND EDUCATIONAL AND MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS
⬚ figure
The Future Land Use Plan goals support Goal III from the overall City Strategic Plan:
Goal III: Strategic Land Use Policy Objective A – Manage growth and support strategic land use policy by supporting quality development.
LU-1: ENCOURAGE GROWTH IN AREAS WELL-SERVED BY INFRASTRUCTURE AND URBAN SERVICES, INCLUDING ROADS, UTILITIES, PARKS, SCHOOLS, POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES.
⬚ figure
Farm and forest land east of the Cape Fear River is currently not served by City sewer. Extension of sewer to much of this area is not advisable due to cost to provide service and environmental constraints.
LU-2: ENCOURAGE STRATEGIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
⬚ figure
Marketing existing industrial and business parks with can help increase local jobs and improve property values
⬚ figure
The pedestrian friendly environment of Hay Street could be extended to other parts of Downtown and replicated in different form in other activity centers to encourage redevelopment, and shopping and dining destinations
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 25
Incentives:
Regulatory:
Investment:
regional stormwater facilities, greenways and parks, and/or school construction or upgrades. o Consider acquisition of strategic properties and potential catalyst sites to sell to developers via RFP process to accomplish community goals
USE DISTRICTS
⬚ figure
Thirty-six percent of commercial properties in the City are underutilized, indicating an oversupply of commercial property. One-third of total commercial properties are under two acres in size.
⬚ figure
New development standards are improving some commercial corridors. Recent development along Ramsey Street sports heightened perimeter landscaping and screening of parking areas.
o Encourage reuse of historic structures through development regulations o Modify land use regulations to encourage the scale and architectural detail of new infill development to be compatible with older neighborhoods.
⬚ figure
Following their most recent community visioning and plan adoption, the citizens of Hickory passed a $40 million bond by referendum. This bond is currently being used to design and construct catalyst projects identified in the vision plan. The major thrusts of the plan include:
These major public projects are anticipated to generate private sector investment that will multiply the total economic and societal benefit.
More information can be found here: https://www.hickorync.gov/content/bond-information
(Photo from the Town of Hickory website.)
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 28
o Re-align key major and minor intersections (and establish minor connections from existing neighborhoods) to create logical connections and nodes for investment, intensification, and public realm enhancements - Develop, with assistance from city transportation officials, a list of intersections that can benefit from realignment. Coordinate with FAMPO and NCDOT to add projects to the STIP for funding. - Use this plan as a mechanism to retrofit areas with other amenities found elsewhere within the city such as street trees, sidewalks, and bike lanes.
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 29
SAFE, STABLE AND ATTRACTIVE NEIGHBORHOODS
LU-6: ENCOURAGE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT RESULT IN QUALITY NEIGHBORHOODS
LU-7: ENCOURAGE A MIX OF HOUSING TYPES FOR ALL AGES AND INCOMES
⬚ figure
Requiring high quality design and construction of public facilities in new subdivisions can encourage development that raises property values, and create a visually appealing public realm.
⬚ figure
A variety of housing type options allows people in different stages of their lives to be able to invest in the social fabric of their neighborhood and community. Providing spaces within neighborhoods for these “missing middle” housing types can allow people to find their own special niche within the City.
This federal program leverages public and private dollars to support locally-driven strategies that address struggling neighborhoods with distressed public or HUD-assisted housing. Local leaders, residents, and stakeholders create and implement a plan that revitalizes distressed HUD housing and addresses the challenges in the surrounding neighborhood. The program helps communities transform neighborhoods by revitalizing severely distressed public and/or assisted housing and catalyzing critical improvements in the neighborhood, including vacant property, housing, businesses, services and schools.
Choice Neighborhoods is focused on three core goals:
Housing: Replace distressed public and assisted housing with high-quality mixed-income housing;
People: Improve outcomes related to employment and income, health, and children’s education; and
Neighborhood: Create the conditions necessary for public and private reinvestment in distressed neighborhoods.
More information can be found here: https://www.hud.gov/cn
(Information adapted from HUD website.)
PRESERVE AND ENHANCE ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES
LU-8: REQUIRE THE RESERVATION OF OPEN SPACE AND UNIQUE NATURAL FEATURES IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
Open space can take many forms and can be public, private, or semi-public. Finding the right, context-sensitive mix can add value to a neighborhood and improve health outcomes of residents.
⬚ figure
Greenways (multi-use trails) are a local amenity as well as a regional recreational attractor.
LU-10: SUPPORT LAND USE, SITE DESIGN AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT INITIATIVES THAT INCREASE RESILIENCY AND REDUCE IMPACTS FROM FLOODING AND NATURAL DISASTERS
⬚ figure
The best (and safest) use of high- to moderate-frequency floodplains is to be reserved for the storage of floodwater during storm events. Passive recreational uses can also increase the utility of these areas.
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 34
LU-11: ENCOURAGE A DEVELOPMENT PATTERN AND COMMUNITY GROWTH THAT RESPECTS THE TRAINING AND OPERATIONAL MISSION OF THE MILITARY, WHILE ALSO ALLOWING FOR REASONABLE, APPROPRIATE USES OF PROPERTIES NEAR FORT BRAGG
LU-12: COORDINATE WITH FORT BRAGG
⬚ figure
The operations at Fort Bragg are impacted by the uses of surrounding lands, as detailed in the recently revised Joint Land Use Study (JLUS). (Source: Fort Bragg JLUS, Sept. 2018)
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 35
LU-13: COORDINATE WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, NON-PROFITS AND EDUCATION AND MEDICAL INSTITUTIONS ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVES AND COMPLIMENTARY DEVELOPMENT IN THE VICINITY CAMPUSES
⬚ figure
Methodist University, Fayetteville State University and Fayetteville Technical Community College are anchor institutions that great assets to the City. Coordinating with representatives of these institutions will be key during small area planning initiatives in the future.
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 36
The following strategies represent near-term recommendations for implementing key components of the Future Land Use Plan.
STRATEGY #1: USE THIS DOCUMENT AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO GUIDE LAND USE POLICY DECISIONS AT STAFF, BOARD, AND ELECTED OFFICIAL LEVELS TO PROMOTE SOUND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
CONTEXT: The last City-wide land use plan was included in the Cumberland County 2010 Land Use Plan, completed in 1996, which resulted from a joint effort between Cumberland County and the City of Fayetteville. Since this time a number of small area plans have been completed in the City that have included land use recommendations. Oftentimes, there could be multiple plans that address the future land use of a parcel in the city. This fact, and not having a clear understanding of what plan recommendations take precedence, could create issues between staff and the development community when those parcels are being considered for development. This document and the associated Future Land Use Map was created based on updating a city-wide vision for growth and development that is based on previous small area plans and a planning and public engagement process that included stakeholder interviews, public meetings, a survey and staff worksessions. It is meant to supersede previous land use planning efforts and be updated regularly.
IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS:
#1: Use this document and the Future Land Use Map to guide land use policy decisions
#2: Update the City’s comprehensive plan
#3: Remove barriers for reinvestment and redevelopment in target areas
#4: Coordinate efforts among departments to create synergistic opportunities for reinvestment in distressed areas
#5: Increase public engagement efforts in support of the goals and action steps in this document
o Refine the city’s development codes in a clear and consistently applied manner and use them as a tool for implementation of the land use goals and strategies found in this document. o Regularly update the Future Land Use map based on rezoning decisions, future small area planning initiatives and major updates every 5 years
STRATEGY #2: BUILD ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
CONTEXT: Outside of recent planning efforts for small areas within the city, there has not been a full-fledged comprehensive plan since the 2008 Growth Vision Plan. As comprehensive plans typically have a shelf-life of 5-10 years, an update is necessary to properly represent the wants and wishes of stakeholders and citizens alike. While this mapping update took much of the city’s available land use, environmental, and socio-economic data to create a thoughtful approach to its future development, a comprehensive plan update will also address items and topics not touched on this update, such as economic development, parks and open space, transportation, and others.
IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS: Planning managers should work closely with elected officials and city management to explain the necessity of a comprehensive planning update and coordinate its completion with planning staff or dedicate funding for completion by a private planning firm. Specific recommendations include:
Over the years, strip development has occurred on nearly every major or minor arterial in the city. This effect has been exacerbated by the numerous, incremental road realignments as well as unpredictable and significant fluctuations in demand and population (in part due to the military base). The changes have created an unreliable backdrop for investment, with an ever-changing landscape of population density, income, access, and availability. As each new strip develops, it disenfranchises the previous strip development by lowering demand, and partially underutilized land and marginal businesses and rental spaces are all that is left. Some parcels were so highly prized for their frontage on an arterial that the entire back 75% of the parcel was ignored, with just a parking lot and shallow commercial space developed along the roadway. With the newly proposed focal activity areas, it is important to encourage and incentivize redevelopment of these marginal strip commercial centers. By doing so, these properties can redevelop as higher value contributors to a better organized community quit that will reinforce activity centers.
⬚ figure
Strip commercial centers with reinvestment potential existing on many of the major commercial corridors. Often, these commercial strip buildings have vacant land behind them that is underutilized.
activity centers will then benefit by increased demand for upfits and redevelopment, which will increase their attractiveness and vibrancy. The existing and future pedestrian facilities along these redeveloped corridors will connect the residents of the redeveloped Commercial Strip Redevelopment areas with the activity centers, which will help those businesses flourish by having a high population of potential consumers nearby.
Neighborhood Improvement/Redevelopment character areas offer a similar opportunity for marginal residential neighborhoods that have failed to grow value as much as other neighborhoods. If context-sensitive redevelopment of appropriate density is allowed and encouraged to occur, it can lead to aggregation of parcels and redevelopment that will build wealth and spur reinvestment. The city will need to find ways to encourage slight increases in density while maintaining neighborhood character. Public improvements, such as sidewalks, street trees, curb-and-gutter, street lights, upfitting sewer pipes, etc. could be targeted to spur reinvestment.
IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS:
STRATEGY #4: COORDINATE EFFORTS AMONG DEPARTMENTS TO CREATE SYNERGISTIC OPPORTUNITIES FOR REINVESTMENT IN DISTRESSED AREAS
CONTEXT: Incremental, disjointed improvements by multiple players across a broad area will fail to communicate priorities and direction that will focus private sector investment to build community wealth. This issue may be addressed by the public sector in the following ways:
Specifically, transportation improvements such as realigning key major and minor intersections and establishing connections near activity nodes is an opportunity in areas that could benefit from investment or public realm enhancements. This will require a coordinated effort between planning staff and transportation agencies. Identifying and realigning minor road sections and/or establishing connections between neighborhoods and commercial centers can lead to more intuitive neighborhood centers and focus private sector investment decisions in areas that will build community focus and wealth, including opportunities for walkable, distinct, and active nodes.
IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS:
o Inventory and identify misaligned intersections and gaps in the road network. o Prioritize those interventions, in part using public input, and then budget for acquisition and construction. o Ensure that these new connections include pedestrian facilities that connect residences to activity centers, to help reinforce these new nodes of commercial activity. o Connect neighborhoods to commercial nodes to support and activate these areas. Method for realigning should rank parcels relative distance to key nodes and seek interventions that have highest cost (purchase + construction) – to – benefit (increased connectivity to node).
CONTEXT: Public engagement is the cornerstone of plan implementation. Without public buy-in, a plan will meet resistance when it comes time to implement, budget, prioritize, and appropriate funds. By building a network of contacts in local institutions, neighborhoods, and districts, and reaching out for education, momentum can be built for implementing plan recommendations.
IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS: Identify and designate a responsible internal team and task them with making contacts and establishing small-scale neighborhood meetings throughout the city. Outreach beginning in the Fall of 2019 can help validate recommendations in the Future Land Use Map and this document and can contribute to an understanding of priority issues to inform a new Comprehensive Plan. A “road show” should be developed that highlights key recommendations in this plan and familiarizes community members and organizations with the goals of the plan. Create and disseminate other informational material, including a website, to help educate the community and provide avenues for them to discuss, comment on, and revise the Plan. Establish metrics for successful engagement and track and report on those metrics to an appropriately accountable body. Additional implementation steps include: o Utilize the city’s planning staff and public information office to serve as the “front line” for implementation of all goals and strategies in this map update.
⬚ figure
District meetings were held during the development of the Future Land Use Plan. Additional outreach is necessary to facilitate plan implementation and determine priorities on a district and neighborhood level. This outreach could be conducted as part of an update of the City’s comprehensive plan.
o Involve other local partners (NCDOT, developers, etc.) when necessary to serve as conduits in the implementation of the goals of this planning effort to assist in the coordination of regulatory compliance o Ensure that the land use map, its character areas, and their descriptions are regularly updated according to the city’s development trends and the desires of the citizens of Fayetteville o Facilitate training and education on the implications of this report to areas of the city that would be affected the most by the changes outlined within these policies and strategies.
The Community Profile focuses on the Fayetteville planning area and includes demographic indicators and trends (i.e. population, employment, income, housing, education, health, aging, etc.) which provide a context for growth and change in Fayetteville and Cumberland County. Natural resources, environmental constraints, existing land use patterns and land use suitability is also documented.
Growth has primarily occurred within the City of Fayetteville with an annual growth rate of 3.3% between 2000 and 2017. This compares with an annual growth rate of 0.6% for Cumberland County during this period.
The median age in Fayetteville has generally gotten younger between 2000 and 2017 going from a median age of 31.9 years to 30 years. This is due to a 96% increase of 14,461 persons in the 20 to 24-year age cohort.
Within Fayetteville, Veterans make up approximately 21% of the civilian population of persons over the age of 18. For these Veterans, 28.7% report having a disability. This contributes to the general population of the City having a higher than average number of persons with disabilities (16.7%) than the rest of North Carolina (13.7%). The most prevalent type of difficulty is ambulatory meaning that 9.6% of the population (civilian, non-institutionalized) reports having serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs.
| Veteran /Disability Status | City | NC |
|---|---|---|
| Veteran Status | 20.8% | 8.7% |
| Reported Disability | 20.5% | 16.6% |
| SOURCE: 2017 ACS ESTIMATES; CIVILIAN POPULATION 18+ |
⬚ figure
Source: 2000 Census, 2010 Census, 2017 ACS
⬚ figure
Source: 2000 Census, 2017 ACS
The City of Fayetteville has experienced a 77% increase in the number of housing units between 2000 and 2017, at a rate of approximately 3.6% per year during that time period. Most of this growth can be attributed to annexation. The County experienced slower growth in housing units (23%) during this same time period at a rate of approximately 1% per year. The housing table below indicates the types of units in the City and the year that they were built. Most of the housing within Fayetteville is 1 unit detached (62.3%), separated on all sides from any other structure except its own garage or shed. Apartment buildings with 5+ units are also a prevalent housing type within the City. Three quarters of all housing units have been built since 1970. While the dataset is not current to 2019, it appears that construction of units has tapered off since 1999.
| Housing by Type | Housing Year Built | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 unit - detached | 58,966 | 62.3% | 2014 or later | 853 | 0.9% |
| 1 unit - attached | 3,575 | 3.8% | 2010 to 2013 | 4,234 | 4.5% |
| 2 units | 2,872 | 3.0% | 2000 to 2009 | 12,453 | 13.2% |
| 3 or 4 units | 4,228 | 4.5% | 1990 to 1999 | 16,692 | 17.6% |
| 5 to 9 units | 8,610 | 9.1% | 1980 to 1989 | 16,829 | 17.8% |
| 10-19 units | 6,847 | 7.2% | 1970 to 1979 | 19,917 | 21.0% |
| 20 or more units | 6,228 | 6.6% | 1960 to 1969 | 12,725 | 13.4% |
| Mobile Home | 3,326 | 3.5% | 1950 to 1959 | 6,812 | 7.2% |
| Other | - | 0.0% | 1940 to 1949 | 2,641 | 2.8% |
| 1939 or later | 1,496 | 1.6% | |||
| Total | 94,652 | ||||
| SOURCE: 2017 ACS, 5-YEAR ESTIMATES |
Since 2010, there has been a gradual shift towards renter-occupied housing. In 2013 the balance tipped toward renter-occupied housing. Currently, Fayetteville has 45.2% owner-occupied housing. Median rent is $892 and 85% of housing units are occupied (2017 ACS, 5-Year Estimates).
⬚ figure
Source: 2017 ACS, 5-Year Estimates
⬚ figure
Source: 2000 Census, 2010 Census, 2011-2017 ACS Estimates
INCOME Median household income in Fayetteville was $43,439 in 2017. Median household income in 2017 is approximately 11% less than in 2010 when adjusting for inflation. This decrease in household income is consistent with an increase in family poverty. During this time period, there has also been a small increase in the ratio of income spent on rent as a percentage of overall household income.
| Socio-economic Indicators | 2000 | 2010 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median HH Income (Inflation Adjusted to 2017) | $36,287 ($51,653) | $43,284 ($48,656) | $43,439 |
| Family Poverty | 11.7% | 13.8% | 15.8% |
| Median Gross Rent as % of HH Income | - | 28.2% | 31.6% |
| Unemployment | - | 11.7% | 10.8% |
| Households with No Vehicles Available | - | 6.7% | 7.2% |
Source: 2000 Census, 2010 Census, 2017 ACS Estimates
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT & EMPLOYMENT One quarter of persons aged 25 and older residing in Fayetteville hold a Bachelor’s degree or higher. The Educational services, health care, and social assistance sector has the greatest percentage of those employed in the City with an increase of 57% and
⬚ figure
Source: 2017 ACS, 5-Year Estimates
⬚ figure
Source: 2017 ACS, 5-Year Estimates
nearly 10,000 persons employed since 2000. While all sectors gained employment, Public administration (139% increase) and Arts, entertainment and recreation, and accommodation and food services (121% increase) had the highest gains in employment since 2000. Manufacturing (10.4%) and Finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing (14.9%) saw the smallest amount of growth among employment sectors.
Mean travel time to work decreased between 2010 and 2017. At the same time Fayetteville saw a 1% decrease in driving alone, a 3% increase in people walking to work and a 3% drop in those working from home. Based on 2015 commute data, 58% percent of people employed in the Fayetteville Municipal Influence Area (MIA) live in areas outside. Most of these individuals are commuting to areas South and West of Fayetteville. Conversely, 47% of people that live in the Fayetteville MIA are employed and commute to areas outside of the area.
| Commuting to Work | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | 2017 | |||
| Mean Travel Time | 19.2 Minutes | 18.7 Minutes | ||
| Car, truck or van, drove alone | 71,452 | 79% | 78,883 | 78% |
| Car, truck or van, carpooled | 8,513 | 9% | 8,836 | 9% |
| Public transportation | 513 | 1% | 771 | 1% |
| Walked | 3,723 | 4% | 7,463 | 7% |
| Other means | 1,352 | 1% | 1,097 | 1% |
| Worked at home | 5,442 | 6% | 3,474 | 3% |
Source: 2000 Census, 2017 ACS Estimates
⬚ figure
Commuting Patterns to/from MIA Source: 2015 Census OnTheMap, Center for Economic Studies
Job Counts by Area for Commuters
⬚ figure
Source: 2015 Census OnTheMap, Center for Economic Studies
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 47
Hydric soils primarily exist in and around the Cape Fear River, making these areas unsuitable for intense development. The vast floodplain of the Cape Fear River has a significant footprint, especially on the older parts of town, including east of downtown. New development should respect these constraints, especially since a changing future climate predicts stronger, more intense rainfall events, which will test the ability of the floodplain to absorb and store water. Minimizing or eliminating development in the floodplains should be pursued as a way to protect existing investment on the fringe, and allow these lands to serve their highest and best function: storing floodwaters. Floodplains can also have secondary uses, however, such as passive recreation and wildlife habitat preservation.
The area’s natural heritage elements and natural areas are somewhat fragmented, as is common in highly urbanized and suburbanized areas. The majority of natural resources follow riparian corridors, preserved areas, or are contained on the military base property, which includes significant tracts of fairly undisturbed natural areas. Focused study and acquisition of key properties could enhance natural resources in the region by connecting habitat corridors and refuge areas.
⬚ figure
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS
⬚ figure
NATURAL RESOURCES
EXISTING LAND USE AND LAND SUPPLY
Existing Land Use Existing land use was analyzed for all land within Fayetteville’s municipal limits and municipal influence area. The exercise of mapping an area’s existing land use is different from the city’s zoning map or future land use designation in that it utilizes the city’s tax parcel records and confirmation through aerials and other means to verify what is occurring on any given parcel. For example, a parcel in the western part of the city may be zoned commercial but have an institutional use on-site (such as a church or school). For this analysis, the existing land use of that parcel would be considered institutional.
The dominant land uses in within Fayetteville’s municipal limits are detached single family residential land (40%), vacant land (28%), and institutional land (9%). Much of the vacant land is located along the I-295 corridor and east of the Cape Fear River. Single family residential land was broken up into three categories:
The majority of single-family residential land (26%) is made up of residential parcels on lots less than .5 acres.
Additional existing land use observations include:
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 49
Land Supply
Using data derived from county tax records, a land supply analysis was conducted to identify land into three categories:
Available land is typically vacant land and may be, for example, currently used for farming purposes with no significant structure onsite.
Underutilized parcels are those that have a low structure value to land value ratio. Although some land identified as underutilized might already be developed, it provides insight into land that could conceivably be redeveloped if development pressures are experienced.
Utilized or “built” lands are those that have homes, businesses, churches or schools on them. This exercise showed that approximately 53 percent of the land in Fayetteville is either available or underutilized. Much of the available and underutilized land is situated along the Study Area’s periphery, predominantly east of the Cape Fear River where hydric soil and floodplain are found most frequently.
The methodology to develop a land supply estimate included the steps below:
⬚ figure
⬚ figure
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 50
To supplement and support the future land use map, suitability analysis was conducted utilizing geographic information systems (GIS) software to identify lands within Fayetteville that would be most appropriate for residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. Data that was factored into this analysis included identifying lands proximal to compatible uses (e.g. commercial centers close to residential neighborhoods or industrial development away from residential neighborhoods), proximity to Fort Bragg, lands located within or close to environmental constraints, and lands close to major intersections and interchanges (both existing and proposed).
Results from the suitability analysis exercise include:
⬚ figure
COMMERCIAL SUITABILITY
⬚ figure
RESIDENTIAL SUITABILITY
⬚ figure
INDUSTRIAL SUITABILITY
ayetteville FUTURE LAND USE MAP | 51