Angry Developers Argue Against Increased Driveway Restrictions at the City Council Meeting

Dozens of passionate builders urged City Council members to drop plans for more restrictions on driveways Tuesday night. 

This proposal would limit front-facing driveway widths in certain zoning districts, creating safer neighborhoods, according to Council members. 

“The whole point of this is to create a walkable city–a safer city,” City Council Member Sarah Marsh said, “to have eyes on the street, to have neighborhoods built for people–not cars, to have streets defined by homes instead of garage fronts.”

Developers argued that this proposal was overreaching and invasive for property rights. Other critics said the plan was rooted in aesthetics, and it would do nothing to promote neighborhood safety. 

Ronald East, committee chair for the Northwest Arkansas board of realtors, told council members that he thought aesthetics was a very subjective criteria, and the cost is not worth it.

“We believe that the proposed ordinance will add unnecessary cost to the construction process and disadvantage lower income families. Affordable housing is a critical element of the housing market,” said East. 

East argued that homeowners have a need for adequate vehicle parking space, but that this proposal would limit that. 

Council members refuted this claim by saying that homeowners were still allowed to have other forms of parking space such as side-loading garages. 

Doyle Yates, a property owner, pleaded for the council to consider making this plan an option for builders, rather than to dictate what should be done with their piece of land.

“To me this is a little kin to having a car dealership and the city council deciding we need to reduce our carbon footprint, so as a dealer you need to have a certain percentage of your inventory as electric cars,” Yates said. 

Yates said the goal should be to create opportunities for attainable housing, and this proposal goes against that.

Realtors and builders were upset that the plan was created before they had a chance to have a say. 

Realtor Larry Kelly suggested they step back and look at the whole proposal, rather than just the amended portion. He said he was for trying new ideas to make Fayetteville better, but that he wanted the community to be involved in the decision making process. 

Lawyer Eric Danielson said there were many legal concerns, including an infringement upon private property rights.

“I’d like to ask the council to not pass it. Kill it,” Danielson said. “It just creates more issues. I’d ask the council to consider not passing it.” 

Accessibility was also brought into question by several people speaking. 

East reminded Council Members that while the proposal is intended to make the city more walkable, not everyone can walk. The proposal poses a problem with the American Disabilities Act which prohibits discrimination based on disability, he said. 

Homeowner Tanner Pettigrew told the council that a reason why he loved Fayetteville is because of the inclusivity of the community, but that this proposal would go against that ideal by excluding people from purchasing new homes.

Multiple council members remained their positions on the issue after hearing public comments.

No vote was taken on the proposal, and it will be revisited at the meeting next month.