HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 3625 FILED r ; ;t RECORD
' 92 RUG 14 MM 13 55
WASRiNV ( ON CO AR
ORDINANCE NO . 3625 A . KSI LMEYER
r
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING EMINENT DOMAIN a
PROCEEDING FOR THE CITY TO OBTAIN TRACT NO , 73
OF THE AIRPORT FEDERAL LAND ACQUISITION p.y
PROJECT , CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 1 . 96 r
ACRES OWNED BY MR , AND MRS , ALLEN HATCH ,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF d
FAYE7TEVILLE , ARKANSAS :
Section 1 . That the Board of Directors authorizes and
directs the city attorney of the City of Fayetteville , Arkansas to
initiate legal action in order to obtain property needed for the
airport federal land acquisition project on the property described
below :
A ) Tract No . 73 , owned by Mr . and Mrs . Allen Hatch ,
containing approximately 1 . 96 acres , as more fully set
forth in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit
nAn
Section 2, The Board of Directors hereby determines that
the immediate acquisition of the above-described property for the
airport federal land acquisition project is necessary for runway
approach and transitional area protection/obstruction removal and
is essential for the public health , safety and welfare . Therefore ,
an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this ordinance being
necessary for the public health , safety and welfare shall be in
full force and effect from and after its passage and approval .
PASSED AND APPROVED this 4th day , of August , 1992 .
APPROVBy : ED :
Mayo
(1 111 i ) -
ATTEST :
By :
• -Cite Cl
92 41394
_ O Y
Jr
CERT'IFICAT'E OF RECORD
State of Arkansas SS
City of Fayatteville
I, ;sherry Thomps, City Clerk and Ez-
Officlo :ecorder for the City of
F'a;yettev;lle, do hereby certify thet the
az ;sexed or foregoing is of record In my
office and the same appears in
OrdPnance Fi Resolution book at
Page. I Witness my han end
seai �thla —y�day of c
C Stp C,sr: nd kr-Ornclol Recorder
r1 -
1l1
ORDINANCE NO. 3626 STATE of ARKANSAS J as
AN ORDINANCE AUTHOR- Cc of Washin ton
IZING EMINENT DOMAIN 4' B
PROCEEDING FOR THE
CITY TO OBTAIN TRACT
. NO. 73 OF THE AIRPORT
FEDERAL LAND ACQUISI- 10 . D . 'Q/� hereby certify that I
TION PROJECT. CONSIST- am the publisher of THE NORTHWEST ARKANSAS TIMES, a daily newspaper
ING OF APPROXIMATELY
1 .96 ACRES OWNED BY having a second class mailing privilege, and being not less than four pages of five
MR. AND MRS. ALLEN columns each, published at a fixed place of business and at a fixed (daily) intervals
HATCH. continuous) in the Ci of Fayetteville, Cam of Washington, Arkansas for more
BE . IT ORDAINED BY Y City Y tY B
THE BOARD OF DIREC- than a period of twelve months, circulated and distributed from an established place
TORS OF THE CITY OF of business to subscribers and readers generally of all classes in the City and County
F A Y E T T E V. 1 L L E ,
ARKANSAS; for a definite price for each copy, ora fixed price per annum, which price was fixed
Section 1 . That the at what is considered the value of the publication, based upon the news value and set-
Board of Directors author-
izes
vice value it contains, that at least fiftycent of the subscribers thereto have aid
Boa and directs the city at- Pcr P
tomer of the Cay of Fayet- cash for their subscriptions to the newspaper or its agents or through recognized news
legal Arkansas to inmate dealers over a Period of a least six months; and that the said news publishes an
legal actin in order to ate Pcr P6Pcr
tain property needed for the average of more than forty percent news matter.
airport federal lana acquisi-
tion project to the property I further certify that the legal notice hereto attached in the matter of
A) Tract below:
AI . & No. 73, owned by Y
eco & Mrs. Allen Hatch, �
1 .96 - ions approximately [ O[
1 .96 � acres, as more fully /
set forth in the legal de- e re was ublished in the ular dail if said a for
scription attached hereto as P B issue onewspaper Per
Exhibit "A". I consecutive insertions as follows:
Section 2. The Board Of Q�
Directors Hereby deter-
mines
1 �lf lxUl 2
miness that the immediate The first insertion on the day of 19 /
acquisition of the above-
described property for the
airport federal lana acquisi- the second insertion on the day of 19
ition
project is necessary for
,runway approach and trensk the third insertion on the de of 19
'tional area protection/ , Y
obstruction removal and is
' essential for the public and the fourth insertion on the day of 19
health, safety and welfare.
Therefore, an emergency is
hereby declared to exist
and this ordinance being
necessary for the public
health, safety and welfare PNZIdtmU General Manager
shall be in full force and ef-
fect from and after its pas- � L
sage and approval.
PASSED . AND AP- I Sworn to and subscribed before me on this day of
PROVED this 4th day of
August, 1992. APPROVED: 01A &Aoat 193a?
By: Fred S. Vorsanger
Mayor
ATTEST:
By: Sherry L. Thomas
City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A" Notary Public
A part of Southwest Quar-
ter of the Southwest Quar-
ter of Section 33, Township
16 North, Range 30 West. My Commission Expires:
1 being more particularly de- ' /r
scribed as follows, to-wit:
Beginning at a Point On the
west line of U.S. Highway '
71 , which point is 811 .9 '
feet North of the South line -
of said 40 acre tract, for a -
beginning point to the lands ��
herein being conveyed: Fees for Printing $: / 07 .
thence wast approximately .:
200 feel: thence South 150 Cost of Proof $ • '
feet; thence West approxi- '
mately 100 feet: chance b ..
South approximately 255.9 Total $ '
feet: thence East 150 feet; ,
thence North 100 feet:
thence East 23 feet; thence
North 83 feet: thence in a
Northeasterly direction 62
feet to a point which is 66
feet West of the West line
of said Highway; thence
East 66 feet to the Wast
line of said Highway; '
thence North 185.9 feet to
the place of beginning. _
1
i
i Reed dLo
a, .
Ioff'
I
i
PART I - INTRODUCTION
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
1
C
I
deed d cd"act;a e j Aw.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page . . . . . . 1
Letter of Transmittal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3
PART I - INTRODUCTION
I
Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Photographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 14
Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 - 17
Summary of Important Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 - 19
Qualification of Tom Reed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 21
i
PART II - FACTUAL DESCRIPTION
Identification of Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • • 22
Purpose of the Appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Definition of Market Value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Property Rights Appraised . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Scope of the Appraisal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 - 25
Ownership of the Appraised Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Area Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Area Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 - 33
Real Estate Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Neighborhood Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 - 36
Parcel Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Description of Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 - 41
Zoning and Assessment and Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Zoning Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 i
I�
PART III - ANALYSIS OF DATA AND OPINIONS OF THE APPRAISAL
Highest and Best Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 - 46
Cost Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 - 54
Sales Comparison Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 - 69
Income Capitalization Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 - 81
Reconciliation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 - 83
i
PART IV - ADDENDA
WarrantyDeed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Location Maps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 - 86 i.
Flood Plain Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Property Cards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 - 93
Mobile Home Inspection Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 - 104
Income Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 - 106
Appraisal Request Letter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 - 109
4
/rI
I
S`
0
J / ,
• I
I
I
BAILEY DRIVE FRONTAGE • •
•'\'�';'Yt�''.I� Vii . ', �•� � � �/•I ''• \� � A�• ��(' `
7J°' rf y�{ �•'G iM7�*
��� • �^' `{F �•VHF
Photographs , Cont ' d .
DRIVEENTRANCE TO MOBILE HOME PARK FROM
BAILEY
•
TRAILER NO * I PROPERTY OWWERfS RESIDENCE p
��!,;����� J
Ji'
/II
Reedd cd"Ocit /.
Photographs , Cont ' do
II. 1 r,� �t1L ,•j 7 '.. s • ,
• .-tom,,:}, l� �_
d I1 � t,
lot Aw �I�I
TRAILER NO * 4
, 2
TRAILER NOs 5.
Photographs ,
pppppp
TRAILER
,
•
i � •,ISI ', r i�
TRAILER NOSJ
' AV
Reed f /
Photographs , Cont ' d ,
.l
����, IIIM1M1M1
- •. . � ti. /. J ff�((111SSp11��7.➢➢O+LLL.'t% , •
�„ �,,,� • � �*''.. ....>/rte'}
1 .� S. +rY•fr' '� 4 h
nr e � '3` -•a4•^3•r1 1
f µf,.rt•, .. }� - ;tea ♦ ^'u •Sn.J\ p=ps)a f' ! /r' s
TRAILER •
TRAILER
ljJail
Spp'
I ►���n11�1110
•
yh o
• � _,; � � �t f4 4 �• .�N` * rMZY bra � •t7' .. ,�( �:
+
i L� ` �• Y ill �1 �
it � ty
+
NIL
i �� , ,
. ..
A . I
yiPp
••{;y LTRCIt;%
`'fS mow' -••'•'T .%ON
' fl
y y.
i a
{ j Iii• -°t hey
i!k .,.;•
' 1 ________ ___ J
-• •4c . Ji .�.y�� '• • �n C M
. • • fi '• t1♦ • 1 V
'• 1• �`Yla�ri►! 111"' 1jYy ..,
i • `� K 1 w �_. :Fit. t
I i W.1'� �..\ Jti� 2aL� nn y '..�J -1 ! / >rr _�.. r� . . .�
' •~"L C. .•r. T� l+'!h•1l./, . e.i.
!1T41V11WI1
(y{Vii 1
:{'.l.!i� Ali (!.a I/ ��fY•.I -tw11 • �,• 1ill •
fi, ,.
J� am.
r... ... r.,1 .flUt*t,),' .� f ��. ..M
v y.
{.in 'j fl 1•
r'~1i�b[L�Q� " >�-(r•T� • Jr�t n •l.l . �q P
•
'i
C
III • � �� �� �
R !:At. i S .. .. ..
Iaw_ .I
weed d s oc aced, Inc.
CERTIFICATE
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:
The statements of fact contained in this report are true
and correct.
The reported analyses, opinions,- aiid conclusions are
limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting
conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional
analyses, opinions, and conclusions.
- I have no present or prospective interest in the property
that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal
interest or bias with respect to the parties involved.
My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a
predetermined value or direction in value that favors the
cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the
attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a
subsequent event. The appraisal assignment was not based
on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or
the approval of a loan.
- My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and
this report has been prepared, in conformity with the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
I, Tom Reed, have made a personal inspection of the
property that is the subject of this report.
- No one provided significant professional assistance to the
person signing this report.
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief,
the reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were
developed, and this report has been prepared, in
conformity with the requirements of the Code of
Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional
Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute.
- I certify that the use of this report is subject to the
requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review
by its duly authorized representatives.
- As of the date of this report, I, Tom Reed, have completed
the requirements of the continuing education program of
the Appraisal Institute.
Respectful1 s bmitted,
Tom Reed, MAI
REED & ASSOCIATES, INC.
15
°mod d Qaaoc:ako, AM
ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS
This appraisal report has been made with the following
general assumptions:
1. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description
or for matters including legal or title considerations.
Title to the property is assumed to be good and
merchantable unless otherwise stated.
2. The property is appraised free and clear of any or all
liens or encumbrances unless otherwise stated.
3. Responsible ownership and competent property management
are assumed.
4. The information furnished by otherS is believed to be
reliable. However, no warranty is given for its
accuracy.
5. All 'engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot
plans and illustrative material in this report are
included only to assist the reader in visualizing the
property.
6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent
conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that
render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is
assumed for such conditions or for arranging for
engineering studies that may be required to discover
them.
7. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all
applicable federal, state and local environmental
regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated,
defined, and considered in the appraisal report.
8. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use
regulations and restrictions have been complied with,
unless a nonconformity has been stated, defined, and
considered in the appraisal report.
9. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates
of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or
administrative authority from any local, state, or
national government or private entity or organization
have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on
which the value estimate contained in this report is
based.
16
1
1
.
r
1
1
I
I
1
t
I
11
I
I
I
I
I
°Reed if . aaocualea, .nc.
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions - Cont'd.
10. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and
improvements is within the boundaries or property lines
of the property described and that there is no
encroachment or trespass unless not0d.in.the report.
11. "Unless otherwise stated in this :report, the existence
of hazardous materials which may or may not be present
on the property was not observed by the appraiser. No
responsibility is assumed for any such conditions or any
expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover
them. The client is urged to retain an expert if
desired."
This appraisal report has been made with the following
general limiting conditions.
1. The distribution; if any, of the total valuation in this
report between land and improvements applies only under
the stated program of utilization. The separate
allocations for land and buildings must not be used in
conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if
so used.
2. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not
carry with it the right of publication. It may not be
used for any purpose by any person other than the party
to whom it is addressed without the written consent of
the appraiser, and in any event only with proper written
qualification and only in its entirety.
3. The appraiser herein by reason of this appraisal is not
required to give further consultation, testimony, or be
in attendance in court with reference to the property in
question unless arrangements have been previously made.
4. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report
(especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of
the appraiser, or the firm with which the appraiser is
connected) shall be disseminated to the public through
advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other
media without the prior written consent and approval of
the appraiser.
s
I
17
SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT CONCLUSIONS
Clients: W.D. Schock Company, Greenland,
Arkansas
Property Location: Southwest corner 'of U.S.. 71 Highway
and Bailey Drive, Greenland, Arkansas; Owner's mailing
address is Route 8 Box 100, Fayetteville, Arkansas
Purpose of the
Appraisal: Market Value Estimate
Property Rights
Appraised: Leased Fee Estate
Scope of the Appraisal: The "Appraisal Process" was
followed in estimating the market value of the subject
property.
Ownership of the
Appraised Property: Allen C. Hatch
Date of Value Estimate: January 29, 1992
Description of Site: 1.96+/- acres of commercial zoned
property; Undulating to gently sloping topography;
Typical public utilities available; Property is
traversed by a drainage ditch; 12 space mobile home park
with room for 2 more spaces.
Description of
Improvements: 722+/- SF frame, detached garage; 11
on -site mobile homes; Property owner occupies space
number one; Typically rented by the week; Each space is
individually metered; Park is 6+/- years in age and in
average condition.
Hiahest and Best Use:
Estimated Site Value:
Indicated Value By
Cost Approach:
Indicated Value By
Sales Comparison
Approach:
Mobile Home Park
$35,500
$224,000
$215,000
Indicated Value By
Income Capitalization
Approach: $230,000
t
ELI
i
ISummary of Important Conclusions, Cont'd.
I
I
I
I
I
Final Value Estimate:
Real Property
Contributory Value
of Mobile Homes:.:
In Place & Reedy
for Rental
TOTAL
_ $ 76,000
= 154,000
_ $230,000
The
preceding value
represents
terms equivalent to cash to
the
owners.
.
It should be noted that subject property is traversed by a
drainage ditch. The limit of the flood zone study is just
east of subject. A survey is needed to make an exact
determination if subject property is located in the 100 year
flood zone.
I hereby certify that this appraisal report conforms to
Federal Aviation Administration Guidelines, to the best of
my understanding.
Only the interior of one trailer, number one, was examined.
The preceding mobile home value is based on the assumption
that the interior of each mobile home is in at least average
condition with no major items of deferred maintenance.
The preceding value is
also
subject to
income/expense data
furnished by Mr. Hatch
being
correct.
Li
LE
weed d .1d%oocialeo, Lw.
QUALIFICATIONS OF TOM REED
Educational Background and Training
B.S.B.A. in Finance/Real Estate -University of Arkansas, May
1973
Masters in Business Administration-Univer"sity'of Arkansas,
r., :...
May, 1978 - -.
State Certified General Appraiser - CG0217
The following courses and/or exams given by The American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers have been
successfully completed:
Exam 8 (Residential Valuation) -1976
Exam 1A (Real Estate Appraisal Principles and Basic
Valuation Procedures) -1977
Exam 2-3 (Standards of Professional Practice) -1982 & 1991
Exams 1B -A & 1B -B (Capitalization Theory and Techniques) -
1984
Exam 2-1 (Case Studies in Real Estate Valuation) -1984
Course 2-2 (Valuation Analysis and Report Writing) -1987
Exam lA-1 (Real Estate Appraisal Principles) -1988
Exam 1A-2 (Basic Valuation Procedures) -1988
Additional appraisal courses successfully completed include:
Farm Manager and Rural Appraisal Course sponsored by
The American Society of Farm Managers and Rural
Appraisers -1976
Professional Experience
Associate Appraiser with Adams Appraisal Co., Harrison, AR,
from January, 1974, through December, 1977
Chief Appraiser and owner of Adams Appraisal Co.,
Springdale, AR, from December, 1977 to present
Adams Appraisal Company renamed "REED & ASSOCIATES" as of
July 1979, and Incorporated as of October, 1982
Professional Affiliations
Arkansas Real Estate Salesperson's License -1972
Arkansas Real Estate Broker's License -1979
National Association of Realtors
Arkansas Realtors Association-GRI
District 3 Vice -President (1985)
Board of Directors (1987-1989)
Board of Realtors
Springdale (President -1984)
Fayetteville -Affiliate Membership
Rogers -Affiliate Membership
Member of the Appraisal Institute - #M7987
Arkansas Assessors Association -Senior Appraiser
Level IV designation given by the Arkansas
Coordination Div.
Conventional Fee Appraiser -FNMA #1024389
Assessment
t
Qualifications, Cont'd.
Clientele
FAA Dept. of Transportation -Southwest Region -Ft. Worth, TX
Federal Housing Administration -Little Roc)c, AR
Farmers Home Administration -Harrison, Ye;ldville, & Mountain
Home, AR
Veteran's Administration -Little Rock, AR
Corps of Engineers -Little Rock & Vicksburg Districts
Cities of: Pea Ridge, Springdale, Fayetteville, Harrison,
Bentonville, Mountain Home, Gravette
First National Bank -Springdale, AR
First State Bank -Springdale, AR
Springdale Bank & Trust -Springdale, AR
United Federal Savings Bank -Springdale, AR
First National Bank -Rogers, AR
MclLroy Bank -Fayetteville, AR
First National Bank-Fayetteville,.AR
One National Mortgage -Fayetteville, AR
Collateral Mortgage -Fayetteville, AR
First Financial Mortgage -Fayetteville, AR
Other Mortgage Companies, Banks, & Savings & Loans
Individuals & Attorneys
Relocation Companies -Employee Transfer Company, Homequity,
Realty Relocation Service Corp., Merrill Lynch
Relocation Management, Equitable Relocation Service
Mass Appraisal for Property Tax Purposes:
Crawford County, Baxter County, Boone County, Carroll
County
Court Testimony
Circuit Court -Harrison, Fayetteville, Bentonvile,
Berryville, Eureka Springs, Mt. Home, & Fort Smith
Federal Court -Harrison, Fayetteville, & Fort Smith
Chancery Court -Harrison & Fayetteville
Appraisal Seminars, 1990
Hotel/Motel Valuation -Deer Valley, Utah, January, 1990
HUD Single -Family Review Seminar -Hot Springs, AR April 9-10,
1990
VA Single -Family Review Seminar - North Little Rock, AR,
August 3, 1990
Appraisal Seminars, 1991
VA Single -Family Review Seminar - North Little Rock, AR,
August, 1991
Landfills and Their Effect Upon Value - Seattle, Washington,
August, 1991
The Technical Inspection of Real Estate - Seattle,
Washington, August, 1991
Residential St. Certification/Licensing Review - Little
Rock, AR, October 18, 1991
General St. Certification/Licensing Review - Little Rock,
AR, October 19, 1991
21
I
• 4
I
I
PART II - FACTUAL DESCRIPTIONS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
1
IDENTIFICATION OF PROPERTY
A part of the Southwest Quarter of•the Southwest Quarter of
Section 33, Township 16 North, Range 30 West, being more
particularly described as follows, to *-± t:-,.• Beginning at a
point on the west line of U.S. Highway 71,' which point is
811.9 feet North of the South line of• said 40 acre tract,
for a beginning point to the lands herein being conveyed;
thence west approximately 200 feet; thence South 150 feet;
thence West approximately 100 feet; thence South
approximately 255.9 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence North
100 feet; thence East 23 feet; thence North 83 feet; thence
in a Northeasterly direction 62 feet to a point which is 66
feet West of the West line of said Highway; thence East 66
feet to the West line of said Highway; thence North 185.9
feet to the place of beginning.
Survey which appears later, indicates slightly different
dimensions. Survey will be relied on this report.
PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL
The purpose of this appraisal report is to estimate the
market value of the subject property as of January 29, 1992.
The client's intended use of this report is as a basis for
acquisition of the property in connection with the
Fayetteville Municipal Airport Land Acquisition Program.
I
I
I
I
22
GR.eed d daaocealeo, Inc.
DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE
"The most probable price which a property should bring in a
competitive and open market under all conditions requisite
to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, eaEh acting prudently,
knowledgeably, and assuming the price -is not. affected by
undue stimulus. Implicitly in this -definition is the
consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the
passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions
whereby:
a. buyer and seller are typically motivated;
b. both parties are well informed or well advised, and each
acting in what he considers his own best interest;
c. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open
market;
d. payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in
term so financial arrangements. comparable thereto, and;
e. the price represents the normal consideration for the
property sold unaffected by special or creative
financing or sales concessions granted by anyone
associated with the sale."
PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED
In this appraisal, we are concerned with the valuation of
the leased fee estate of the subject property. Leased fee
estate is defined as follows:
"An ownership interest held by a landlord with the
right of use and occupancy conveyed by lease to
others; usually consists of the right to receive rent
and the right to repossession at the termination of
lease. ,i2
Subject rental rates appear to lie within the market range
' for properties of this nature. Therefore, in my opinion,
the value of the leased fee and fee simple estates are
basically equal.
'American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The
Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, (Chicago: American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 1984), P. 194.
2American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The
Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, (Chicago: American
Institute of Real Estate Appraiser, 1984), P. 123.
'American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The
Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, (Chicago: American
Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 1984), P. 152.
4Ibid, P. 152.
' 23
R# eeia J do4icez4i, Inc.
SCOPE OF THE APPRAISAL
The scope
of this appraisal involves the application
of
the
"Appraisal
Process" in estimating the market value
of
the
subject property.
Subject site was last inspected -:on January 29, 1992.
Pertinent locational and physical data was obtained at the
property inspection. Mr.Hatch,the property owner, was
present at the inspection. Some photographs were taken at
the inspection as well as the exterior of the mobile homes
examined.
The legal description was furnished by the client. Also, a
survey on the property was furnished by the client.
Applicable property tax data was obtained at the Washington
County Courthouse.
The
highest and
best use
of the property was projected based
upon
location,
physical
characteristics, zoning, existing
and
past usage,
etc.
Each of the three accepted valuation methods has been
utilized in this report. The "Approaches to Value" are
described later in the report.
Marshall Valuation Service, a National Cost Service, was
used to project the reproduction cost new of subject
improvements. A local mobile home dealer was contacted on
the average value per mobile home if the home is sold and
moved. The information he provided dealt with Book Value.
Subject improvements are not new and do suffer from accrued
depreciation. The Economic Age -Life Method was used to
estimate the accrued depreciation percentage. The indicated
percentage depreciation was multiplied by reproduction cost
new to arrive at the dollar estimate of accrued
depreciation. Finally, comparable land sales were examined
and analyzed for comparison purposes to the subject site.
The estimated value of the subject site was added to the
depreciated improvement value to arrive at the indicated
value by the Cost Approach.
24
Scope of Appraisal, Cont'd.
I
I
Cl
I
I
I
In the Sales Comparison Approach, sales of mobile home parks
were examined and analyzed for comparison purposes to the
subject property. There was not an abun'ance of mobile home
park sales, especially •recent transactions. The sales
utilized were considered the best available. The sales were
compared to the subject property on a per space basis and
adjustments made for differences to arrive at the indicated
per space value for subject. The per space value was then
multiplied by the number of spaces in subject park. This
provided an estimate of value for the subject property,
excluding the mobile homes. Four of the mobile home park
sales also included mobile homes. Insufficient data was
available on these mobile homes, however, an attempt was
made to utilize the sales, including the mobile homes, to
arrive at a total value of the subject property by the Sales
Comparison Approach. Sales four and five were the primary
comparables relied on. An effective gross income multiplier
was developed from these sales and multiplied by subject's
projected effective gross annual income to arrive at an
indicated value.
Mr. Hatch furnished income/expense data on subject mobile
home park for 1989, 1990, and 1991. Copies of the 1989 and
1990 Schedule E from Mr. Hatch's tax returns appear in the
"Addenda" of this report. This data was used in the Income
Capitalization Approach. In addition, other mobile home
parks in the Fayetteville -Springdale area were examined for
comparable rentals. Annual net operating income for subject
was projected at stabilized occupancy. An applicable
capitalization rate was projected by the Band of Investment
method and by Market Abstraction. Annual net operating
income was divided by the selected overall capitalization
rate to arrive at the indicated value by the Income
Capitalization Approach.
In conclusion, the value indications by each of the
approaches were reconciled into a final estimate of defined
value.
OWNERSHIP OF THE APPRAISED PROPERTY
Subject property is presently under the ownership of Allen
C. Hatch.
DATE OF THE APPRAISAL
The effective date of this report is January 29, 1992. The
date this appraisal report was prepared was March 11, 1992.
25
. 1 .r PF I I v ,� 1�
'WI
;L��.�„ --^� ;- .:•.I " 1t\ % -•l•i, `- 1 I I• 1 :: !: '•� •::,\_ u...
1T ..q k I „ :'.C 11.., �•,_ � / _r_ ;_ ,{' u�.L%:._.Yi. '. I ^_ e. ti (
Ilk
Tar
�\ T p • ,:, I. r,n_ t, I I r•1�'\\Y\, A.'I, I. w ``yR1 0E �n - I I 1\ I ,'. ,\ r rll`I i f'i .n �f1If�II(' .'. 4 J .. i I C.
•9
. j :,.t -
•. ! __ - - ...
Y ic �1 rr1 0
j_ .._. ¶ • - •__t•
, • •-
rl I • III"' , � ` 1: • r ., T
\ Ir
otealil rgNe� �•y.r , • f I. r � f ,tM^ I
r 1� onevf 11 A I r — • :N . •• , I.1
I
fONESY' W11011e /t ' —•� -
• —. 1 .._ FOREST ' d:::•.. If "Y. •'
I •. •' V.
r •
V • • �Ik L I I • . e • f. ay ._•
:''`' 4
It -, I
' I. I
I t OF i It.
t . H• t.
:-i • T ,......•-t.a♦l y : 1 ' - • -LI •P--,...'1 �,r•. _z - •• - - -;h .- is __ __
V. u1: 4fr : :.. -p • I /111L a Ir__. 1/ ...*1• i' _ ��I�IY �. ri. Y' I n. M , •1111 F '✓ I J •.Y
1•:-Ir,� S �'l••)♦; li..,I_L'I-•-'$,•. — i�.k:•:!Y,�•.f -i� ', �,.I �y �,LL,..:i.'�s'��
•• I f. I -• f '`^- .��.. S' Y�j Y .l .JY •.
.f !Irk`, ], r ., ` •— ;•}J.-.\-�L_
'.. 4 f 4±1!
': ' II. '• f • , \. 'I `.4 •1' , A.% `•
tl�'J �, 1 I} _ I♦0111 1l / �I fr;th•'•. '\1 _ •;.{ 1[.1 V•: I: rJ��•
•�' i;• I i\ t ;f •I I , /' I,'.�••' )
'. L�
YY ' ,r , JI C I!,•.ti• 4 ••. ♦ • 1 I •l yrll 1�.:. ,,l IT�.'�1
' '♦' ♦ Q 2P 1• 1'' !1 11 C ..,^I I
f4!%\Li:$..::i.cII f.i/ TI 1t;:4tJ
'/•' .i� .�.\% a •1 f l' 1 r I .
The trade area includes Washington County and Benton County.
The two counties are located in the extreme northwestern
part of Arkansas. This area is bordered by the Oklahoma
state line on the west, the Missout-.:.State line on the
north, Carroll and Madison Countiesd' on the east, and
Crawford County on the south. The., total area of Benton
County is 886+/- square miles and Washington County is
963+/- square miles.
The value of real property reflects and is influenced by the
interaction of basic forces that motivate human activity.
These forces are divided into four major categories: social
trends; economic circumstances; governmental controls and
regulations; and, environmental conditions. These forces
exert pressure on human activities and are also affected by
these activities. The interaction of all the forces
influences the value of every parcel bf real estate in the
market.
SOCIAL FORCES: Social forces are exerted primarily through
population characteristics. The demographic composition of
the population reveals the potential, basic demand for real
estate services.
The population of Benton County in 1960, according to census
figures, was 36,272. Washington County showed a population
of 55,797 for the same year. The combined population in
1960 was 92,069. The 1980 census showed population figures
of 78,115 and 100,494, respectively, for the two counties.
This totals 178,607 for the two counties in 1980. The
growth rate between 1960 and 1980 is computed to be 94+/-%,
or 4.7%/year. The population of Benton County in 1990 was
97,499 and Washington County was 113,409. The combined
population of the two counties in 1990 was 210,908,
representing a 18.1% increase over 1980 or 1.81% year.
Bentonville is the county seat of
Benton County. This city
is located in the north part of the county. Bentonville had
a population of 8,756 in 1980, a
140% increase since 1960.
The 1984 population of Bentonville
was approximately 9,918.
The 1990 population of Bentonville
was approximately 11,257.
Rogers is the largest city in
the county. Its 1980
population of 17,429 showed a 206%
increase in the last two
decades. The 1984 population of
Rogers was approximately
19,810 and the 1990 population was
24,692. Siloam Springs,
located on the Oklahoma line in the
southwest part of the
county, is the third major city in
the county. It grew from
a population of 3,953 in 1960 to 8,151 in 1990, a 106%
increase.
27
Area Data, Cont'd.
,
pflAL
Some of the smaller cities and towns in Benton County
include Gentry, Gravette, Pea Ridge, Lowell, Decatur, Cave
Springs, Bella Vista (a large-Pcale planned unit
development), etc. Within the county there. are a total of
18 incorporated towns and cities.
Fayetteville is the county seat of Washington County. This
city is located in the north central part of the county.
Fayetteville had a population of 36,604 in 1980. This
represented a 19.1% increase since 1970. The 1990
population of Fayetteville was approximately 42,099.
Fayetteville is also the largest city in the county.
Springdale is the second largest city in Washington County.
Its 1980 population of 23,458 showed a 39.8% increase in the
last 10 years. The 1990 population of Springdale was
approximately 29,941.
Some of the smaller cities in Washington County include
Prairie Grove, Lincoln, Farmington, West Fork, Johnson, Elm
Springs, etc. There are a total of 13 incorporated cities
and towns within Washington County.
The increased population trend is expected to continue in
the Benton -Washington County area. This should at least
sustain real property values and, in all probability, will
have a positive effect.
ECONOMIC FORCES: Econom:
real property values.
fundamental relationships
supply and demand and the
to satisfy its wants,
purchasing power.
.c forces are also significant to
It is necessary to analyze the
between current and anticipated
economic ability of the population
needs, and demands through its
The estimated per capita personal income of Benton and
Washington Counties in 1989 was $14,770 and $13,775,
respectively. This compares to an estimated figure of
$13,000 in 1989 for the State of Arkansas.
Some 14% of the population of Arkansas are considered to
have an annual income below the poverty level.
The civilian labor force in Benton County numbered 53,450 in
December, 1991. Washington County totaled 63,700 for the
same time period. Benton and Washington Counties had
unemployment rates in December, 1991, of 3.6% and 4.0%,
respectively. The unemployment rates for the two counties
weed d Scialr, gnc.
Area Data, Cont'd.
have remained relatively stable over the last four years.
The unemployment rates for the State of Arkansas and the
United States in December, 1991, were 7.2% and 7.1%,
respectively.
Regional building permits for 1991 reached a total value of
$197,251,966, an increase of 20% from 1990. Individual
permit categories for 1991 show residential up 45%,
commercial down 2%, industrial down 95%, additions up
59%, and others down 1%. The number of residential building
permits issued for new dwelling units appears to be up 48%.
Statistics obtained from Northwest Arkansas Regional
Planning Commission indicated the following figures with
respect to value of building permits issued for 1991
compared to 1990:
Bentonville'
+ 538
Fayetteville •-
+ 5%
Rogers
+ 41%
Siloam Springs
- 38%
Springdale
+ 45%
County development indicators for the two counties for
activity outside incorporated areas are as follows (Source -
Northwest Arkansas Planning Commission):
Benton County Washington County
1991 1990 1991 1990
Elec. Meters
Placed 1240 1266 302 937
Septic Tank
Permits 407 828 314 964
The percent change in electric meters placed for the region
appears to be 30% downward while the number of septic tank
permits issued decreased 59.8%.
The economic base of the region consists of four basic
areas: First, agricultural production with the primary
commodities being beef cattle, dairy cattle, and poultry.
The general offices of Tyson's Industries, the leader in the
chicken industry, is located in Springdale in Washington
County. Benton and Washington Counties are primarily rural
in nature and, therefore, it would stand to reason that
agriculture would be important to the area. There is also
some cropland in the area, primarily green bean and orchard
production. Second, influence from the University of
Arkansas located in Fayetteville. Enrollment in the
University ranges from 13,000+ to 15,000+ on an annual
basis. The University provides considerable employment
opportunities for area residents. It is not uncommon for
29
Area Data, Cont'd.
residents of outlying areas of Benton and Washington
Counties to work at the University. Third, , recreational
usage primarily in the northeast part of Washington County,
and the southeast, east and northeast:, parts of Benton
County. This recreational usage is privjdii•ly provided by
Beaver Lake, a Corps of Engineer reservoir on. the White
River. Fourth, the large number of manufacturing businesses
and small industries located within the two counties.
Again, residents of outlying areas of the two, counties will
commute to Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, Bentonville,
etc. to work at these facilities. The general offices of
Walmarts, a retail chain, are located in Bentonville. Most
of the major industries are located in the larger cities in
the counties, however, there are exceptions. McKee Baking
is located in the small community of Gentry in the southwest
part of Benton County.
There are several financial institutions in Benton and
Washington Counties. These institutions provide an adequate
supply of funds for residential, commercial, industrial, and
agricultural growth. The major commercial banks and savings
and loan associations are located in Bentonville,
Fayetteville, Rogers, Siloam Springs, and Springdale, with
smaller banks and branches situated in many of the smaller
communities. Currently, interest rates on long-term (15-30
years) residential first mortgages are in the 8 1/4% - 9%
range. The maximum rate that can be charged on
agricultural, commercial, industrial, and second mortgage
residential loans in Arkansas is five points above the
Federal Discount Rate. At the present time, the Federal
Discount Rate is 3 1/2%, making the maximum allowable rate 8
1/2%.
Real estate development in the area has primarily been
centered in the major cities. However, rural development
is also occurring with small acreage homesites visible
throughout the two counties.
Agricultural land values in the area generally followed the
downward trend prevalent throughout the Midwest in the early
and mid 1980's. However, falling land prices in the two
counties primarily occurred between 1984 and 1986. The last
few years have seen more of a stabilization in land values.
Also, Benton and Washington Counties have not suffered as
severely as other areas of the Midwest due to a lesser
amount of low cropland.
Economic data, for the most part, appears encouraging in the
area and should also have a positive effect on real property
values.
Z�]
Area Data, Cont'd.
GOVERNMENTAL FORCES: Governmental, political, and legal
actions at all levels have a great impact on property
values.
The county seats of Benton and Washington Counties, as
previously discussed, are Bentonville •and Fayetteville,
respectively. These two cities are some 30 minutes apart
via U.S. Highway 71 Bypass.
County government in each county is under the direction of
the county judge and quorum court. Other elected county
officials include the county clerk, circuit clerk,
collector, and assessor.
Property taxes in Arkansas are collected at the county level
and distributed to the county, cities, and school districts.
In Arkansas, all real property, except agricultural land, is
appraised at market value. Agricultural land is valued
based upon soil class productivity. The appraised value is
multiplied by a 20% assessment ratio to arrive at the
assessed value. The assessed value is then multiplied by
the appropriate millage rate to arrive at the annual
property tax. The tax is due by October 10th in the year
after it is levied. Property taxes in Benton and Washington
Counties are not out of line with what is experienced in
other counties in the state.
Benton and Washington Counties do not have county zoning at
the present time. The major cities in the area do have
zoning regulations. There are no adverse legislative
restrictions on the use and development of real property in
the area.
Public utilities available in the rural areas of Benton and
Washington Counties include electricity and telephone
service. Natural gas and public water are also available in
certain areas. Public sewer is available in the major
cities and some of the small communities.
Overall, governmental forces in the area provide a positive
effect on real property values. Lack of public water and
sewer in certain rural areas, however, is a drawback.
ENVIRONMENTAL FORCES: Both natural and man-made
environmental forces influence real property values.
Environmental forces include climatic conditions, topography
and soil, natural barriers to future development, primary
transportation systems, and the nature and desirability of
the immediate area surrounding a property.
The two county area has relatively warm summers and mild
winters. High temperatures in summer are often accompanied
31
Area Data, Cont'd.
by high humidity.
degrees. Each
temperatures go al
temperatures drop
average of 6 to
averages around 46
The average daily temperature is about 57
year there are about 58 days when
)ove 90 degrees and only a few days when
to freezing or belois'd The area has an
12 inches of snow "`annually. Rainfall
inches annually. -
The area is part of the Ozark Highlands. In Benton County,
topography ranges from broad plains and rolling hills in the
western and central parts to rocky, rough, steeper hills in
the east. Much of the eastern one-third of the county is
covered by Beaver Reservoir. The elevation increases from
west to east and ranges from 1,000 to.1,700 feet above sea
level. The elevation of Washington County also varies from
1,000 to 1,700 feet. In general, the topography is rough
along the western, eastern, and northwestern boundaries.
Extending through the heart of the county, from the Oklahoma
line to the city of Springdale, is a plateau -like area
consisting of rolling, reasonably level land. The city of
Fayetteville, located in the edge of the Boston Mountain
Range, is quite hilly. Soil and subsoil conditions within
the two counties range from fair to good for agricultural
purposes.
There are natural barriers to real property development in
the area. These consist primarily of mountainous regions,
rivers, etc. However, many of these barriers have a
positive effect on agricultural usage.
The primary transportation routes in the two counties are
U.S. 71 (North -South) and U.S. 412 (East-West). There are
also numerous state highways and county roads providing
adequate access throughout the area. Also, U.S. Highway 62
provides east -west access. Both U.S. 71 and U.S. 412 are
very heavily traveled traffic arteries. U.S. 71 traverses
Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, and Bentonville. U.S. 412
traverses Springdale and Siloam Springs.
The two county area is reasonably well located and is within
relatively short driving times of major metropolitan areas.
Driving time to Tulsa is 2+/- hours, to Little Rock is 3-
4+/- hours, and to Kansas City is 4-5+/- hours.
Environmental forces, for the most part, are considered
favorable for real property development in the area.
32
Area Data, Cont'd.
CONCLUSIONS
Each of the major forces affecting real property values has
been discussed in this section. The conclusion is that
these forces appear to favorably influence real property
values in the area. The trend in Benton and Washington
Counties has been upward and the outlook for the future is
good. Population growth is occurring at a fairly rapid pace
spurring real estate development. Periodic downturns in the
economy may take place, however, the strong economic base of
the area should prevent a major recession.
33
AYE7TI:EV ILLS ;.
Ci
a
___ FJrry 1[.} p 1 YC; Wtl - ____ '�i-.., .. r. ' as NAn=. "
1 GIIIdIaMO 1Il��� 4V YPkl n
!1 neat w.0 ♦�+ T T 1 r �e . ""J(7
.�. ai`: 1 fAY[iTFVII [— 1' Its •. - • •. r"\ r I e. n 1 ( :�i:•u�
. .r. I.,..r .il FF 1 .'•I
. ��.((��\N 1 •• L YY ..il I ".i L Iit 1• 4 N J{ j. �( \ . . .Tr' 'M..,//P N \..
9• • Y' orn .1 :Li Ill I lr l; dl�yl i r1} ♦ ` 1 r.u. v .re fi
y eyl . ♦.1• , IY`w' . 1( r n +. ` I N 1 ` ya•. {i r Fr
O i r l YLL I. 4n I .• H 1
F�•'Y' Ir 1 •. l , lyi,?F. f . r yf I/�ti YIYJV J . e. e...e. r. ..•...
♦ 91r P ..�� +w:l •µ!y y, i.n 4 �1 rl .. w•uns 1. i.r
VY ii j)' .. Y f •'14.1\� \d�•.i1 I'� `•.e( 1iil...e. I41 'MI�Q'
7 1 A�I wrw FII r 1 i n� Ir i1/• F .h
I q•wn :ii IL L e(1 VJw \r •• 1 ww uP
. u .Imn .• ii.. \-.r L" 1 IT11.. S...q.-a.....w� ••
w .1 f . e , ,d 3 "� Es,.:
I Il.e. .. ; c
r: I, ♦Ai � .. ..c. 1 � std . .. 4 f _ lA it 1 ^� i' r �
..r. r•
I 1 )
r r
T!:T$T!
±1 1 t•. �Yr.✓• • r' .L: an�ri{aNY•
' hl r. .. ' . J y '1 T, t�
1 1 I y� R IN LI 11e I: .�"
J 1�\�, d`r�`� {\ .♦/ • yL( SA I' r- I IJ �TG ' 1.11
.1 P11 �� •♦ I1.".y1f i/.� .r ':1'. • • II• ( I•IsLI 11 ��•1.1 .r1
r YY .�
•.• .. �./w ♦j•, .{ . • \ iYn S' `ir I ♦ . r.• s re .: rr.
•MJ ♦ • Y■ A ♦\ 1 I. Syr _ 1 •Y .... In
%•II. WNli li E 1. ){f s .c {• .r ) 9"^I\4 �)l +}...• F.�.
., v Y J5 . V ♦ :::r..
a Y 1°A >iaY [?�,) R l% �.��•� :.. .I^ 1.i.S.. �, 1 ♦ P}. r._ulr
• 1 : L.IY { 'fir 1 1• .Iw.
{ / • r �1 okt
1••9j' • •INo Y..,1. 1 i f ']�L 1 . T I I. L\ :.1• '1-J1•.rJI i" ♦.P 1 ,•..7 ` I;.. I • T:II \r '• '%l-♦.:... ••I
..r..
n.
NEIGHBORHOOD DATA
Neighborhood is defined as:
"A group of complementary land uses."'
Geographic Boundaries: The subject neighborhood is located
in Greenland, Arkansas, along U.S. Hwy 71 and vicinity.
The Highway 71 Bypass appears to be the North
neighborhood boundary and the South Greenland City
Limits are considered the southern, boundary.
Arterial Roadways: The major roadway within the
neighborhood is U.S. 71. This is a heavily traveled
North -South thoroughfare with four lanes and a center
turning lane. The 1988 Arkansas transportation Map
indicates an average daily traffic count on 71 in the
neighborhood ranging from 15,560.in the south to 18,000
in the North. The.1991 count is'expected to be higher.
Built Up: The neighborhood appears to be over
75% developed, considering the Fayetteville Municipal
Airport. The overall occupancy rate is in the 85 to 95%
range.
Summary/Conclusions: Subject property is located on the
West side of U.S. 71 at the Southwest corner of the
intersection of Bailey Drive with said 71. This
location is in the North central part of the
neighborhood.
Property uses in close proximity to subject include: A
residence to the west; A residence, welding shop, and
small warehouse to the north across Bailey Drive;
Fayetteville Municipal Airport property to the east,
across U.S. 71; And, a mobile home park to the south.
The Fayetteville Municipal Airport is located on the
East side of U.S. 71 in the immediate subject
neighborhood. Subject is located West, across 71 from
the North end of the runway.
The majority of the subject neighborhood is the small
community of Greenland. Commercial and industrial
property comprise the majority of neighborhood property
use. The breakdown of property uses is estimated to be
15% single-family, 20% commercial, 30% industrial, and
35% vacant/airport.
Utilities available in the neighborhood include public
water & sewer, natural gas, electricity, and telephone
service.
35
r' raWnr?refl'taahjmi
Neighborhood Data, Cont'd.
Subject neighborhood appears to be in the stability to
declining stage of its life cycle. No new construction
was observed. Marketing time fortproperties in the
neighborhood appears to be over six months.
36
-""Parcel No. 73
1.96 Acres
More or Less
OWNER OF RECORD
Allen C. Hatch
farce! may
/7.912710
DRAKE FIELD
el® LINE —
ORAnOe xAts `
Book 1208 —Rigs 484 kri.rLJ
1
A/L6Y DR/[mod' (is' ASPHALT)
— _ N 88.0926' yl - 242,00' 1
— J
IIauRI ,EM rM4 $ 1 Record Afn( Al
II - IL r[I�I 1
in ' I I
71 It,, nI
FRE Scab W I
r! FRAME GARAGE \
II I R 104 V1I1 ^ ' MOeWE HOME r I a
N 88.09'26/6r»ryGAt 7 0 k
0I
94.03' I z
I •C�,ii S 88t9'25 E I
_ 71,27'
e I C� <<�r I
II I
—� J / 108 JII:7s o
fl --c c n n ��I
T
I J S 86'09'26' E co ^ I I ..
I / 23.00' \ t
u I I1fi Ia 1 W — , I Z
0
J MoenE g
HOME
(fl AL) 0 g
z or
^ 76
Y I I
_�% ____S _88t9'26" E
� a
il
76
Y.WW Oa\t
.I/IMR M-7�I,I I
%OJOfN.e/1 . L/1Ne Roth — (&o NI,M [A.f Of 40 ACRE (RAC, f
MII A err w MN� __�I
,
P'teel d do4ocbz ea, Inc.
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
Dimensions & Shape: Dimensions appear on facing page;
Site is irregularly shaped.
Area: 1.96+/- Acres; .= 85;378+/- SF;
182.67'+/- of frontage on the west right-of-way of U.S.
71; 242'+/- of frontage on the south side of Bailey
Drive. It appears the east boundary of the site extends
on to the 71 right-of-way.
Topography: Undulating
topography; U.S. 71 frontage
grade; Also, a drainage ditch
southeast corner of subject.
conditions are not believed
construction, however, a soil
examined.
Street Improvements-:
Sidewalks _Yes x No
curbs 71 Yes _No
street paving
Concrete x Asphalt
On -site Parking Gravel
Off -site Parking None
to gently
is slightly bi
intersects 71
Soil and
adverse to
survey has
Utilities:
sloping
alow road
near the
subsoil
building
not been
water system:
x public _comet indiv
sewer system:
x public _comm _indiv
gas
x
Yes
_No
electric
x
PSC
Rea
Discussion of Economic Inadequacies, if any: Airport is
nearby, however, this is not considered adverse to the
site's highest and best use. In addition, the Arkansas -
Missouri Railroad runs a short distance west of subject,
however, this, too is not considered adverse to the
site's highest & best use.
Easements or Encroachments on site, if any: According to
the survey, it appears three trailers from the adjoining
mobile home part to the south encroach on the subject
sit, one completely. Mr. Hatch indicated that the
adjoining mobile home park used 1 1/2 spaces of his
park. They pay him $1200 a year for this encroachment,
however, are delinquent in their payments.
No adverse easements were noted, however, the survey
does not depict the location of utility easements.
The flood zone map appearing in
the
"Addenda" of this
report does
not indicate subject
to
be located within
the 100 year
flood zone. However,
the.map
indicates the
UJ
weed I Seiatco, Lw.
Description of Site, Cont'd
actual limit of the study to be just east of subject.
Considering that the south part of subject is traversed
by a drainage ditch, it would appear logical that during
times of heavy water flow in the :ditch, a flooding
problem for the south part of the site might be created.
However, according to Mr. Hatch, this has not been a
problem.
Site Improvements: Subject site is presently being
utilized for a mobile home park. There are 12 usable
spaces, with 11 spaces presently utilized. The property
owner indicated there was sufficient room for two more
spaces.
Utilities are all underground and each space is
individually metered. Each space has concrete runners
with spaces one, two, eight, and nine having length
runners and the remainder of the spaces having crosswise
runners. These crosswise runners are typically 12'+/ -
long. Spaces one and two, according to Mr. Hatch, have
excessive concrete.
Additional site improvements consist
area, 25'+/- x 22'+/-, at space one,
landscaping. Several mature shade
hardwoods, were noted on the site.
trees have diameters of 12", 20", 22"
of a stone parking
gravel drives, and
trees, including
Five of the larger
26", and 31".
A satellite was also noted at space one. In addition,
there is a 722+/- SF detached garage located in the
north central part of the site. Construction is frame
with composition shingle roof covering. The interior is
unfinished.
At the time of my inspection, there were 11 on -site
mobile homes, spaces 1-11. Following is a list of the
homes:
Space 1 - 16' x 80' 1986 Oak Creek;
Deluxe Model; 3 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 2 - 14' x 70' 1984 Redman;
3 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 3 - 14' x 70' 1983 Squire;
3 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 4 - 14' x 60' 1981 Homette;
2 bedroom, 2 bath
39
uleed IS?cialea, Inc.
Description of Site, Cont'd.
Space 5 - 14' x 80' Oakland -Fleetwood;
3 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 6 - 14' x 65' 1981 AlL American;
2 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 7 - 14' x 67' 1983 Redman;
2 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 8 - 14' x 64' 1985 Redman;
2 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 9 - 14' x 65' 1983 Redman;
2 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 10 - 14' x 65' Redman; Deluxe Model;
2 bedroom, 2 bath
Space 11 - 14' x 80' 1984 Skyline;
3 bedroom, 2 bath
A mobile home inspection report on each unit appears in
the "Addenda" of this report. The reports were prepared
by Don's Mobile Home Service of Fayetteville. The
reports indicate compliance with code requirements and
any repair needed work to the units. Also, the cost to
prepare the unit for moving is indicated.
The only noted repair work was as follows:
Unit 4 - Kitchen floor is unsafe and needs to be
replaced. Estimated cost is $375.
Unit 5 -
Seam coating
on roof is
peeling
and roof
needs to
be resealed.
Estimated
cost is
$336.
Unit 6 - Roof coating is flaking off and roof needs
to be resealed. Estimated cost is $273.
The estimated cost to make the mobile homes ready to
move was $650/unit except for unit one which would have
an additional $150 cost due to an alternate heat/air
duct system under the home. Mr. Hatch disagreed with
the moving cost estimates provided by Don's Mobile Home
Service. He felt the cost per unit would be $1050,
including reskirting and air conditioner hook-up.
Each mobile home has air conditioning except units three
and seven. Also, each mobile home has a deck with an
average size of 8' x 10'+/- except unit one which has
6P
Description of Site, Cont'd.
20' x 10' and 3' x 10' decks. The property owner
occupies unit one.
Additional information on the mobileI--oines, provided by
Mr. Hatch, is as follows:
1. Unit 3 has new carpet.
2. Unit 4 has a new 3 1/2 ton air conditioning
unit.
3. Unit 5 is all electric.
4. A metal building is located adjacent Unit 7,
however, is considered personal property and is
not valued in this report.
5. Unit 8 has masonite siding and has a fireplace.
6. Unit 9 is in excellent condition.
7. Unit 10 has a jacuzzi tub.
Typically, the mobile home units are rented by the week,
however, unit five is rented monthly. Each unit is
rented for $135/week (includes space) except numbers 5,
10, and 11 which rent for $425/month, $140/week, and
$155/week, respectively. The property owner pays all
utilities except on number five where the tenant pays
the electric bill.
At
the
time
of
my
inspection, only unit
eight was vacant
and
it
was
to
be
occupied soon.
Subject mobile home park is approximately 6+/- years in
age and is considered in average condition. Functional
obsolescence is indicated in layout when compared to a
new facility of this nature. No external inadequacies
were observed. The effective age is estimated to be
5+/- years and the remaining economic life is projected
to be 20+/- years.
CONCLUSIONS
Subject site
relates reasonably well to
its
surroundings and
is considered
adequate for its present
use.
41
3tee
d d , Booth 4o, inc.
ZONING
Subject site is zoned C, General Commercial.
The existing improvements and use appear _to be legal and
permissible. d.,:.
ASSESSMENT AND TAX
The following data was obtained from the Washington County
Assessor's Office:
Assessed
Value Tax
Land
$ 810
$ 30.62
Buildings
12,270
463.81
Total
$13,080
$494.43
The 1991 tax is due October 10, 1992.
Subject property was appraised for property tax purposes at
$65,400. The assessment ratio is 20% and the 1991 millage
rate is .0378.
The appraisal for property tax purposes includes the land
(indicated to be 2.12+/- acres), the garage, and five mobile
homes. There are now eleven mobile homes on site.
Therefore, the existing property tax is lower than it should
be. In my opinion, if the additional mobile homes are
considered, the annual property tax will increase $525+/-,
assuming no change in the present millage rate.
No special assessments were noted.
42
L..
• Zoning Map
• f ; \ 1//!Sid
h.. .1
71
y...•
: - t 7'
C
At
. ..::. -.. 14 R-1
R 2
.
..
Y•..... t
• .,„ K is
':
:
..
R-1
.•
.
R1
fl
Taw
II
TN
R1 [I
J
M
• .r_1.
'.i'. "l "..,'•i'..,
..
LINE
•MOSS
vnL50N'
O
_
t R-1
L y
R-1
•°
NH
N
C
i,:
R_1 1
•
CIIICL
OP.
.
n
-2
NAPIER
011.
4
Z
•
R-1
CKURCH On.
O
I
43
J•
_
1
.
t
II
.
I
..
1
- ;
1
nt'
1
.
1
1
I
•
I
I
I
I
I
I.
1 '
I 4
1 R
1 .
..A AGRICULTU
R-1 LO V/ DENS
R-2 MEDIUM DE
C GENERAL C'
I INDUSTRIAL
mftr :11_
HISTORY
The present owner purchased the property from Jesse J. and
Alice L. Schader on December 30, 1986. The deed is recorded
in Book 1208, Page 484. The indicated -sales price was
$60,000. Mr. Hatch indicated there was:i,house on the site
at the time of the purchase, which he had moved.'
A brief
income/expense
history on the
subject property is as
follows:
-
Gross Income $49,976
Operating Expenses $26,037
1990 1991
$59,192 $61,738
$24,259 $23,755
Net Operating
Income $23,939 $34,933 $37,983
Mr. Hatch indicated, at the time of my inspection, that he
owed $252,270 on the eleven mobile homes, or an average of
$22,934 per home. However, information provided to other
individuals connected with the airport expansion project was
that approximately $190,000 was owed on the mobile homes.
This computes to $17,273+/- per unit.
44
PART III - ANALYSIS OF DATA AND OPINIONS OF THE APPRAISAL
• !/LeeQ € J1 i40c1 zk4, ti%w.
HIGHEST AND BEST USE AND
IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS
The definition of highest and best use is as follows:
1. The reasonable and probable use sphat,.supports the
highest present value of vacant "land' or improved
property, as defined, as of the date:of..the appraisal.
2. The reasonably probable and legal use of land or sites
as though vacant, found to be physically possible,
appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that
results in the highest present land value.
3. The most profitable use.
Implied
in
these
definitions is
that the determination
of
highest
and
best
use takes into
account the contribution
of
a specific use to
goals as well as
property owners.
and best use of
preservation, con
like. "4
the community and community development
the benefits of that use to individual
Hence, in certain situations the highest
land may be for parks, green belts,
servation, wildlife habitats, and the
The four tests that must be met to determine highest and
best use are as follows: 1) Physically possible; 2) Legally
permissible; 3) Financially feasible; And, 4) Maximally
productive.
Subject site consists of approximately 1.96+/- acres of
improved commercial property. The site is zoned C, General
Commercial.
The location of the site is on the west side of U.S. 71
Highway at the southwest corner of the intersection of U.S.
71 and Bailey Drive. This location is in the north part of
the Greenland City Limits. Fayetteville Municipal Airport
property is located to the East across U.S. 71.
Commercial/Industrial uses make up the bulk of the
neighborhood property use. However, older residential uses
are also visible. Development in the neighborhood is static
at the present time.
The physical characteristics of the site are considered
reasonably conducive to commercial development. The site
fronts the west right-of-way of U.S. 71 for approximately
182.67+/- and the south side of Bailey Drive for
approximately 242'. The frontage is slightly below 71 road
grade. Drawbacks are the irregular shape of the site and
the drainage ditch which traverses the south part of the
property. The south part of the site may lie in the 100
year flood zone, however, without a survey,, it is impossible
45
Highest and Best Use, Cont'd.
to determine. The topography of the site is undulating to
gently sloping. Typical public utilities are available.
In my opinion, based on the preceding anal"ps`is;'•the highest
and best use of the site as vacant is for -the construction
of commercial service or retail improvements that are in
compliance with existing zoning regulations and that do not
suffer from any form of accrued depreciation.
Subject site is presently improved with a 12 space mobile
home park. There are eleven existing on -site mobile homes
and a detached frame garage. The mobile home park is 6+/ -
years in age and is in average condition. At the time of my
inspection, ten of the units were occupied with the one
vacant unit to be occupied in the near future. The property
has a reasonably good appearance and has a -good history of
steadily rising income. The net operating income has also
shown definite improvement over the last three years. I
seriously doubt that any other use of the site would produce
greater net operating income than the present use. The
mobile home park has substantial remaining economic life.
In
my opinion,
the
highest and
best
use of the subject site
as
improved is
for
the present
use,
a mobile home park.
In summary, the
highest and
best
use of the subject site is
that indicated "as
improved".
46
. APPROACH
In the cost approach, an estimated reproduction or
replacement cost of the building and land.. improvements as of
the date of the appraisal is developed. together with the
losses in value that have taken place du •to wear and tear,
design and plan, or neighborhood influences. To the
depreciated building cost estimate is added the estimated
value of the land. The total represents the indicated value
by the cost approach. The following terms utilized in the
cost approach require defining:
"Reproduction Cost is the estimated cost to construct, at
current price, an exact duplicate or replica of the building
being appraised, using the same materials, construction
standards, design, layout, and quality of workmanship, and
embodying all the deficiencies, superadequacies, and
obsolescence of the subject building."5
"Replacement Cost is the estimated cost to construct, at
current prices, a building with utility equivalent to the
building being appraised, using modern materials and current
standards, design, and layout." 6
"Accrued Depreciation is the difference between the
reproduction or replacement cost of the improvements on the
effective date of the appraisal and the market value of the
improvements on the same date. Depreciation is caused by
deterioration or obsolescence in the property.
Deterioration is evidenced by the wear and tear on the
structure. Functional obsolescence is caused by internal
property characteristics such as poor floor plan, inadequate
mechanical equipment, or functional inadequacy or
superadequacy due to size or other characteristics.
External obsolescence is caused by conditions outside the
property such as a lack of economic demand, changing
property uses in the area, or national economic
conditions."'
'American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The Appraisal
of Real Estate (Chicago: American Institute of Real; Estate
Appraisers, Ninth Edition, 1987), P. 351.
6lbid, P. 352.
7Ibid, P. 353.
47
m
Cost Approach, Cont'd.
LAND VALUE ESTIMATE
Comp #1
Location
Sale Date
Proximity
to Subject
Zoning
Size
Shape
Topography
Sale Price
Price Per
Acre
Comments:
Comp #2 y Comp #3
East side of
NEC of 71B &
W side of U.S.
U.S. 71, south
26th Street
71,N of Branch
of 71 BP Inter.
Bank & across
from airport
6-17-90
1-18-90
Listing
.9+/- mile
1.4+/- miles
.3+/- mile
North
North
South
Appears to be
Appears to be
C
C-2
C-2
1.66+/- Acres
1.09+/- Acres
2.23+/- Acres
Appears
Appears
Appears
Irregular
Irregular
Irregular
Gently Sloping
Undulating to
Undulating to
Gently Sloping
Gtly. Sloping
$15,000
$40,000
$69,500
$ 9,036
$36,697
$31,166
Sale No. One
Grantor:
Grantee:
Date of Sale:
Recorded:
Legal Desc.:
Consideration:
Size:
Price Per Acre:
Pearl Thurlby
Kenneth Shepard
June 17, 1990
Book 1349, Page 784
Part of Lots 3 and 6, Block 7, Sheltons
Addition to Fayetteville
$15,000
1.66+/- Acres
$9036
48
Cost Approach, Cont'd.
Remarks: Approximately 125' of frontage on U.S.
71, south of Skelton Street.
Speculation is thatthe seller was
motivated to sell and/;.�s- result, sold
below market.
Comparison to Sub.: Requires upward adjustment for
conditions of sale; Reasonably similar
in location and size; Requires upward
adjustment for a lesser amount of 71
frontage per acre. Subject is a corner
site. Overall upward adjustment of 55%;
Indicated per acre value for subject of
$14,006 ($ 9,036 x 1.55).
Sale No. Two
Grantor:
Roy Teckell
Grantee:
Frank Shuler
Date of Sale:
January 18, 1990
Recorded:
Book 1350, Pages 257 and 258
Legal Description:
Lots 4, 5, and .6, Grandview Place
Subdivision to Fayetteville.
Consideration:
$40,000
Size:
1.09+/- Acres
Price Per Acre:
$36,697
Remarks:
Approximately 300'+/- of frontage on the
east side of U.S. 71B across from
Mexican Original. Site is level at road
grade. Property was part of a trade,
however, indications are that it was
fully arms -length.
Comparison to Sub.:
Reasonably similar in location; Requires
downward adjustment for smaller size and
for substantially more 71 frontage per
acre; Subject is a corner site. Overall
downward adjustment of 50%; Indicated
per acre value for subject of $18,349
($36,697 x .50).
Listing
The third comparable utilized is a listing located on the
west side of U.S. 7111, approximately .2+/- mile south of
subject. The property is situated in the S 1/2 of the NW
1/4 of the NW 1/4 of 4-15-30. The location is in the
Greenland City Limits.
Lindsey
&
Associates
Realtors
presently
has
the property
listed
for
sale at a
price of
$69,500.,'
The
property has
49
Cost Approach, Cont'd.
been listed for
a long period
of time with little market
activity.
The price
has been
reduced at least two times
recently.
The
property has
approximately 528.06' of
frontage
on U.S.
71 and also
fronts the? -Arkansas -Missouri
Railroad
right-of-way.
In comparison to subject, this property would require an
upward adjustment for size and a substantial downward
adjustment for 71 frontage per acre. Subject is a corner
site. Assuming the property sells •for list price, the
overall downward adjustment is 40%; Indicated per acre value
for subject is $18,700 ($31,166 x .60).
Conclusions
The land comparables utilized indicate a per acre value for
subject ranging from $14,006 to $18,700. Sales one and two
indicate $14,006/acre and $18,349/acre, respectively, while
the listing indicates the upper end. It would appear
logical to give more weight to the sales:
Indicated Per Acre Value For Subject = $18,000
1.96+/- Acres at $18,000 = $35,280
Say = $35,500
o
1: a I•: RW f •..I :1/,#i
r1_ J J N At00Vrp 1 I s
tr 11 r
Y Comparable Land Sales l...
_.sal r t' t �Kt.
.s IM ,- I !mf•01 1 moon .l
4 _w - r-- 4_..r. ..
i -. —
r _
V' ' 'I \ 3 r1r
`1 rr INI I t1� ■� I Yr 5.
m
r \� i a
i1 �.u1u SI•.V . .
If DIN 1} .'run IJ. y..
;..
IIMt1\ rat
a r 'in.
1..
CS' ST IIsr \�• �w ~-a% •• _ �t
SAOwEu ` r •pa•
1 IN f q IM Ff
w .. /1W r♦.. ♦ ♦ — .__ .
Y un
m�u rip.�A•e `Jf r M a. 1__.__.._J r�J.
RII /'! SI r1r •vw mlNJlw oua _] i : t4 .•Ylj?Y t rl f ♦/tr ° [Isar ca.oa D { 3,^f(,' ,-. < ✓ .
�..,.._u. .a • , f�.�Mrl s\r1r .. .�.L . .rnq..1 T♦'xrY •1., •4�1,'4Sr+11 ;. I'!tZ 4 '�Nij� ko • a r ..
JT Y 1 Y SI$!i1:t;t
<./yr4i °'. Jr, {1.� . � '.��i'. -;.a.• Lti`sSs 4l �, N i,ySl. I. /J . • : 1 r t a° • '. t9 1 lt� r + 1 r / v ] r r < • -' I♦ bwla nr''V-•41 1d1 y ryyr♦ • •✓•f I ,y I I r• Cm♦ nI T J/ 4
` 4 %)q �1 LlM1(I •r a. i ♦ ! yt 4y,` ♦ f.. 1 f ♦ rry I Wrn .' Di rnii
16 l/ iil I5�i.1`�r , • Yliani`ly .}si YIIA[I ... 1 4rn
uil tJ� �. 1 ,•� j r.' ♦�/ 4 +A.{ a llJJ♦y/���. (a 3� 4Y Y�1 R`�) rui:IH pr •w4r•Yr
♦ 1 = I.V. II J t M �. ♦ �'✓ tR�. Mr v'J �: '+ JY1ylYrT. Of •Yul.
' GOECN 1[N .a �y v' i �: /. .^' t♦J R ( / 4n♦ro. ... I I
l O '♦' bi YY4 n.. DI Y•w
i
'. srpc[r m4Ez •r i��� L/r+�+.:, "t '� ."♦.oi i+ . :4r'
r ✓M SI ♦
Wr'fL.... On J 1...............o•,
Yn nn..nLb Dsatyon[♦
u V`Ku >o w FAYETTEVII}E '.' p• r.- 1 I .D�I.w-♦• - °i un
uulc, O, r Y Ji•r 'i'N a'1` \• , w 4u 4♦ flj•..
n1. of .4n t DRAKE FIELD F 1 ... 1•. \ .• wJ
PDU 4♦ f I 1 I! •lt.) '� I UYI YT i
o-°tt`141n. .H r ? is 1F I~�♦'I .Y^�•YfrfLl .Iy+ tr1 6i•IY 1.V♦r c i.._
nlwtl.. .411' N 1
GI I N 1 .. J {l r•. n 1 e 6t 1, + s i •I mvrwu 1 f 4
11♦r Cw ♦�a C l r^ r /. 4Jr i4fC /; yJ• 1.\ -Ir\la CVu.0 r.. 41 V'1.
f ] 1.y 1 r-. rr♦ Ic :"' 1C'9 vS �ae.4.no.1a 4' ii r.
IID1/rlg4 P' .. 41I M �/
S. 41nt11 D4 CN ��'t ///......'Y 'r MN •r )L�[C' .[ I II ♦I 11 Y" n4rO mc."I.q tr YI
IOt DS OII :E,Y a-- . u ]I. ul. '1 r1 t t • 4• ♦J �. • I�iy OD w10 III Y
• •• Rl4Pr. 4111 9�j r3 t�_ a )f , I ]
r'0.D1♦ ON rt v ' a J'1 ���rDwtgµO... -. 11.
fft IM• On •°l / \ '.: ` ,l nL�.a ,A r1 ♦ 1 `�.' • M1t V41" •..
1N4..... &IF ♦..-� I 11• 4�C.:r I, r ♦ '4 Y..: W01 If •.
MC0.n Gp r l • • �Y ♦ Y' ) • 1 N Y.!)/�PI14•III%. _1.1 Y
fro+rn. .011 .' 1 / .� !'Srr'D°N�u l`.' 4� `I
1 •• 10• .) •• Rl S r 1♦- 1YS TI1. `�na • c, s.
w ( . ,D
p. / I r ? l :.�1 <I ICYi' :`(• � }I + 'F •1h . r4N 1 IS Wq
rrin i;
y f < t Il i 11> )i li'••% x,14. 11 t'"1
L ,t \1( NIKVCI It YV✓'i
J ♦^Y V'/l.r J... !� 't• 1 r a 1 . -3/ �11 .. °♦ er.
r1 ♦ �" �i• I ' JJ,,r��• AIRy'.•t. V�? }r t V4+ rKit rr Y`i
1flj
1) R 1 I.II •..� ' , Ai1,W ^ 'I •atiiA'r♦� r'I� r)'1 J1•��1�i "`"Cohn Vf '$!IU
1 S wr+l)1[ Y. t;J 1„ ♦i l,`j`?� an. !v 1 [' { 1 II 11OWYa"
",it, / R;�: -.1 ;1 1 a i�� • s.w..1t1 r .,4 rr.n rp4r.IPn i[. r r rp - r yJt /Yf14,4q . }q..(��1�1>..a .♦ f - �.+ 1 rF A ��J )T 1' Y A nIr V I. YY..
I�I ♦I /. ♦'11 ♦ ).. I 1� ••_}I, .♦ f r ••� II•[w 01 f rn.
4A1Q liQ 1 r Fr •` �. 14 a. , . a ..1 llC �f i.
•i `l4 ` •J1I1 • ) 1 .a a iryil .i 1 r.1 r 1 i �. I�Ya•Y 11 a
+ r ..1 '+ -. /[ Y .f \ yJr J�ri� �"11 }{`. Y n�' i`Y Hlhvnt• ... �l.l Y/.J�
Wf QpJI1♦ \iy. MI
4 ♦ rI Y' � I1" r,rin qOP /I1 Y..•♦r.
Lf r a.L_•Y `7 T<�`. jl :•1'SI ` 1, •
1 �. -r lf. yrr yv . I + •v � /.9 ' pwu/.nw4 41 wJ.
"`"•-`l i' •[ lv. w•v/(y l' < J( I \ I(I`i- `I' wR it .{/ RY C1 �4 a�'V• I Pr41 nl , Oi wYv.1
w w I •4. 1 -t l j a ♦ r !. 1 . r I :T 11 i!' r ^1 4, ( %.}4JI1•f• ulw. • v I r s..:...
d }1;t •c. •�i . 1 • ,, 4 _ n Tr:, a It•< in F 1.• V f'� r.u. .11
•• /y i •T. ♦ ♦Y 1 jl-�•• I*.
1 11 f •t J 1 FwrIllw Y \ i 17' yw��• fl
ir11n
fL M J { 1 .il /] .J_ /(Nl. /. r/rY :♦ 1)f I j'i
1' +] t J �/ 1. ♦. IY l I a � 1�, `� I •qlv 1.. J• two.
`.4•, ♦ •'. `,, lI. t r i�. 1 y, ii�t• 1rY-(1 4'. M 1 C♦.rr
�Jl'•y1f� ;1 w 3lyy t '� ♦j YI}'Jl 1s r_ J I•„}vl d14 W �Q a j Y`. SY3♦'1141r�n. lrarw<sJ o
J*it'. • f , J ♦ i17Y ♦4 ..A SIS)-1. '•�. I ••�1 �C"�.• a. -l♦31� R .o- 11 L•..1..
r I iihl y..♦ ' .J •I^ �. r. .I!. _I•JV r a • .�[ !'IRVIItr Nrc. C1 lures
I��r 1 ) ♦•J r" / • • fS <ifv=♦1♦yI".�ii1,E'+It t^y+1 aJT lra f Nw E• 11
-•/Z'` { . �I I( YV T�) I ♦ 1 /~'!1 I♦ t /Di `..� nl �• ��I • If 1`IySI ?'i�-.�tY'J ♦1^'!.,t))•�4.I'�i `I tJY .Of14 /I 11 •-
• i r •
f C ,yr ♦T' '. i ' l f + 4 n ^ T+i • I �I i'i 144]1 b � r 1 1 • _ •r _ r i5JS�1rY1 J([! it • i - M. 1 t •
.). '1 a r - !Ji•,y z.t,1,r 1 ♦'Y i .. FIf 1(.♦,.I r 11 1 •- .1 Y:�. a/1� i 1 r /J• ♦ i fli •Y�� ww } :v,'c.. is : ..
' • / j � 4 Y G lY ♦ . f : I u C rr)Y r 4 y., - Y r♦. -1 _1 'r♦ V ..
1 T. •4'i il• ./(4... !-�° "t 1J 1• I '1 rJ. t ♦ �...•♦+ ] ),- l .Y•r r"1 rclrJ OR f1 Y1 `L..
•.:-.-s♦l 1 }1 I 1 i ..}--------------------_•_.
i r r] L`''\J •'I ?? .1 [M` \./1�♦I NF -II /I il.✓�� 1 V•
Cost Approach, Cont'd.
Marshall Valuation Service is utilized to estimate the
reproduction cost new of the subject mobile home park:
Mobile Home Park (Section 63,)
The following costs are based on average quality with some
deviation where subject is lacking:
Per Space
Engineering
$
430
Grading
345
Street Paving (Gravel)
75
Patios & Walks (Minimal)
115
Sewer
515
Water
425
Gas
215
Electrical
575
Miscellaneous
(Landscaping, etc.)
120
Indicated Cost Per Square
$ 2,815
Multipliers
Number of Spaces
1.21
(Interpolated)
Gross Area Per Space
1.16
(Interpolated)
Cost
.99
Area
.84
1.17
Adjusted Cost Per Square
=
$ 3,294
x 12 Spaces
=
$39,528
Plus: 8% Entrepreneurial
Profit =
3,162
Reproduction Cost New
=
$42,690
Less: 20% Accrued Depreciation
(5 Yr. Eff. Age /.
25 Yr. Ec. Life)
_
(8,538)
Depreciated Reproduction
Cost New =
$34,152
SAY
$35,000
52
Cost Approach, Cont'd.
Garage
Reproduction Cost new for this structure was derived from
Page A-5 of Marshall & Swift Residential Cost Handbook:
Indicated Price Per Square Foot
(Interpolated) _ "'$ 9.84
x 722+/- SF = $ 7,104
Less: 50% Accrued Depreciation
(20 Yr. Eff. Age '/.
40 Yr. Ec. Life) _ (3,552)
Depreciated Reproduction Cost New = $ 3,552
SAY 1$ 3,500
Cost Approach Summary
Mobile Home Park = $35,000
Garage = 3,500
Land = 35,500
Total (excluding mobile homes) _ $74,000
In our investigation, we contacted a local mobile home
dealer for information on the book value of the mobile
homes. The following information was obtained:
Unit
1
= $14,475
Unit
2
= 6,800
Unit
3
= 5,525
Unit
4
= 6,600
Unit
5
= 7,225
Unit
6
= 4,500
r
Unit
7
= 6,300
Unit
8
= 6,500
Unit
9
= 6,300
Unit
10
= 6,500
Unit
11
= 7,225
TOTAL
_ $77,950
This is based upon the units being in average condition
and the dealer being responsible for all moving costs.
Also, this represents book value. Obviously, the units
are more valuable on -site and available for rental.
t
53
Cost Approach, Cont'd.
Marshall & Swift Residential Cost Handbook indicates the
following reproduction cost new for manufactured homes (See
Pages A-109 & A-111): fr/:;:..
14' x 64' Unit (Avg) _ :$26.85
14' x 64' Unit (Good) _ $25.38
14' x 68' Unit = $20.56
14' x 76' Unit = $20.05
16' x 76' Unit = $22.70
Floor Cover = $ 1.36
Heat/Air = $ 1.36
Multipliers = $ .84 Area
These costs can be applied to subject units as follows:
Units
6, 8 & 9 =
Units
2 & 4 =
Units
3&7 & 7 =
f Inif q
tj G 11 -
11nit
1 =
nnlr
in -
llrapidua
h Jduuzzl
Decks
(Page A-5)
Extra
Plumbing
Fixtures
=
2716+/-
SF
@
$19.80
=
1960+/-
SF
@
$19.56
=
1918+/-
SF
@
$18.41
=
2240+/-
SF
0
$19.13
=
1?R0+/-
SF
@
¶21.15
=
Dinar
Fr
0
¢7van
—
1030+/— SF @ $ 6.48
$ 53,777
38,338
35,310
42,851
27f12R
71,479
1,220
6,674
11 @ $ 302 = 3,322
Subtotal = $230,302
Plus: 8% Entrepreneurial Profit = 18,424
Reproduction Cost New = $248,726
Less: 40% Accrued Depreciation = (99,490)
(8 yr. Avg. EA V. 20 yr Ec. Life)
Depreciation Reproduction Cost New = $149,236
SAY $150,000
Considering
the
mobile homes,
the following value is
indicated by
the
Cost Approach:
Total Excluding Mobile Homes
Mobile Homes
_ $ 74,000
150,000
Indicated Value By Cost Approach = $224,000
54
SALES COMPARISON APPROACH
In the sales comparison approach, the subject property is
compared to similar properties that have been sold recently
or for which listing prices or offering figures are known.
Data for generally comparable sale properties.'are used, and
comparisons are made to demonstrate a probable price at
which the subject property would sell if -offered on the
market.
"To apply the sales comparison approach, an appraiser
follows a systematic procedure:
1. Research the market to obtain information on sales
transactions, listings, and offerings to purchase
properties similar to the subject property.
2. Verify the information by confirming that the data
obtained are factually accurate and that the
transactions reflect arms -length market considerations.
3. Select relevant units of comparison (e.g., dollars per
acre, per square foot, or per income multipliers) and
develop a comparative analysis for each unit.
4. Compare the subject property and comparable sales
properties using the elements of comparison and adjust
the sale price of each comparable appropriately or
eliminate the property as a comparable.
Reconcile the various value indications produced from
the analysis of comparables into a single value
indication or range of values. An imprecise market may
indicate a range of values."B
The sales utilized in estimating the market value of the
subject property are as follows:
eAmerican Institute of Real Estate
of Real Estate (Chicago: American
Appraisers, Ninth Edition, 1987),
Appraisers, The Appraisal
Institute of Real Estate
P. 315.
1rzr, rat 74 flltf
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Sale No. 1
Grantor: Edwin H. & June Riis,
Grantee: Bobby D. & Beverly d. Anderson, and
Harold McKissack & Bobby D. Anderson,-` Trustees for the
McKissack Family Trust
Date of Sale: June 13, 1986
Recorded: Book 1182, Page 267, Washington
County Courthouse
Legal Description: Part of the Frl. S 1/2 of the Frl.
NW 1/4 of Section 6, township 17 North, Range 29 West,
described as follows, to -wit: Beginning at the SE
corner of said Frl. 80 acre tract, thence N 660.00',
thence W 1329.65' to the center line of the Old Missouri
Road, thence along said center line S 09 degrees 46' W
535.76', thence departing said center line E 397.65',
thence S 132.00', thence E 1023.00' to the point of
beginning, and containing 19.768 acres, more or less.
Consideration:
Financing:
Adjustment to Cash:
Verified:
Land Size:
Mobile Home Spaces:
Price/Space:
Gross Income, 1985:
Operating Expenses,
1985:
Net Operating
Income, 1985:
Capitalization Rate:
$477,000
Conventional Loan
None
Buyers
19.768 acres
79 (17 are RV spaces)
$6,038
$85,800
$24,050, 28%
$61,750
12.9% ($61,750 /. $477,000)
56
Sale Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Description:
This
sale is
located
on the east
side of State Highway
265, east
of the
airport, in
Springdale,
Arkansas. The property
fronts
State Highway
265 which
is a heavily
traveled,
asphalt
paved, four
lane road.
_..
At the time of sale, the property consisted of Whisler
Mobile Home Park situated on 19.77+/- acres. The park
consisted of 62 mobile home spaces, and 17 recreational
vehicle spaces. The park was 16 years in age and was
considered to be in good condition. Improvements
included: Asphalt roadways and streets; storage
buildings; a fenced area for resident's boats,
recreational vehicles, etc.; And, a manager's living
quarters. This mobile home is a Budger double wide, 20'
x 56'. It was approximately 18 years in age and in good
condition. The mobile home had central heat and air,
and an attached carport. The room count was 5-2-2.
Water, sewer, natural gas, and electricity to mobile
home spaces. Sewer, water (hydrant at each 2 spaces),
and electricity to RV spaces.
57
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Sale No. 2
Grantor:
Paul E.
and Phyllis
D. Cornett
Grantee:
Kenneth
M. and JoArint k. Bergley
Date of Sale:
January
12, 1988
Recorded:
Book 682,
Page 578,
Benton County
Legal Description:
Part of
the NE 1/4
of the NW 1/4 of
12-19-30
Consideration: $398,000
Description: This is the Idle Wheel Mobile Park
on West Olive Street in Rogers. There were 30 spaces
and 24 park owned mobile homes. In addition, a
residence, garage, and outbuilding were included in the
sale. The mobile homes had a contributory value of
$4000-$5000 per unit. This leaves a value for the
spaces, residence, garage, etc. of $278,000. The
acreage size was approximately 2 acres and a part of the
site does lie within the 100 year flood zone. In April,
1989, this park had 27 park owned mobile homes, each
rented by the week ($75-$85). The three remaining
spaces were rented for $82/month with the water paid by
the park. Gas is also paid by the park on the weekly
rentals. Electricity is the only utility individually
metered. This park previously sold in 1987 to Cornett
with the space allocation being $120,000 for 28 spaces.
The sale appears to be unusual considering the second
transaction.
Price/Space:
Financing:
$9267
Conventional Loan
58
' I.
meal JOaoacialea, Inc.
Sales Comparison Approach Cont'd.
C
el S
L 1 ' 1 ✓. _ —tea "^���•T11 •I/ ♦)I�� rte M N �}J j���1!y,� �� �\
�}1 �( { p L {5 1
v)" i y { M11 •Sr� 1 i i lI. �I�'T r. 1
•
4 v. • t::
M1
59
deed d ,1�ooaciales, ,Inc.
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Sale No. 3
Grantor: Nancy E. Powell
Grantee: Earl J. Hanaway
Date of Sale: June 19, 1986
Recorded: Book 1182, Page 539; Escrow Contract
Legal Description: Part of the N 1/2 of the NE 1/4 of
34-18-30 and Part of the S 1/2 of the SE 1/4 of 27-17-
30.
Consideration: $630,000
Description: Springbrook Mobile Hdme Park on 6.37
acres located at Appleby and Gregg in Fayetteville.
This park supposedly had 45 spaces, however, an earlier
listing indicated 37 spaces. Seven mobile homes were
included. This sale also involved Countrylane Mobile
Home Park on 5.94 acres located on Appleby Road in
Fayetteville. This park supposedly had 65 spaces,
however, an earlier listing indicated 42. Eleven mobile
homes were included. The total contributory value of
the mobile homes was estimated to be $45,000, leaving
$585,000 for the spaces.
Price Per Space: $5318
Financing: Not known
60
L3Ped I O160oci z/ea, $w.
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
61
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Sale No. 4
Grantor:
Grantee:
Date of Sale:
Verified:
Legal Description:
23-19-30
Consideration:
Dae Joon Park
BCR Properties, Inc..__
December 31, 1986
Luther Black of BCR Properties
Part of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of
$470,000
Description: New Hope Mobile Home`Park located on
New Hope Road in Rogers. This park consisted of 92
spaces on 9+/- acres. Some 32 mobile homes were
included in the sale. They had an estimated
contributory value of $96,000. This left $374,000 to
the spaces. The 1987 net operating income was
$57,928.05, indicating an overall cap rate of 12.33%.
The 1987 operating expense ratio was 52.8%. The 1988
operating expense ratio was 49.6%. In 1983 this park
sold for $520,000.
Price/Space: $4065
Financing: $70,000 downpayment and assumption
of $400,000 loan.
.....,....W 1e.•
.,. ., ......._._4._:_-
. "�. r:dJ
V.
62
• ^r1 1 r .b!
• • I I •L f •ter ' i•. 4. '
;y__ Improved Sales Map Fj _.'
r ., r {1 q r I ♦r, ,
fI 1Y r L fF
1� ,l
•aJ. n t. L.', lT, -�1��.11r.. �:•�} i
r.
(}1��- I -ten ._n.� 1I "I r' \ I, '':z�tr
-• WS t - 1W�' L11r•\`I
)4:&J;9
''t V I I 1} I ,'. 1 �• rf5I„L i� ` \1' •t�•.. ;
i & 'y j �-^ • 1 _ : 1I.P r„.•.,..
••• / F . • \ \l, • ' .♦L � 1 1 U l „ , "r -,\,
r �S1L- r� L I J} I
I ,f` i wwL • `f-I�M1 r �.. -.--.
. rl , 1 • •11' r !ra _``
.PY^n _ - • ',' III ' I'I / _ � 1 r I 1 • I � r � IC\\\--++±'.]___JJJjjj/It l'Il Pr l-r--rtL 1 \ (' _ •_t 1 • r `%t4 - j Ir T , _ _ ' 1 I I,e
Ii., y `r` -n••1yy1y�1 11' � 1 f nl .♦. 1/ 'I(1/\ ` ) ,•'�
ft, 'I , _.1. '[Y�rf/•''' • •.1• _f , �., 1 !''•t1 .L •r ' \r
y l{1 : C/ )I 1 / I 1/ ,� I. ` rr •, 1 S• 4 .�� 4rc1!4?
• �� J r , f' r t` �
`•_V•LI Ir' -A • r� n' -r _ / 1 `♦ S' r .• r
r 1 � �) ` •r a I' u•rn 1 u •' ' '\. • ���•r. �. I 1 '!...
• 1 r• •1 (4'c_':
• EL
LL n 1. 1", •.- ./ ' Lµ(.L_ L• L. .,.:.+,L
, 1\ 1
• M,iN1Yl : � I � Yr 1 I. 'I L 9
( ♦I _ _r•
IONCSi 1-1'I/ 1 tJ„, �N:-•i+ ��� I '1 ✓', ^f.. .. ��... i .r! F/.
�' r 1 5 � • IE.4Lt:..y.LLI(
I
,+ (rI _ ,yn_S _ __S-RI'
1 A ,
y Y,
• • 4
1 \ 1? aY i• •I. �j :J• r' • I / I I •-.-.:; •�. I
1X ,• tea• �� r � I
li •' � r rl�!! ', 7—; UiL
•'�1 r 1� i ) . r � I I �ICt i�� 1 Y": _-'i is • ( i • .. V.
1. _ I \ r I �\:[.r�,.l••
(•�7
. ,f �• 1 � L` ,rj .�r r 111 i ^./'' , l• r' 11// i I I•l`` li fa�.�-YL 3I , a. �,4 � r
• • f:1.,I: Lta1.• [ n.n ' 'CI �9 1+ I I !r • .� .--4 I FYi r �11.c• ♦\ ,• •r-.
, ..i /� '• I•n , i tl •, (•
Ltd I r•.,` 1.1. ; ' ` I S.'
. w d 11' a.. ,f • •4• II.
� •L' ___ ..t h••_i. I LA'::.'• 1 .I f—
.: •
.: f .I ,•, 1 Ir L .I I
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
IMPROVED SALES SUMMARY
Mobile Home
Parks
Sale
Date/
Space
Spaces
Price/
No.
Sale
Consid.
Space
Location
1
06-13-86
$477,000
79
$6038
Whisler-Springdale
2
01-12-88
$278,000
30
$9267
Idle Wheel -Rogers
3
06-19-86
$585,000
110
$5318
Springbrook&Country
Lane - Fayetteville
4
12-31-86
$374,000
92
$4065•
New Hope - Rogers
Analysis of
Sales
The unit of comparison is price per space.
The elements of comparison are property rights, conditions
of sale, market conditions, location, and physical
characteristics.
Mobile Home Park
Property Rights: No adjustments are necessary. The
sales involved the transfer of the leased fee estates,
however, the rental rates appear to have been at market.
Conditions of Sale: Each of the sales appear to have
been arms -length transactions and financing did not
appear to have substantially affected sales prices.
Sales one and two involved conventional financing,
financing on sale three was not available, and sale four
involved an assumption of an existing mortgage. The
details on this assumption could not be obtained. Sale
two appears above market, however, the buyer is of the
opinion he paid market value. The property had been
listed at $495,000. Sale four appears below market
considering the earlier sale, however, this was not a
forced sale.
Due
to a lack
of
market
support,
no adjustments are made
for
conditions
of
sale.
64
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Market Conditions: The sales are older, however, my
investigation indicates they are the best
available in the area. Small, recentmobile home park
sales were found, however, generally th4y were very low
quality set-ups in rural areas.
It would seem logical that mobile home parks have
increased in value since the 1986-1988 period, however,
I have no market support for this. Therefore, no
adjustments are made for market conditions.
Location: Sale one is located on Highway 265
in Springdale, sale two on West Olive in Rogers, sale
three on Appleby Road in Fayetteville, and sale four on
New Hope Road in Rogers. Sales two, three, and four are
primarily situated in residential neighborhoods while
sale one is located in an industrial neighborhood near
the Springdale Municipal Airport. Subject is located in
a mixed -use neighborhood. Sale one has good visibility
to traffic flow, as does subject, however, this is not
necessarily more important to a mobile home park. Also,
sale one does not face the traffic flow that subject
does. Sale one is situated near central shopping and
employment areas. Subject neighborhood is in the
stability to declining stage of its life cycle. In my
opinion, each of the sales have superior locations. A
downward adjustment of 20% is indicated.
Physical Characteristics: The primary adjustments here are
for land value, park size (spaces), and quality, except
for sale two which also included a residence, garage,
etc. Typically, the tendency in the market is for small
parks to bring a higher per space price than similar
larger parks. Although, this is not exemplified by sale
four. The adjustment for size is estimated by matching
sales two and three, after adjusting for land
contribution and, also the residence, etc. on sale two.
The indicated adjustment is $40/space. As the number of
spaces increases, the price per space decreases.
65
Sales Comparison Approach Cont'd
e4€a If t3i46ccat4o, 'Inc.
Each of the sales is considered to have inferior land
value per space to subject. An attempt was made to
abstract the land contribution from each sale in order
that this adjustment could be made accurately. In each
case, the adjustment is large due tosubject's small
number of spaces. The following adjustments are
indicated for land: Sale 1 +15%, sale 2 + 20%, sale 3
+30%, and sale 4 +45%,
Subject's land value contribution per space is estimated
to be $2958. ($35,500 '/. 12 spaces).
Each of the comparables is of superior quality to
subject and each has superior amenities. A downward
adjustment of 25% is indicated to each sale.
The estimated downward adjustment for the
improvements on sale two is $2000.
No other adjustments are indicated. Each of the sales
included some outbuildings, however, subject has a frame
garage. These factors are basically considered
offsetting.
Conclusions: Based on the preceding analysis, the
following adjustment grid is indicated:
Sale 1 2
3 4
Price/Space $6038 $9267 $5318 $4065
Property Rts. 0 0 0 0
Cond. of Sale 0 0 0 0
Market Cond. 0 0 0 0
Location -1208 -1853 -1064 - 813
Physical Characteristics
Size +2680 + 720 +3920 +3200
Land + 906 +1853 +1595 +1829
Quality -1510 -2317 -1330 -1016
Other 0 -2000 0 0
Indicated Value
Per Space $6906 $5670 $84.39
$7265
7
131 ed d daaoclzfed, inc.
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
A wide value range is indicated.
The mean is $7070/space and the median_.:.;is $7086/space.
Sales one and two are considered the best comparables
and are given equal weight.
In my opinion, based on
the
preceding
analysis, the
indicated per space value
for
subject is:
$6300
12+/- spaces @ $6300 = $ 75,600
Say $ 76,000
As for the contributory value of subject mobile homes,
little conclusive sales evidence could be found to form
an accurate opinion.
Sale two included 24 mobile homes with a contributory
value of $4000 to $5000/unit. However, these mobile
homes were much inferior to subject units, as evidenced
by their weekly rental rates of $75-$85 compared to
subjects $135-$140.
My investigation indicated sale three also included
mobile homes. Some eleven units were involved in the
sale. Their contributory value was estimated to be
$45,000, or $4091/unit. Again, these units were much
inferior to subject mobile homes.
In addition, sale four included 32 mobile homes with an
estimated contributory value of $96,000, or $3000/unit.
These, too, were much inferior to subject units.
Finally, one additional sale was considered:
Sale No. 5
Grantor: Dallas & Charlotte O'Neal
Grantee: Timothy & Vicki White
Date of Sale: January 12, 1990
Location: West of Elm Springs on Brush Creek
Road
Consideration: $90,000
67
Reed id4acxizlea, Inc.
Sales Comparison Approach Cont'd
Financing: $20,000 down with owner carrying
$70,000 at 10% for 15 years ;,..
Verified: Through Collins_.... -Real Estate in
Springdale, the selling agent
Remarks: 12 single -wide mobile homes on
3.34+/- acres. Age of the units ranged from 1966 to
1976 and condition from fair to average. Gross income
for 9 months of 1988 was $22,780. Land value, etc.
estimated at $13,500, leaving $76,500 for mobile homes
or $6375/unit.
3
The mobile homes included in this sale have an inferior
location to subject and were in inferior condition, however,
are more similar to subject units than the mobile homes on
sales two, three, and four.
ME
weed d' J+ ooi,ciale0 , ,Y'nC.
Sales Comparison Approach, Cont'd.
Conclusions
Considering the preceding mobile home analysis, it was felt
the best method to utilize in the Sales Comparison Approach
to value the total subject property -(from which the
contributory value of the mobile homes could be abstracted)
was the effective gross income multiplier. Sales four and
five were the only comparables, which included mobile homes,
included in this report from which effective gross income
multipliers could be abstracted. Sale four, based on 1987
data, indicates an effective gross income multiplier (EGIM)
of 3.83 ($47,000 V. $122,729). Effective gross annual
income for sale five was not available, however, income for
nine months was. If it is assumed that monthly income
remains constant for the last three months of 1988 for this
sale, and EGIM of 2.96 ($90,000 /. $30,373) is indicated.
This is a 1990 sale, however, income is for 1988.
Based on these two sales, a range in effective gross income
multipliers of 2.96 to 3.83 is indicated. In my opinion,
more weight should be given to sale five as it is a smaller
park, has more similar mobile homes to subject, and is a
more recent sale. An EGIM of 3 is considered appropriate
for subject:
$71,766* @ 3 = $215,298
Say $215,000
*Projected effective gross income for subject - see Income
Capitalization Approach.
The contributory value of subject mobile homes is estimated
as follows:
Indicated Value by Sales Comparison
Less: Estimated Value of Property
Excluding Mobile Home
Contributory Value of Mobile Homes
This computes to $12,636/unit.
Approach = $215,000
= 76,000
_ $139,000
7.
Reed d cd000ciolea, .onc.
INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH
In the Income Capitalization Approach, the current rental
income is shown with deductions for vacancy and credit losss
and operating expenses. A conclusion about the prospective
net operating income of the property is developed. In
support of this net operating income estimate, operating
statements for the previous years may be reviewed, together
with available operating -cost estimates. An applicable
capitalization method and appropriate capitalization rate
are developed for use in computations that lead to an
indication of value by the income capitalization approach.
The following definitions are necessary before applying the
income capitalization approach to the subject property:
"Potential Gross Income (PGI) is the total potential income
attributable to the real property at full occupancy before
operating expenses are deducted. Potential gross income may
refer to the level of rental income prevailing on the date
of the appraisal or expected during the first full month or
year of operating, or to the periodic income anticipated
during a holding period."9
"Effective Gross Income (EGI) is the anticipated income from
all operations of the real property adjusted for vacancy and
collection losses. This adjustment includes losses incurred
due to nonoccupancy, turnover, and nonpayment of rent by
tenants •1I10
"Net Operating Income (NOI) is the actual or anticipated net
income remaining after all operating expenses are deducted
from effective gross income, but before mortgage debt
service and book depreciation are deducted."
"Overall capitalization Rate (RO) is an income rate
total property that reflects the relationship bet'
single year's net operating income expectancy or an
average of several years' income expectancies and
price or value; it is used to convert net operating
into an indication of overall property value.02
for a
green a
annual
total
income
9American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The Appraisal
of Real Estate (Chicago: American Institute of Real Estate
Appraisers, Ninth Edition, 1987), P. 411.
'o Ibid, P. 411.
"Ibid, P. 412.
'2lbid, P. 412.
70
.d 64P d4daci7� 6.nc.
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd .ul
"Direct Capitalization is a method used to convert an
estimate of a single year's income expectancy, or an
annual average of several years' income;:.,expectancies,
into an indication of value in one direct step --either
by dividing the income estimate by an appropriate income
rate or by multiplying the income estimate by an
appropriate factor.""
r
"American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, The
Appraisal of Real Estate (Chicago: American. Institute of
Real Estate Appraisers, Ninth Edition, 1987), P. 417
71
ell d JY"0CI.?•IPA. .J'Y/f.
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd.
1
MOBILE HOME PARK RENT COMPARABLES
Comparable #1
- City View Park Estates, 2201 South Powell,
Springdale, AR
- Spaces Available - 143
- Monthly Rent Per Space - $150
- Utilities Available - All City - up to $30 for gas,
up to $30 for electric, and up to $15 for water
included in monthly rent.
- Vacancies - 19 (5 spaces & 14 mobile homes)
- Park Owns 112+/- mobile homes which are rented
weekly in the $60 - $110 range (includes space).
The average rental rate for the park mobile homes is
$85 - $90 per week. There is also a*small frame
house on one of the spaces that is rented for $70
per week.
There is an on -site managers office.
Rent survey date was 7-24-91.
Comparable #2
- Razorback Mobile Home Park, 55 E. 15th, Fayetteville
- Spaces Available - 24
- Monthly Rent Per Space - $95
- Utilities Available - All City - None included in
monthly rent.
- Vacancies - 1
- park does not own any units - only rent the spaces;
$50 deposit
- Rent survey date was 3-92
Comparable #3
- Southgate Village, 2331 S. School, Fayetteville
- Spaces Available - 21, 9 trailers, 6 cottages, & 1
apartment
- Monthly Rent Per Space - $75, $150-$175/month for
trailer
- Utilities Available - All City- Water included in
monthly rent
- Vacancies - 1 Trailer
- $100 deposit on trailers
- Rent survey date was 3-92
4.
72
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd wed d'Wbaaunlea, .9nc.
Comparable #4
Western Hills Mobile Home Estates, 2757 W. 6th,
Fayetteville
Spaces Available - 110; There are;40 park owned
mobile homes
Monthly rent for trailers - $200 to $325
- Utilities Available - All City - None included in
monthly rent
$135 deposit on trailers
- Rent survey date was 3-92
4.
Comparable #5 y.
Trailwood Mobile Home Park, Mt. Comfort Road,
Fayetteville
- Spaces Available for rent - 70
- Monthly rent per space - $75
- Utilities Available - All City - None included in
monthly rent
- Vacancies - 3
- Rent survey date was 3-92 I
Summary �.
.r...
The comparables indicate a range in space rentals from $75
to $150. The high end is City View in Springdale. City
View pays a good part of the tenant's utilities. It appears
the typical range, where utilities are not included in the
monthly rent, is $75-$95. Comparables one, three, and four
also include trailer rentals. Comparables three and four
indicate a monthly rental range of $150-$325. Water is
included in the rent on comparable three. Comparable one
indicates weekly rental rates for mobile homes. The typical
rate computes to $340 to $360 per month and includes
utilities up to $30 for gas, up to $30 for electric, and up
to $15 for water. This comparable is the most similar to
the subject operation, however, the mobile homes on
comparable one are inferior to subject units.
A recap of subject rental rates indicates that each of the
units rents for $135 per week except Units 5, 10, 11, and 1.
Unit 5 rents for $425/month, unit 10 $140/week, unit 11
$155/week, and unit one is occupied by the property owner.
Unit one is the largest of the mobile homes and is in good
condition. I would estimate a weekly rental rate at the
upper end of the subject unit range, say $155 including
utilities. All rents include utilities except number 5
which is all electric. The tenant pays the electric bill on
number 5.
73
v .- 1 ,� 'I 1 / , .rl r.�r !_ _ J .f ; I ,� \ '••..•,` 1 rl l J
' �. r . '. � I: � _. 1. !p t - � •Jr 1 - tl1 � r1i ''�` I' :_
L . / •rw rp ♦. Jf �
V 1 "l 1 �, ,f...I 11; _ t L .1 -j �F I �,1 •' T yti �t
MTIOM ' Y •� r r i. • B• I. • 1-.
Y / ` •I\
f' $F
J7 v 1. 1YjLcL
Y • rw I , • .: :J. 11,
I- I
11J' i. , '... rw•rrlwu � -
._1� f� y1\.I I•" ♦ •n _11 rYr�• V.' -'•rI l'..• ' I
S •r.;/(�.�,J
..•.• r._ fI 1... )'_ fl I •a /1 i. 1 .r `\ h 1 ♦: I
`r•, r ' ' :. /..'.
;, r' 1.1 `J 11( ♦. �!
{{ lIl ` , 1 I {
1
\• /kt1±
T\L r wyl1-• •a r irL`I�I I` I TJJ3;.1 l
in �•(' 1 _ � �'�.i 'I � �II� yy 1_. F 1 i ''!.. �•—r\/ J�11\1 1 • LI LJI'••
1 ., 1 J . . !•` ' I. • Ir. / /-r. •.li �� t 1
I,1 '1 •"t J J:YTg
�'' _,I; 4,1 .•- 1/ I I ..• r • • • %Lr. s-, .j '' ^;I I I I I , .ar...1.. • }; 1{4I
1. 1 f ) ,{ . I It'k r .. � t 1. .., I. I ., . I - • . ! it i'
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd. `4no°ccalpo, 'Yn�
Subject rental rates are considered market rates with
utilities included.
Potential annual gross income is estimated. as follow:
7 Units
@
$135/week
x
52
weeks
= $49,140
1 Unit
@
$140/week
x
52
weeks
= 7,280
1 Unit
@
$155/week
x
52
weeks
= 8,060
1 Unit
@
$425/month
x
12
months
= 5,100
1 Unit
@
$155/week
x
52
weeks
= 8,060
Vacant Space @
$ 75/month
x
12
months
=
900
Rent for
Encroachments
= 1,200
Potential
Gross
Income
=
$79,740
Vacancy/Credit Loss
Mr. Hatch indicated that his vacancy in 1991 amounted to 22
days. This computes to less than 1% vacancy considering ten
mobile home units. If rents were at the same level in 1991
that they currently are, then the dollar vacancy/credit loss
would have been 11.3% ($61,738 Int./$69,580 potential not
including owner's unit, vacant space & encroachment = 88.7%
occupancy). However, rents probably were lower in 1991.
The comparables indicate a vacancy range of 4% to 13.3%.
Comparable one is the most similar to subject and indicated
13.3%, however, again this park has inferior mobile homes
and has a heavier tenant turnover.
I would expect that a vacancy/credit loss rate of 10% is
realistic for subject on an annual basis. Tenants in the
subject park typically sign 6 month leases. If rent is not
paid, the owner turns the utilities off. Mr. Hatch indicated
this happened only twice in 1991.
The one vacant space without a mobile home apparently is not
being promoted for rental. Also, the history has not been
good for receiving rent for the encroachment.
Annual vacancy/credit loss is estimated as follows:
$79,740 @ .10 = $7974 Annual
Vacancy/Credit Loss
Effective gross income is indicated to be:
$79,740 - $7974 = $71,766
75
Reed ef cd
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd. aoocia,Ceo, gxc.
This represents a 16.2% increase over 1991, however,
includes the owners unit which was not included in 1991
income. The owner's unit could obviously be utilized for
rental purposes.
Operating Expenses
Operating expenses in 1989 were 52.1%, in 1990 were 41%, and
in 1991 were 38.5%. The expense ratios included a
replacement reserve for short-lived items, particularly
furniture, however, did not include an allowance for
management.
City View Park Estates in Springdale indicated a 54.8%
operating expense ratio in 1990, including a replacement
reserve and salaries for management. This park is in
inferior condition to subject, however, is substantially
larger. City View involves weekly rentals as does subject.
Overall, I would suspect the operating ratios to be similar
on City View and the subject property.
In my opinion, an annual operating expense ratio of 55% is
appropriate, including reserves for replacement and
management. The management expense could take the form of
furnishing the owners unit to an on -site manager at no
charge plus payment of a small salary. Management makes up
slightly over 16% of the total projected operating expense
ratio.
Further support for the projected operating expense ratio
comes from New Hope Mobile Home Park in Rogers that
experienced a 49.6% operating expense ratio in 1988. New
Hope consisted of 92 spaces and included mobile home
rentals.
Annual operating expenses are estimated as follows:
$71,766 @ .55 = $39,471
Net Operating Income
Net operating income is computed as follows:
Effective Gross Income = $71,766
Less: Operating Expense = (39,471)
Net Operating Income = $32,295
76
Re
PHOTOGRAPHS ed I `d000cealea, Snc.
.
COMPARABLE RENTAL #1 - CITY VIEW PARK ESTATES
COMPARABLE RENTAL #2 - RAZORBACK MOBILE HOME PARK
77
cgs.. .,y .� • �' 1p;. tlNttTr4!
V --•,,.R. ,. a `P1 ,a •*fi -.
F •� I ♦.t�. P ...n A ✓
• ✓ \ �J is 1 \ L•�
n .. Y
7#'•. � v
.Ii :q 1.•
�•• •• a
P.
®1si"A �;�INJ '1 i::� •: '^����ay! '•', fI s!'�.lflr17s.7�
iMhi
:° ••• ._:._tee
I++T
�• om• 11
• U.iYY
' M
.t
' Iq yi•'
£1cP
W1 P
Sin •• .
�f �V r+•
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd.
Capitalization Rate
Rp
Because most
properties are purchased with
debt and
equity
capital, the
return on
investment component
of the
overall
capitalization rate
must satisfy the
market
return
requirements
of each
investment position.
Lenders must
anticipate
receiving
a competitive
interest
rate
commensurate
with the
perceived risk or they
will not
make
funds available.
Similarly, equity investors must anticipate receiving a
competitive equity yield commensurate with the perceived
risk or they will divert their investment funds elsewhere.
The capitalization rate for debt is called the mortgage
constant (RM). It is the ratio of the annual debt service
to the principle amount of the mortgage loan.
The equity investor also seeks a return on and a return of
the equity investment. The rate used to capitalize equity
income is called the equity dividend rate (RE). The equity
dividend rate is the ratio of equity dividend to the amount
of equity. For appraisal purposes, the equity
capitalization rate for the subject property is the
anticipated return to the investor, usually for the first
year of the holding period.
The following terms are currently indicated in the local
market for commercial loans of the subject market.
8.5% Interest Rate (not fixed for full term)
75% Loan to Value Ratio
10 Year Amortization
.1487828 Annual Constant
The equity dividend rate for the subject property is
estimated to be 11% (See 2-1-92 issue of the "Appraiser
News" for fourth quarter 1991 equity dividend rates on
retail investments). The upper end of the range indicated
by the "Appraiser News" was selected due to the risk
involved with used mobile home rental. However, subject
units do have substantial remaining economic life.
11
:w
R,P,d dr �a%aaeia/pd, �nc.
Income Capitalization Approach, Cont'd.
The band of investment or weighted average formula for
deriving an overall rate when the mortgage constant and
equity dividend rates are known is:
RO = M x RM + (1-M) x. Rg
Therefore: RO = (.75 x .1487828) + (.25 x .11)
RO = .112 + .028
RO = 14%
The following market abstracted rates were obtained:
Whisler Mobile Home Park 1986 NOI of
$61,750 /. $477,000 Sales Price = 12.9%
New Hope Mobile Home Park - 1986 NOI of
$57,928.05 V. $470,000
Sales Price = 12.33%
These sales
are older
and only
give fair support to the
overall rate
indicated
by Band of
Investment.
The overall rate indicated by Band of Investment will be
utilized in the value computations.
Value Computations
Value = Net Operating Income / Cap Rate
Value = $32,295 V. .14
Value = $230,679
Say $230,000
The contributory value of subject mobile homes can be
estimated by subtracting the indicated value of the land and
spaces derived in the Sales Comparison Approach:
Overall Value = $230,000
Less: Land/Spaces/etc.
From Sales Comparison
Approach = ( 76,000)
Contributory Value of
Mobile Homes in Place &
Ready for Rental = $154,000
"e
ii
J' ,Pd d .doaacia4o, Inc.
RECONCILIATION
Reconciliation is the part of the valuation process in which
the appraiser attempts to resolve differences among the
value indications derived from the application of the
approaches. The conclusion drawn in thereconciliation is
based on the appropriateness, the accuracy, and the quantity
of the evidence in the entire appraisal.
Cost Approach = $224,000
Sales Comparison Approach = $215,000
Income Capitalization Approach = $230,000
The Cost Approach is based,
substitution. This princip
and holds that no prudent
existing property than the
construct improvements of
without undue delay. Other
to the cost approach are:
externalities; and, highest
in part, upon the principle of
Le is basic to the Cost Approach
investor would pay more for an
cost to acquire the site and
equal desirability and utility
appraisal principles that relate
Supply and demand; balance;
and best use.
The strength of the Cost Approach is the availability of
good supporting cost data through Marshall Valuation
Service. The weaknesses are that subject improvements are
not new and do suffer from accrued depreciation and, also,
there is a lack of good recent land sales in the
neighborhood.
Certain principles are also basic to the Sales Comparison
Approach: Substitution; supply and demand; balance; and,
externalities. Again, the principle of substitution is very
important. This principle states that the value of a
specific property generally is set by the price necessary to
acquire a substitute property of equivalent utility.
The strength of the Sales Comparison Approach is in the
valuation of the subject property, excluding the mobile
homes. Four mobile home park sales were examined and have
been included in this report. The sales are older, however,
were considered the best sales available. The sales were
compared to subject and adjustments made for differences.
Numerous adjustments were required, however, are believed to
be market supported. There was limited data to utilize in
applying the Sales Comparison Approach to value the total
subject property. However, an additional sale was examined
and, along with sale four, was utilized to develop an
appropriate EGIM for subject. This multiplier was applied
to subject's projected effective gross income to arrive at a
total value of subject by the Sales Comparison Approch. The
estimated property value excluding the mobile homes, was
then subtracted to arrive at an estimated contributory value
of the mobile homes.
m
Reconciliation, Cont'd
The application of the Income Capitalization Approach is
based on the operation of value influences and appraisal
principles. The appraisal principles:. considered are:
Anticipation and change; supply and demand;' substitution;
balance; and, externalities. Anticipation and change are
very important. The principle of anticipation states that
value is created by the expectation of benefits to be
derived in the future. Income Capitalization methods
attempt to forecast future benefits and estimate their
present value. The Income Capitalization Approach also
focuses on how change affects the value of income -producing
properties.
The strength of the Income Capitalization Approach is the
availability of good income/expense history on the subject
property and the availability of reasonably good comparable
rentals. The projected net operating income is believed to
be realistic for the subject property. Band of Investment
was relied on in arriving at an appropriate overall cap rate
for subject. The Income Capitalization Approach, in my
opinion, produced a supportable value conclusion for the
total subject property.
Final Value
In the final value analysis, each of the valuation methods
was given consideration with most weight placed on the Sales
Comparison and Income Capitalization Approaches:
Real Property = $ 76,000
Contributory Value of
Mobile Homes = 154,000
In Place & Ready for
Rental
Total = $230,000
83
PART IV - ADDENDA
i
o S ✓a..e_✓ fILEU Ii
.iUSSA1dD
ND CCONVEYiNG AS ON IN COMMONS BY
TTENTIRETY, JOINTLY FUR REDOIIR�D i 1
MNOW ALL MIEW Y THESE P*ESINT$I •1 p1, g
That .e Jeege J, Schnder and Alice L. Schnder, '8'1^ISON1�CDuhT RA
ew,eb..d wad .No, $w&n.h.e ailed Ore, er ..d M wn.w«• %S%" µEYE
ibn .4 the in of One 0x11.. (11.001 end eilwr good and vei.✓_.1e W A Fl•Ia" �OZ G1.EK
wr.40_ lean Win l n hand paid by Allen C. Batch, it single RCUI
• parson,•
.e'S17x d 4..ta. I
r
S.
01317200355540 •
.r may,,
N.el,u ley Galled Orrrlw, do hereby urn. brg.a and sail pale rho
sold Grantw and thiW"•o barn and sold^., w blbNne d crlwd I
AAA, Vashington county. elero M Arlu,...., Io-n:
A part of the Southweat Quarter of the Southwest Quitter of S.etion 33.
`a Township 16 North. Range JO West, Wing Bore particulr.rl)w described as
�;3 follows, to -wit: Beginning at a point ou the vest 1St. of U.B. Highway
{ 71, which point is 811.9 feet North of the South 11,.1 of said 40 acre
"� • tract, for a beginning point to the lands herein hying conveyed; thence
�O 7 7 wet approximately 200 feet: thence South 150 fee:;. thence West
•'
'� t approximately 100 feet; thence South approxinat'Ly 255.9 feat{ thence
en
)p East 150 feat{ thce Worth 100 feeti thence E.it 23 feetl thence North
a 83 feeti thence in a Northeasterly direction F! feet to a point which I
is 66 feet West of the West line of said Htgh+ay; thence rant 66 feet
to the West line of said Highway; theacu North 185.9 feet to the pluce
of beginning.
yt a
I CERTIFT UNDER PF21ALTT OF FALSE SWEARING 'MAT AT LEAST THE LOCALLY CORRECT MO'•t
t
AUNT OF DOCUMEKTART STAMPS HAYS BEEN PL..CED ON THIS INSTRU)elNT, '+
j Signed: I.C�Lr1�J i� UYO /
Grantees
i c
r 1
I..'
{• Address 4
hTO HAVE AND TO HOLD Ibe said lends sad appulwanon therwntn babnglnO unle IM sold Orontes and Grant..'.
I•, Min and MMyne. brew[. And n, the sold (ksnldrs. hereby tnrer.anl that n are lawfully .N..4 of sold land and
porniew• that it,. Came Y .,nincumb.rw, and loss w. will trays .rrnl sea defend the into to me said lands agalnn all 1
legal tame WN.ewee. .1
And n, w fInneetM Orentoeo, heresy release end reiMdulalt unto the MidOraMe. our rnpectiw dowerlcunwy oral .�
homestead M ana to Mid land..
i i /lam\ ,,�
' I!. VetrWESS dM Mad. '4 ...N on this 3 day of 'r�"— , io f?
re
r THIS INSTRUMENT PREPA BED BY:
r !a C?
OREER ABSTRACT COMPANY ,}ESSE SCFU fit ISw11 i
. 31 East Center _' cCcA (Seal) d
• Fey.ltevllle, Arkansas 72701
i Al ICA-L. ecuinyR Seal)
i
I.; ACKNDWLEDGM114T ;.
I;STATE OP AM(ANSAO • ..
I-.'
oeraw, QJa It s- kI
. . '•P�r this day of 1 b.4 n L. a notary Wale, p.noa.Ily appeared
• leaae.Il. Sthader and Alice L. Schader, husband end wife,
• known to . 4q MMa
pr?`.n1 re be 'hi ere pone whasa am nes art eubealb.d toM rWongoing NMan rwhl and
�e
! acknowlec " tIly d e.aculw I...mama M teawereiM ppo... thn Tribe .1
In wllhal•a.Mweel I.Mrwnte m my hand and officio. seal. '
/�
My Oernmleabn - •.
I Ii BAILEY DRIVE U
I i
1 71 i
oca# ap
TXIJTTT.
DIXON FAYErlfV/(Lf.
OwaA'f 1
:6' (2(0
•- I • MOUNTAIN :....-.
I.
DR. ¢
F
W
SMITH
o Z
W
J
J
RUSH
n
A 4
p � 1
DIANE floss \ •1
ui a 1 1
WILSON $ I
WILSON '- • t t I
.H
p,�LL t
TJ(
AVE. j
`; I
1•
CIRCLE DR. W i E
PIER DR. I O.
1____— E
2
0
N �
A w
(NURCNDR.
1
¢O
2
R•
ZONE X
4 Flood Plain Map
LIMIT OF
DETAILED Si
City of Greenland
050217
UP "RM68
UIU
[ii EflCOYs.
245
ZONE X
I
NEI
ZONE X I-
1239
[Ill
ZONE X
•
onl ap
CG1/57RUE� /AVW�/GTS
Xlal• ----... .. __
-1:
34."/ R ii.-
te•••• ,,,., TRANS/ /ONZi�A�6 �_ .-
,,. 7./ SLOPE L.;
^ I.,... '4/ `• . •.L..
silks , _.: . •..,
list. _;
5
4
6r O I
•.
.. IL O
l {� I, 0
1 ,Yl • 11 • III. S
i.
M1 t •
l.
{J °mss ' 4p/
». nti. �»,., • n... n..., J 53 ' •O,C R'OpRT
47
•I „L: �.� . I»l. • .,.1, Il. .YR.• / °pERry
,,,... /
. .-
II-.. �,.,.
»..
' r ,
''' J6 •YIL,
rll
S'00FECi '•••• u.,s ,'
J ".Ls ( -ELEV. /250 p
4
1.,..
5O • FR
'»,.• RUNWAY'T£CT/ •••,.•
.ZONE (34 .
1,,...^�' Y.L. /-' ' • l' -�.
m..• un.) + 6 n •�
».• V
11,1., ran n n, -n..• zn/.^. r
, 34 / RPZ i; • GB '
TRANSYT/GW Z
7.•/ SLOPE
-. 7 6
I-
--I
J s�
Tracf Nu.nbcr )
-... 1 "I: is 4..
r XHIBIT "AI"
PROPERTY MAP
.. 1 -LAND.8 tASEMENTACQU1STIC
• CTFY'OF FAYETTEVILLE
lr
�q ,vo�es� FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
, s AJO I. All plan Eerlrrr• are !•.m Aari.I Ma/gra 1, taken Oct. '017". .•"�y_4 Rai/r.Id E !pl Cbuhw+s given oa.s Ow.*r. MI ..6Tf /r.' M6v ✓ 1Ooa DRAKE FIELD _
Mt err,ere• ,.erd. FAYETTEVILLE MUNICIPAL AIRPOR
o r..ed,/rrel✓a-:•+ OBSTRUCTION MAP
C=— .4] $rare/ street
..."_._ Drainage Ma•nd YaR[LURD C01I4LTOq EMCRRERL M. c11 evil dh,q _.�.� .e♦ee B . _ .r. M1.a i
iIrflIttt1;l'
i
'
r.,
i
n2
u
u
r
u
u
r
r
Ve
6
O
N
N
N
N
N
N
<1
u
¢
3
3
Z
5
W
6
O>
a
tY
1In
t;;
Q
z
.A
Q4
¢
UU
N
. ft
W
J
L
y
O
N]
l
6
a
W
• • • • • • • • • •
Y
O
V
J
J
y
y
§
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
a
• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
N
—
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...•... . . . . .. . •--
—
—
uu
.
2
•
�•
o
j 2
4<
m
V
Y
V
J
••
v
3
W
A
W
m
W
-J
.Si
2
u
V
•Z
L
V
S
y
L
y4
Z
WI
• . . • •
v.
1
4W
;
N
V
y
V
T
-J
V.
of
J;
!
�
o
i
U
y
`
,
it
1:
•
n - N-
111
Y O
..
l7
.
<
t
u0
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I,
o
e
y
O
QQ
I
• . • • S S3{
up
G
C
ri
¢
J
W
W
O
W
Y
W
J
O
<
F
O
z
Y
I�
y`
i
r2
�(A^(,
•.
0
y
Q
W
V..
M
p
V
<
J
r
g
N
•
y
Q
S•
>
O
w
0
0
0
Y
u
6
J
Y
Y
<
flaw
O
r
N
¢y
yJ
2
N
p,•
O
a
W
0
W
O
o
J
p
;
l
N
.1
..
p8
x
{¢u
O
W
Z
O
.i.
y
1Y
y
S
Q
O
r
8
J
r
0
'a
Z
•Q
O
N
S
y
g
y
<¢
0]
:.
'(
O
2
Z
W
•'
t$
W
J
r
0
0
I
O¢
.
3
3
W
S)
f
U
J
S
in
1.1
O
W<
J
W
y<
S
r-
Z
W
W
D
•
1
L
O
Y
J
J
�N
S
m✓
N
F>
Y r
y
.,
id
W
2
Nl
J
44
y
004r
z4
G<
a
�'
vpi
W
O
7
O
(3,
f
f
f
o<
O
'„
¢¢
W
N0<
'1
U
ILl -a
__II_ILI
----
4
V
u
T
NR�•
g2
<O
�1
W
l
$W
6
J
N
W
ul
J<
O
O
F
J<h
J;`YlpW¢
>
ll,i
ZN
U
Z_
'¢`
J
y
u¢i
i
j¢
2
y
w
O
i
NiiO
O
]
JiOOyyW
N
i
ptl
N0m
WNNW
Z
r
i
<
W
6O_
I60
0
U
3
_O<O
O
p<
O_
fIO
0
W
y
a
O.-¢
W
JO
'
O
O
Q
JtJJ
g.
M<;
U
N
N
p
J
6
N
p
0
0
0
Y
N
p
T r
{
W
N
N
r
N
x
e
3 W W Si O W W
„ 3 a u$
S.
W L
- r xW r r U -
m
as U
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .
j y, •.•. W; -
s¢ ry V u aJ 6
C U 2_
;s$ n8s8d�a
I - o
11 I
U c"
• • • • T_ • • •
C
w
e a < k 8
0
f • . . • . . • . . • . . . . . • • • . •
0
r e
o
•
t 2 m rY S O W U
ry 5 8 3 b s e# YS.
$
Y O F Y r0 N F F N O W -
Pt 88u
---
I r W g 1
I C
pp$ - ¢ ¢ Y u<YOO= N ZQIII9Cw
F Z N LL an 6 O WOOQQ1 J O W OUWIQ< O N J } QO 6 y•O r J yy N m Z Z W< J W r< Z < N •. < Y y F• W WZ3
T r/ O - uI 0r< Z Q<O¢ ¢ 5�'V I} O< � `;<} m 2; Z
44
-----r
U W
m i u o 3 N } ¢ m J j< i W- O•
< O I m „ J; mO - N J}_ r W J W 6 W 6 O< W u<OWC[eiO O 2 rz I ZR O O WZ W Y W O •m O O J O<= UM15 O> O N o O W Z Jm W NF 'r6Q <¢ m6
8 U Y Y W O W W W¢ 6 U UO Z Y O m Qp <Irrrrv••} J J V V 0 0 L' Z` w l `♦ 4i <2 OWJ- r¢ Q W J U 0 JU N N W b l C N 6 U V Y N 6 i �• < W N N 2 I �• N
90
_
Cl
0
r
r
46
r
-
-
r
y:
W
j
O
b
-
N
O
in
a,
F
S
.
yy
7
33�
3
3
u�
s
{O
•�S
-
Vw
j
j
r
U
6
m
u
W
41
C'1
8
3
.4
<
SQ
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •<
p<
Z
T W
Q
W
Y
Y
a
2
U• . . . • . . • . • •
=
U
UU
•
. . . . . . . • . . • • •
Y O
.
i
ft
n
n
a
r.
. . . . . . . . . •
.
e
•
p
mot{
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . .
a
I
K!
Z
. •�
N
Y
=
Q
1.
WJ
Y
S
a
it
0<
•'
6Q
Q
W
<
N
J<
F
u
W
n
f
•
O
u
O
N
M1
z
W
of
8
Q
O
C
R
6
Q
Z
Y
O
!<
O
W
J
]
N
M
l
<
<
Y
W
•
T
r.
M1
F>
Yf
tl1
W
W
Q
Q
I
O
J
J
Q_
O
O
Q
=
]Q
II
]
•.
O
O
Q
•µ•
Q
p
SS
W
lY
;
J
W
<.
W
i<
Q
N
J
]
f
Y
I
F
W
F
<
3c
yYj
a
•
`i
6
•
Z
J
C
W
J
•
N
Z
.�
Z
rN
$p�
W<
J
qW
~t
y�
Y•
t 2
f,
O
W
Y¢_
W
-.
J
<
t<
(J
O
i
•<]¢
"
N
W
O
i
0
3
F<
N
0<
L
i
Z
L.
w
•.
:
C
>O
;_>
—
M>
3<<
;<
i
S
:�
.
G
O<
N;
J
i
V
N:
O_:
w
-
u
N
J
Q
]
W
W
1
U
N
]
r
a
C
Z
~
C
N}
W
V
6
.
W
J
N
J
s
J{
F
N
N
Q
N
sL
17l
<
>
W
F
N
Y
W
J<
j
O
Y
VJ
q
W
¢p
•-
N
W
J
6]
(i
I
O
J
a
i i
w
F
Y
W
W
QO
W
6
Q
l
W
"
S
U
l
O
j
N
PW
`
N
2
2
I
W
r
2
�•
N
Q O
2
Cj
Y
N
N
�O
O4
O
O
}W
Yi
CoOa
STf
O
N
;
Q„
W
q
W
N
'
N
W
W
t
~{
a
a
�
<
Q
0
<
m a
<
W<<
;;
(
!I
u
.�
S
S
O
N
m
4o
J¢
oO
8
.l
F
F
VY
M1
F
S
J
M1
•.
S
O
J
a
8
O
J
y
J
•.
C
C
O
W
S
J
0
•�
O
O
O•
W
J
O<
J
:�
a
a S
O
O
O
J
-•
✓<
•
I
.
91
c
8
�M
V
�
u
r
Ui
w
a
w
�
3
Y
3
g
e
MI
N
R
h
.
(q
(q
�
6
WZ
O
W
g
•{�
C
6
I
LL
LL
U
Q
o
w
W
p.
W
W
t�
W
$
o
i
r
c>
• . . . . • . • . • . . . . • . . . . .
.••••• S S ....... •
e
OL
.QO{
S
$
W
••••
U
W
q
Y
U
a
u
8
m38$d
o
.
.
...................
<
................... •
x
. . . • . • • . • . • • • • • • • • •
U
LL
p
C
• • • •
O
i
3
g
§
O
. . . . . . . . . . . .
'
$
o
dI
J
•. • . . . . .
. . • . . •. . • •. . •. .
•
Y
gg
VI
r
N
0
3
0
of
J
♦
W
$
0
w
0
0
v1
Z
z
u♦
•V
6
O
W
U
F
]p
iQi1
r
2
O
1. WWS
WSS
8
a
1
N
W
p
8
r
u�
O
Z
Z
W
l S
li
O
J
,
2
•
Q
O
W
r
W
{
Q
m
!
G
N
Z
W
a
Q
F
Z
W
r
T
W
r
J
S
W
S
W•
V
'.
U
'•
J
6
N
Z
r: Z
a
W
F
J
.•
Q
Q
F<
r
<
x
r
O<
O
x
N(
Y
0
0
4_=
o
<
a•
J
Z
7
u
-
-
:J.l -
-
--------
-------------
--
---
1O
j
jR
Wo_i0SC
wt
CC
Y
W
U
J
F
•-
N
W
Z-
J
m
6
Q
O<
O
JI
`.
V_
U_
p
uo
Jii
O
L
p
O
<
[
I O
8
J
n
••
O
O
6
J
6;
J
LL
;
W
N
N
U
U
O
Y
N
Ly
92
r
T
0
t
.�
7 Y
C
O
w
W
J
°
j
r
°-
2
J
t
3
<
<
a
Z•
O
-.
J
r
Y
a
J
r
L
-
Z
W
O
w
O
°
Q
W
Q
N•
2
]
G
1
LL
San
-
w
r r r r
en a
°
C>
.
• . . . • . . . • . .
• •
•
. . . . •
C(b
a
O
Y
o
CY
• . • . . • • . • • .
. • • . • . . . •
.
• . . • • • • . •
• • . . • • .
• •
_
y
`A
J
r
W
J
.7
J
O
Uj
n88
Q�
Z
Y
L
�•
3tdd
VVJ
W
L
< •••.• •..Q
..••...T-
u . . • • . • . • .
• • • • . • . .
t
a
o
0
W
L
Y
<
6
. .
•
•O
• • . . • ••• •
-. . .
... . .
•• • • • • • •
•Y
• .
•
• • • • • • • • • •
. . . . . . . .
• • • • • • . • • •
• ••
N•
.,
L
o
•.
y
°
O
C
`
0_
T
0
y<
}g
J�
`
•'
L=
Z
J
T``
J;
uQY
6
r
W
Op
O
J
L
z
```
Z
`
Z
f
Y
2
Z
<
6
V
b
L
+
a<
J
F
•Ji
7
N
Y
T
N
O
2
YO
E
E
r
Q
L
K
`
4
YTCiO
.
:::.
3
S
T
]
W
ul
A
,
Ha•ag
F
F
>"
0_a
O
r
W
_
go
J
a;
O
9
Z>
W
i
<
>
Z
<
Y
N
f
°
T
F
N
Q
J
=
^'.
g
Q
Z(
<
O
r.
F
0
S
.
^
C
L
N
T
N
u
F<
<{
I
g
T
J
Y
F
Z O<
N I
i
W
F
T
s
j
6
Q
Z
"
�3
G
W
6
LL
YJ
6
W
6
Y
Q
••
Y
"
J
W
U
w
Y
Q4
•.
a
W
N
U
J
I
N
Z z
N
°
V
2
„
0
W<
N
J
J
Q
:
li
l
li
<
C>
W
1`°]
31
W
53j
Z
O
OW
O
w
O<
Q
Q
O
6°
I
r
J
z
Z
4
W
6
G<<
t
CIO
N
104
O
Z
6
r
Q<
a3
M1 n
bbL
F¢
/(Z•{
V
L..W°
U
<
W YTI
N 01>1<1
2 0
uO4T<
T 6
l<
2 g
a
~
N
C
g
W
;W"
O
Y]
g
i
8
<
i>11101O
<
O;
N°
V
6
W
C
W
s
T
W
L
CJ
b
o
U
C
U
I
{�
N
J4
W
Q
O
y
J
m
2
O°
U
i
i
W
T
Q
Z
U
0
T
Z
O
•'
6
Q
a
W
a
J
N
1•
J`
J
O<
Q 3
g
r
r
N
pO
O
;
O
a¢<
Q 3
W L"
W<
W N
6
0 I
J
J
N
i
Y Z
FY
Z
2
W
✓I
Z}=Z
O
N;
Z
N
Z"°
j
W
Ill
O
J
Q
V
W
6
u
Z
O
V
y
N
Q
U
C
W
•.
2
O
Q>°
f
N
W
W
2
Q
0
O
U
O
J
i_
Q
0
Z
O°
f
W
W
J
Z
6
OO
O
J
G
Q
W
Z
W
W>
O
N
W
W
U
O
6
93
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection: /.2-3-_91
2. Name of Family: /-// j�7jd/C/1
�1
3. Address: .-.t I Ih�dx /da
4. Telephone: Z i'/y6S
-----------26/10
-------16X1a _l_j2b; le _//ocs----------------------
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 5q. ft. for �Y N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area?
7. Adequate Water supply?
B. Adequate Heating System
9. Adequate Electrical System?
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities?
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound?
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved?
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements:
1t .r'c y )t rc nce(kCI — flnvne
I .,. \ ( 1 -1 a I -3..
,
14. In the opinion of thn inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary. QY N
Signed: �_(` Title: DON'S
800W. 11th
Date: t- -3q 11 Fayetteville, Ark. 72701
t6 b
� 1 l I I J
1I Ir�� , �vnG h2S ar� z\rernA'C NeT /I2 r cluck sgsk¢ r+ .LAndQJ
1f
ole 1 h,S 5u$iCn�tyV1� ti ut. !ff t rC•n,outd 1Y\ ecclGc-
move.
'- /7O0CrOX1»7d1e. Cott4/5b B=
11
94
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection: /) - 3 -
2. Name of Family: .'ayeq /y ]d ccA d/I 3. Address: __ft.,. gsnX l4U 42
4. Telephone:
--------IKX.70-n )obl Ae ---- -----------------------------------------------------
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 Sq. ft. for N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each. additional occupant.)
•6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? QY N
7. Adequate Water supply? l V N
8. Adequate Heating System Y N
9. Adequate Electrical System? Y N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? Y N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? Y N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? Y N
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements:
I1ln L'. . ,1 ,.a�C3 4Th" r� I 0 t N -N cep v,l ct_ ak.lcs L'nd hj ck
14
In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE:) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary. OY N
----- ` boi _ abpeecs-- 1.O _ C_ -ire- gaoc _ Cre_ � or
Signed: bv. Title: 71 [ u_MF_SF•RVICE
800W. 11th
Date: 1 -) —c Foyettevil►e, Ark. 72701
95
3.
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection: /.2 - 311
2. Name of Family: �% %Jj /SQ/1
3. Address: 1Rf $ . 8ox /po €3
4. Telephone: JJ �y //�� I / �/
--- l--__�J ors_ _ }'n t i� i t^ l (1 ��10 71 C'r - / T/1 7Q Jy%6,(liL/O_
------------ ----- -----------
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 sq. ft. for �Y N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? Q N
7. Adequate Water supply? N
8. Adequate Heating System Q N
9. Adequate Electrical System? N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? �y N
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements:
(-t+ 6'P2.c4 mIIE PI Y'ne r6T' CrkluP./rey Gvz SI,C*i fl0 tl- fhr kr
►► ay)
1=Aisel o°
14. In the
opinion of the
inspector this Mobile Home
meets
or complies
with
Local
(FAYETTEVILLE
) Codes Requirements and is
safe,
decent and
sanitary . N
--_- 0O5 d a S �6 �'_/1_ AQ _ COY_\d
Signed: Qvl_ Title:
Date: 17-3-91
DON'S
MOBILE HOME SERVICE
Fayetteville, Ark. 72701
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection: /. - 3 - y I
2. Name of Family: Ze%rj b p' eyo re.
3. Address: 6j}. S 9c JoO
4. Telephone:
/Y770 nIzhYsS'me
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 sq. ft. for N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation areal O N
7. Adequate Water supply? (� N
B. Adequate Heating System ( N
9. Adequate Electrical System? N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? (j N
11. is the Mobile Home structurally sound? — See -4-13 Y
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? // N
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local _/ code requirements:
' 4en to
7 e 1.nsaf e -.- n eds to bC £C'dX 2cC�C1 1Ww T* es hmd PC Cof J
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE ) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary. Y N
------ ----
-------------------------
Signed: __ Title:
MOBILE HOMES
SERVICE
800W. urn
Foyettevllle, Ark. 72701
Date: t) -3-9t
97
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection:
2. Name of Family: 1�)CS?S S )annen
3. Address: �ouf2 2< £G)C /6U '
4. Telephone:
hl� (arir�_1 z7&..c cti c a w e_�t- �_ �-- Q,.TU. __L4ez - "`� ____e
,'Yxdl/6 mb-lP o,r7'2 CIRCLE ONE
S. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 Sq. ft. for Y a
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? N
7. Adequate Water supply? N
8. Adequate Heating System a
9. Adequate Electrical System? N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? O N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? Y N
11. List repairs, if necessary, to meet Tlocal code requirements: *;n oh
. ._T nnn\. .. . a . wn ,.w\ ano\ IA ��. CC''SCekd- Iin e.t� 2�.n f (� ' JQ
.1 ,re/euef 'f6SO
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary./ Y) N
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DON'S
Title: MOBILE HOME SERVICE
Signed: v"_� --000 'IL 11th
C7 Fovetteville, Ark. 72701
Date: 3>? — I
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection;
�1 I
2. Name of Family: / flo- 7e?.s fJascn nib3. Address: ��ufe d ROB/Qd *a
4. Telephone:
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 eq. ft. for N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
•6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? 7®f N
7, Adequate Water supply? v N
® N
8. Adequate Heating System
Y N
9. Adequate Electrical System? — •i
Y N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? —
Y N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? —
Y N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved?
Pec }.r is
11. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements: Oe �
i�i_N!C_ -C ^OPr\C +n he ce-seieJ - i73
In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary. N
------------------------------------------------ ------ DON'S
MOBILE HOME SERVICE
11th
Signed: CJY� Title: ve,
/ / [� Fpyette1�
Date: 1� - I
a
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1.
Date of Inspection:
1
2.
Name of Family: '\\
1 c
3.
Address: (oV 2 D
Op
W0X
,11
1 -F 66 7
4.
Telephone:
yX ¢ _ ---h_ le r,-,
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 sq. ft. for () N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation areal N
7. Adequate Water supply? N
8. Adequate Heating System N
9. Adequate Electrical System? Y N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? Y N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? Y N
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements: on e p Q ecQim
cr.ukc� need- liome u'\i cr('q,i.rt ek les,ttrec d-h,h1, taryde_ LR ins�?IIQ
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary/ N
DON'S
Signed: Title:¶)BILE HOME SERVICE
000 W. 11th
Fayetteville, Ark. 7270?
• Date: _ -y-9
0
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1.
2.
3.
4.
Date of Inspection:
\\
Nam`l Maine of Family: eh(5e W003
Address: 6uUtQ S dQX )00 4t-
Telephone:
--------------�`�-XGo_1n��Z�%e--�om�--------------------------------------------
CIRCLE ONE
S. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 5q. ft. for / Y/ N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? H
7. Adequate Water supply? Y N
8. Adequate Heating System Y N
9. Adequate Electrical system? Y N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? Y N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? � Y N
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements: �)n spa Cent ee9e fl
`` fI 1111 }1 11 11 i-r•1--'�-
/loorlo(I— HAw.P 1..;U CPnu ro dxkkk� . I ;cec e -J ;TCA QfV 1(J hQ 1 ni�a1IQd -
1 zJ ; I ` n- &1 k ( I
aX�fs, I CC'S—i�ocKiuC� nu wit' nth mI\ecoJd�-
1
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE ) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary N
------�eo� _ ------------._ it _ -Qom-----------------------
DON'S
.OBILE HOME SERVICE
Signed: ��, y Title: 800 W. 11th
-oye eve e, Ark.
Date:
101
I
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection: I) --C/'9
2. Name of Family: F egr K MAAro
J. Address: Pr. K 16O 4-`1
4. Telephone:
[4X6 S _Z&hly - _ o�C-------------•
CIRCLE ONE
5. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 5q. ft. for N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? Y N
N
7. Adequate Water supply? — —
Y N
8. Adequate Heating System
9. Adequate Electrical System? — a
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? Y a
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? Y N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? Y N
13. List repairs, if necessary, to meet local code requirements: 170 e ppsrenF r ce/cs
eKJe + A;jrsL o /e
11 r* V- e — D J l/
r 1 f0 1' P2 O U11 n,@ nuQ(nrlIaI/
c'k/es �i' s —/aroue ) mnue Wl c In �`)l i�Ps-eeb/oce� )eve —`�-
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local IFAYETTEVILLE ) codes • Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary. 0 N
----"00 7 _ L�l7PAi _ _m _(.Z___CP12Y-C-'------------------------------
DON'S
Signed: Title: `'(1RT1 F Hf1MF SFRVTfF
800 W. 11th
Fayetteville, Ark. 72701
Date: -
102
do
Signed:
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection:
2. Name of Family:
%a/ y nny,
3. Address: //�O4 K50 C ftD /6
4. Telephone:
a
CIRCLE ONE
S. Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 eq. ft. for N
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
6. Adequate kitchen or food preparation area? N
7. Adequate Water supply? Y N
8. Adequate Heating System N
9. Adequate Electrical System? N
10. Adequate Bathroom facilities? [3 N
11. Is the Mobile Home structurally sound? N
12. Can the Mobile Home be moved? N
13. List repairs, sif necessary, to meet local code requirements: flu deferent e
npe/eo - /'ION7(3 c//et/es. et/es, F reS -A. /rJI-fe ncwo /ln
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE ) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary./xl N
DON'S
MOBILE HOME SERVICE
Title: SCOW 11tH
Fayetteville, Ark. 7270'
Date: /_7-
rs
103
MOBILE HOME INSPECTION REPORT
FAYETTEVILLE LAND ACQUISITION PROJECT
1. Date of Inspection: I) -5 '/
/
2. Name of Family: �/')an r nIfs -J i-7 1 YI q
3. Address: h�oAfe Y /pox /DO //
4. Telephone:
CIRCLE ONE
5
6.
7.
8.
12
13
Is there sufficient space (sq. ft.) for the number of family members to
meet the codes requirements? (Federal Requirements - 150 5q. ft. for
the first occupant and 70 sq. ft. for each additional occupant.)
Adequate kitchen or food preparation areal
Adequate Water supply?
Adequate Heating System
Adequate Electrical System?
Adequate Bathroom facilities?
Is the Mobile Home structurally sound?
Y N
Y N
N
Y N
N
N
—I— crluy-c.l
14. In the opinion of the inspector this Mobile Home meets or complies with
Local (FAYETTEVILLE ) Codes Requirements and is safe, decent and sanitary.() N
tsr,
-------�a-. --z - �S '--- -- -- t o LI__ CZ? C� o .-----------------
DON'S
(� Title: `'OBILE HOME SERVICE
Signed: Cam_ "�-� Rnn W 11th
Fayetteville, Ark. 7270'.
Date: I) -5-`j\
102
$CntOU4.E a
(Form 1140)
ogrinavt 04 ar Trrvir
Uyawnr Revenue Srvu
Nrrv(U shown on ream
AT.T.VN C & NA?
-
nCQTW and Loss
g� �p4 t pe 's (Ww rwa. RtMIIC& .�c-!
V,o,,. ,.,.,, rorol" n.,,r.1989
► AOear r ratr� 1040 M rem 1041. 13
► 9ee Ineuvcllee'0t Schedule ((Form 1040 • Your social security number
377 36 0474
3
Srw the kind and location of rental property:
A MOBILE HOME RENTALS-------------
r_vFFNT.AND. AR
a------------------•---------------•----.
C.............
and Royalty Income:
4
4 Rants received ........ 5
n,...elene raewivad...........
.
O altleS Caution: your rental loss may be limited.
2 For each rental property listed on line 1, did you or
your family use It for personal purposes for more than
the greater of 14 days or 10'/. of the total days rentod
al fair rental value during the tax year?
3 For each rental real estate property listed on line 1,
did you actively participate In its operation during the
113
I?
0 Totals
No
G Gf.- Illrrla 11 ' Irrrli l'il IIII.. 1,,1111
6 Advertising . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �O
;li;I,tl Y1IrI1 IIli, jIii �I;n�
7 Auto and travel ..... ... .. .. II, I� 1 III' ,II n Illr n,p ' ,IIII I'1:1 1
g 245. IIllil l,'��;4li I; )IIIIh1 :I5i'
9 Cleaning and maintenance .... ,I'i I' 1,1 'i111�I't,�1
y l'rll r!!'rlr!III"Ir
9 Commissions ............. 1 959
111111; I': tiiIIP' INII'�; Ii
III II�i I. II
10 hill' I� I.:ill.t!��rilll:Iti;ll lrl lllii r;I :I
10 Insurance . .. 9 3 3 . inlairli .,:;U1111.i ILi11rVllrrh; 611; 1;Ih161!,lell..:::.i
i1 Legal and other prolossion at lees ......11
12 Mortgage Interest paid to banks, 26,291. 12 26,291.
etc. (see Instructions) . . . . . . . . . 12'rj41
13 "II'I'' ';III 'I 11 l'i IIII
13 Other interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . In 1. r r II '�i1 �'I' i LI 1
4 273. 4li1i�ii iI�Illiurilliil,'�I'I!!1' IIILIIII:'!
14 Repairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 77. ru!1"1 ytlI �, Ill4l ilrr I' 1rJ '1 '1111 r IIr11Ij
I!.II r'Ir 1 IAI IIII 1IIIi II 11 i�tl
t5 supplies 930. r rlillr 111,11 '1
16 1,11 yI Ili ' � t,_;i
16 Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Irl,r j1I ,'tl 'rUli II II,,Ir:I Il 111 i
13 004. rr. r r ire.
17 Ir 'I ' r IIII; 1, IIIIil I1: 1111'1 "
17 Utilltle9 (See IesWCUOn5)
i11 I' 111
,
19 Wages and salaries. . . . . . 19 ;1 ,: Ip,
19 O 111111,;1111 1 ;111:';11 Ills '4111111 III' i:llli j��'lllll ll lilll�
Other ► -------------------- 425. ! 1
TRASH ---------
!:l'
i1i li'Illrl l'ii X111"°11
4 4 . .... 1,1 r '11y11111r1 II'I li t'r r' ra
PEST CONTROL ......• t9 858 l,l r'n it- lll;,rlr;Ill;ll,r! ;i
LAWN CARE j; l: !:I r;rrra I;:ur�, JII:�i�i thrill ?!1
REPLACEMENT FURNITURE 2 627•
52 328.
20 52 328.
20 Add lines B through 19 20
21 Depreciation expense or depletion 21 12 407 .
21 124O7.
(see instructions) . . . . . . . . . . . I' 1 I I r I,II II III'IIIII Il'r
64 735. ;'rl' ;, 11111 III „rlllllt'Irr ri
22 Total expenses. Add lines 20 and 21 . 22 11 'i 'I
111, lr!I ill 1'i 111111 ll 111 Illrr
23 income or (loss) from rental or • r.r , 11,1 111111 11114 1 :1 :.
royally pmpemi ts. Subtract line 22 ,III !'III IIII 1 1i I!llll I I 11 11 f 11'11
from tine 4 `rents) or line 5 IIII,i l li IIII I ;Ilil I �I'I Ililllllll'llll "'l ill.
(loyalties). II the result is a (loss). ,i ii � I ri' 1, 111, 111 it '
see t lut i bons to find out it you —14 7 59 . 11 'tjjillillllli I'II III11,1:1I'll,r'r IIII
must file Form 6199. . . . . . . . . . 23 Ip';jl'„" I' r Lno"nill Il llniiallillilil'it ill.'lll
24 Deductible rental (loss). Caution: Your I I
rental loss on line 23 may be limited.
See Instructions to find out It you 7 59
must file Form 9582 ........24 14 .
25 Income. Add rental and royalty income from line 23. Enter the local income
29 Losses. Add royalty losses from line 23 and rental losses Irom line 24. Enter the total (losses) hero.. .. .
27 Combine amounts on lines 25 end 26. Enter the net income or (loss) here .. . .
29 Net term rental Income or (loss) from Form 4835. (Also complete line 43 on page 2.)'. .
29 Total rental and royalty income or (loss). Combine amounts on lines 27 and 28. Enter the result hors. II
Pails II, III, and IV on page 2 do not apply to you, enter the amount from line 29 on Form 1040, line 18.
Otherwise, Include the amount from line 29 in the total
,.. Inpructiona, Copydah r form ton wr01y Unbar Pi.0 Sollwan
For Paperwork R.ducoon Pct Houca, 1
— I a . I J7.r
27 I -14,759.
29 -14,759.
schedule E(Form 1040) 1959
sota a Saappr m. ncal Antoine and Loss _
ouwjn.. .�.s/o�►..
pMN► ttes, 10l� 9vws,. ass, WSREMIC", sta1U
) o'�J�7V
O4eiaMe Cl P Ardr b lrorlava n Pea 1041.
eeerrel Aeveve Servr�e ► Sae Yrfucawu for Solwdue C low 13
Narrow /sown on reurn
Your sxlal aecurlly number
ALLEN C & NANCY J HATCH 377 36 0474
art Income or Loss From Rentals and Royalties Note: R farm rental Income or toss from Form 4635 on e e 2. line s.
I Show Illkirdandlocationofeachrentalproperty: Form 8582 not required, $25000 allowance
A MOBILE HOME RENTALS GREENLAND,_AR
B
C
Yes
No
2 For each rental property listed on One 1, did you or your family use h for personal purposes for more than the greater
A
X
of 14 days or 10% of the total days rented at fair rental
value during the lax year? (See Instructions.)
a
C
Rental end Royalty Income:
R ^tea
D Totals
A
B
C
(Add columns A, B, and C)
s
Rentsreceived ..............
3
59,192.
3
59,192.
4
Royalties received . ......
4
. .....
4
.
Rental and Royalty Expenses:
a
Advertising .............
a
4O7•
, :
„l
a
Auto and travel .............
a
399.
tlf�
7
Cleaning and naintenance ......
7
1 057.
a
Commissions . ....
9
Insurance .......... .....
9
1 959.
1"'f ''
"Irl
" : ' ::.
. 'll„4 I' $
10
Legal and other professional lees....
10
590.
l�
11
Mortgage Interest paid to banks,
"
etc. (see Instructions)...........
1t
21,608.
11
21,608.
t2
Other interest .......... ....
12
386.
13
Repairs .................
13
2,323.
!, I'!'
14
Su ties
PP ...........
14
62
:ii
,n (,
'll ',j. I
...
•
II; j'1
� I. ll'l.1;,
',
IS
Traces ..................
15
760.
;Inl41,1
,
i4 ni l,lllllll
16
unities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
to
12 518
I I:
.
.
17
Wages and salaries . ...
17
:I
16
Other (list) ►
l :!ll
r I it
I 'll I�
.....................
TRASH
490.
.
,: ..
!
I'. ;:
,:
:,, ,, ,:i
1, '
PEST CON TROL
1s
96.
',
°"'ll'lll'i"I'.
-•-••-.........
LAWN CARE
!
.:,: :
REPLACEMENT FURNITUR
331.
2 881.
.:-
19
Addtines3Woughla.......
19
45,867.
45,867.
20
Depreciation expense or depletion
(see Instructions) .............
20
12,394.
20
12,394.
21
Total expenses. Add lines 19 and 20
21
58,261.
..
22
Income or (loss) from rental or
:':
;i 1' Illil ;
royalty properties. Subtract Yr o 21
„
"' I
from One 3 (rents) or line 4
,f j.6i ! '4
(royalties)the rosull Is a (loss),
In
�
n, 1fi ,l' it
' ::'I'
tructions b find out It you
III III'j
I'll
.II, •
^' jn"Il, iI ll'; "ill (II
trust fib Form 6198.. .........
22
931.
�
i �l'l I
I.
'l,il01i11 ill, filj'il�l lliih,�llfl it
23
Deductible rental (loss). Caution: Your
Ilnil,li 1,
li i„ „I lil I'le l l''I llll
rental loss onO rte 22 may be 0mited.
'I:l,:I
';
f'I(
U1::,,,:
Sue InatrUCtrO to
rs find out 6 you
I„I
must file Form 6582 . . . .
23
�
24
. . .
Income. Add rental and royally Inoome
.
from line 22.
Enter the total income here
II 11 i
,Ilii'll I�` ililiili Ii !lil'
.................
24
931.
25
Lasses. Add royalty bases from One 22
and rental losses from One 23. Enter the told bases here .........
25
26
Total rental and royalty Income or (loss).
Combine amounts on Ones 24 and 25. Enter the result here. If
Parts 11, Ill, N, and One 39 on page 2 do
not apply b
you, enter the amount from One 26 on Form 1040,
One 1a. Otherwise, Include the amount from
One 26In the told on One 40 on 2
............... ..
26
931.
..gp.ym ro..n .en WO. Vn,r L.,.r rte" 5O.1VV1
ace.d.b E (roan 1040) 1990
I r .
October 29, 1991
Mr. Allen C. Hatch
Route 8, Box 100 CERTIFIED - RETURN
Fayetteville, AR 72701 RECEIPT REQUESTED
RE: Fayetteville Municipal Airport Land Acquisition Program
Parcel No. 775-17980-000
Dear Mr. Hatch:
The City of Fayetteville and the Fayetteville Municipal Airport
will be acquiring your property in accordance with Federal Aviation
Administration regulations pursuant to an approved program under
FAR Part 77 "Objects Affecting Navigable Air Space." This program
as approved is necessary for the runway protection zones and other
transitional zones off the end of each runway.
Preliminary title work indicates that the Parcel referenced above
is owned by you and as such, has been included in our Land
Acquisition Program. The City of Fayetteville has contracted with
the W. D. Schock Company, Inc. as the Consultant to perform the
acquisition and relocation portions of this program. The
Consultant's representatives are Mr. William D. Schock, Officer in
Charge, Mr. Ralph White, Program Director, and Mr. John T. Baugh,
Project Manager.
The purpose of this letter is to give you advance notification of
the Fayetteville Municipal Airport's interest in acquiring your
property. In giving this notice, we wish to acquaint you with the
various steps that will be taken.
The property will be appraised by an independent
appraiser appointed by W. D. Schock Company. The
appraiser's name, address and telephone number is given
for reference at the end of this letter. Please contact
the appraiser or the appraiser will contact you for the
opportunity to accompany the appraiser as he completes
his work with respect to the appraisal on your property.
Land Acquisition • Relocation • Part 150 Implementation
1400 Oonelson Pike • &..nlding III Suite B-2 Nashville. Tenrrore • 37217 615/399.0585 • FAX 515/366-1184
Mr. Allen C. Hatch
October 29, 1991
Page Two
2. Following completion of the appraisal, you will receive
a separate letter offer from W. D. Schock Company
advising you of the established fair market value by the
appraiser and the review appraiser. Further, you will
subsequently be contacted by a representative of W. D.
Schock Company, who will be in a position to discuss the
offer and negotiate the purchase price of your property
with you.
3. If the negotiated purchase of your property is not
possible, and you are not willing to sell your property
at the fair market value established by the appraiser,
W. D. Schock Company, in conjunction with the City of
Fayetteville, would take into consideration the right of
acquiring your property under eminent domain.
4. At the time an offer is made, if you have a business on
the property, or a tenant who may have a business on the
property, will be contacted by the W. D. Schock Company's
Relocation Advisor to explain relocation eligibility and
benefits available for businesses. Any business that is
impacted by the acquisition program does not have to move
immediately and will have ninety (90) days from the date
of purchase to relocate to other areas or facilities.
Relocation is a separate issue and will be handled by the
Relocation Advisor with the business itself and will be
conducted under the rules and regulations that apply
under the "Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1970,"
49 CFR Part 24.
5. Please note that prior to a site visit from the
appraiser, we will need to complete preliminary title
work and field surveys. McClelland Engineering will be
contacting you shortly to prepare site survey on your
property.
The City of Fayetteville is committed to accommodating
the acquisition of your property as quickly and fairly
as possible. Listed below is the appraiser assigned to
prepare the appraisal on your property. Please contact
him directly to schedule an appointment as soon as
Mr. Allen C. Hatch
October 29, 1991
Page Three
possible. We encourage you to accompany the appraiser
on the inspection of the property. Following receipt of
this letter, if you have any questions regarding the land
acquisition and relocation program for acquiring your
property, please contact the W. D. Schock Company at
(501) 521-6852. We will get back with you as soon as
possible.
Very truly yours,
W. D. Schock
President, W. D. Schock Company, Inc.
cc: Ralph White, Program Director
John Baugh, Project Manager
Tom Reed, Appraiser
Carl Grimes, TRW Title Company
Wayne Jones, McClelland Engineering (surveys)
appraiser: Mr. Tom Reed
Reed & Associates, Inc.
210 S. Thompson, Suite 1
Springdale, AR 72765-1102
(501) 756-6313
109
Parcel Map
Parcel No. 73
1.96 Acres
More or Less
FY912710
DRAKE FIELD
SCALE: I" = 60'
PARCEL NO. 73
OWNER OF RECORD DEED LINES - - - -
LAND LINES
Allen C. Hatch
GRAPHIC SCALE
1 Y e y
Book 1208 — Page 484
(arorl I
I me.a M I
BAILEY DRIVE (76' ASPHALT) N 88'09'26" W
— / — — - 242.00
CHAIN LINK FENCE 0 Record Poi1-7�1
0 I -�
II 3-1
I 1
74 II ONE STORY I�
II I /� FRAME GARAGE 1 MIRE FENCE O
MOBILE HOME +3
N 88'09'26�� (TIPICAL ) Z0
I
94.03' / 1 / I
I
Y� rE S8_9_ E I
�� \12 71.21'
"E77 \ t4 6�A69 0
cn
I I z
_X< /J / I o 0 75 I I 0o
a N �\
MIRE FENCE (`I W
�" I . 1 S 88'09'26" E E1I6
N23.00' I I C1
LA
74 I w _��
I
o oLi
MOBILE HOME i�I o i I
( TYPICAL ) - op
O W
76 n
Z :t
i S88'09'26" E _ J
o
F 5 00 0' o77
Iz
77'
I� I
76
IIMcClelland
u nod o Consulting
Engineers
Incorporated
'_ __
( RECORD SOUTH LINE OF 4O ACRE TRACT ) /
F
Fayetteville Little Rock
1810 N. College 900 W. Markham
AIlTaASID AND % COotVErNsa AS TENAMTg w f1E ppRO
YIl;FMTINETY,., jOINTIr on IN coxvAots cot RE •r
1 Nfaw Ai4 tar rr f _•
•F 9 � t ;
r�`?11W aa�Y,leaaa"J�gchadar and Allta L Sehader. r� ...'• - xii •''` -!
kbtee•1te •aa•� I•'X { IiJ %'n. n• V \ R �+ U•,V
io•
tbw N Eb �. Mwb/br'M tad QMWAee., fir WA b ..dw• ,. '��
a •r.N 01b Dallar*Ntm Redness, end and ws•aWo p NNX 0.K k•' '".' `. :--iy r '1;.,� )
�y�'wYlrnba a r r ran sMa Allon C Batch, a a=ngle `�- CV�t CAE Yi ' Y., •''` .,>~.
r(il paratlG• y ru7Y L/! p?. •i : 1 '1 v r' !•,I\♦ -n !. •
rfla��u Y i ",fiy�/y1� ti!• t{ NI Ilkir ,.
S�Y- � Q!!Y/{• r\/j •♦ 1 , . �y y�1�,�{ ., • ,., ir` ♦��.
n+i`C ; ♦ } ti/ I•I i I�'s:- • ,.n�+. �) ♦ •• •-i n' . Y % y(' Y.YRM YOfltilOfY Y ('i• F.a '�4� _A'
..F ' .-y. Y}'t Jr � a in.
�FI r e�w qp[��.p ,T, �.; J� Vv 1, .` r 1.1 M1, ♦Y'. 'h: f♦p�l 1 •}f �YX.
l<+ Y, S'r,`d- Y-1t•�J�11✓tf 2 ,. ' n a , IY•i )-,. , s .,
`� (^�1 (f�I y�.f k.r Yl�r till. •�'� t ,- � A I•�#'itl " ♦1�:.
• 0131120 35554 g~ ,41 iI
a?v.. •,j �'N �Y�•`• )al. ♦ •'mot' r ♦ i s
•
„jesMNla1. rlda.r1ta•�'`'fbfa1t «•M, asaele elte see t•ye ab .a 4i.?;, �,` i♦' - • p)h �' -.
, 2Pl.:plddYM1Ye •ad Q•MMh aeb eM aMl-Me IM kilo 111s d.MAEU t'- r:.. y,;;
.xa>Fste.'slara a ,... ,.t:,r
t ie., }• �Yrr uk[. - w• ... e, r:r /li,ol: ..., ' .fin .. .. (:.•
s )
Y ' " WaehLtetan -+ Ost•yt, eWs a AAM)re, Istilt: : • ..
♦n�fC 1 • a
Y y•l��flp4 fi11LV•a 11�.; { ,. V+ 1 4II.
' p•�tj t•�ly.Iil)r:�,-� a J, a � 1
A-prt?et the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 33.
"'-J'Townahip 16 North, Range 30 Vest, Ming more particulr.rly described as V
j follors,-.to-,its Beginning at a point on the west l-ne_of O.S. Highway
'it 71, which point is 811.9 feet North of the South 1f -a of said 40 acre
,It tract•' for a beginning point to the lands borein piing conveyed; thence
& Is west approxiaately 200 feet: thence South 130 fee;; thence West
- approxiaately 100 feet; thence South approxfsbte/y 255.9 feet; thence . ,-
? - East 130 feet; thence North 100 feet; thence Rapt 23 feet; thence North -
83 tut{'.then in a Northeasterly direction f2 feet to a point which
- -. is'66 feet West of the Vat line of said Higl'eay; thence Let 66 feet
�. f•, to,the.West line of said Highway; thence North 185.9 feet to the place
of beginning:
t.., I CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OP FALSE SWRARINO 'tHAX AT LEAST THE LEGALLY CORRECT .
AMUNT OP DOCUIUMARY STAMPS RAVE BERN PLACED ONINSTRUMENT. THIS
.........
Signed: Lf[�..J...�i
Grantees
rasa
. ..
.':' :. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the ale bode sal appuneerwae the nb bNengMe nab the said On and �g
hen and salyte, forever. And we. the eeW hmtete, Plenty realty that we are lawfully e5Uee of said land sad
-.. ,., .....Sr, that the wr• b -s lnoamaaW, and ma we will tef•eer wtinettt end defend the N1b to the meld lade •pahet al;. .:
4.... lone eblttln uh& st.;, -�� ; •:., And es, the tteprt o Girton. mint alias aid tsetgWal aye the sold G iws, our nep•Nlw Cow tloet5iy rid,:
• ' V""ESS o f »tee ire rM. er tab 3 0 day el • . •' . t , .
THIe INSTRUMENT P lEPARED BY: • : Y....... - ...
GREER ABSTRACT COMPANY SSS2 , S (well
1 31 East Cemar - - '
Paystts Ifla AlRamas 72701
fseMl
A9CE-L.-ECHdDER•
AOKNOWLEOGMEM •
STATE OF ARKANgAA{, •'c
1 V I t 1 • - 4 .r:Y • nl T: l 1 i • sat a , betethe^ • ttetary puslb, paaertlgl •pp•ree - ..: ti
.l heder• eW Alice L. Schadet, husband and wife,-'
fstese Ins rtbftsbrlfy I b be ins Of�ll, a1 perre floss wn s as sYESNless b the brow a inorwr•el and " 14
-eathewbsgreiT Ilad •aneM•e Ire aanb b1 eln pleprr a1•reln M fret. lee h'•f
b �.hefe r" so at heed bed -lone 11n•1 . ; - Y ^ p
/::
my OerlteleMs• fA4aa f ,. ' • 1 f ' l U /, w—. iy - / �Y✓ . • ` ♦i� 0
. v.., ,�`�•'�CpI ,ev(e/t �Y11Cf .Fa 1.I.
.
l- i' •
,. ! i.`.'!•+... } ' •.• .4.r 1N .�fl": ���"'i lL .✓i'.alY �.\'�, n d!C
�r.. REDEMPTION DEED NO. 91999i0.t
d -• Vie' y
i r^ ;� CHARLIE DANIELS
P'r' COMMISSIONER OF STATE LANDSCRFILLED
l� rt3 STATE OF ARKANSAS Issued under the provisions of Act 151 of 1891, Act 626 of 1983 and Act 814 of 1987 3(0
THE STATE OF ARKANSAS:
To All Whom these Presents Shall Come — GREETINGS:
KNOW YE THAT, WHEREAS: The following described lands situated in
WASHINGTON in the State of Arkansas, to wit:
Section :
33
Township:
16N
Range
30W
Acres :
000002.120
Addition:
(OUTLOTS)
City :
GREENLAND
775-17965
Parcel Number
1. PT SW SW
2. DIST # 951
3.
4.
5.
6.
the County
of
=
> cn
n
o z
;.-
c
.
-o
rn
_< r
rn
c)
•.. o
r-`
0
N
1-1L 1988 cn o
Year Forfeited cn
were certified to the Commissioner of State Lands, by the County Collector for the non-payment of
taxes for the years hereinbelow set forth; and that the taxes, penalties, interest and cost outlined below
have been paid to the Commissioner of State Lands;
ANDWHEREAS CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
113 WEST MOUNTAIN, FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72701
claiming to be the owner(s) of said real property, filed a petition to redeem duly verified according to
the law, showing such ownership.
NOW THEREFORE, I, CHARLIE DANIELS, Commissioner of State Lands within and for the State of
Arkansas, for and in consideration of $ 2784.99 so paid and by
virtue of the authority in me vested by law, do hereby release and quitclaim unto the said
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
and .'- heirs and assigns forever all right, title and interest the State of Arkansas acquired
under any forfeiture, sale or condemnation for taxes.
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 29 -Sep- 1993
Taxes 1988 - 1991 2075.39
Interest 463.81� Q ) C
Penalty 207.54 Commissioner of State Lands
County Cost 2.25
Recording Fee 6.00
Deputy Commissioner of
Deed Fee 5.00
Addie M. Grigsby
Commissioner Fee 25.00
Total Paid: $2,784.99
Receipt #'s 36028 0 0 0
Deed Mailed to:
CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
ATTN: LAGAYLE
113 W. MOUNTAIN,
FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72701
VI
93 56550
• . tiv-
if -
1
•yea=� � wc�
0. ,��o¶1.0
'd`��
C�d(ac 34\w may.°�
c-�.
pr Je 4*1
�• Qo
P
Charlie finer of RECEIPT
Commissioner of State Lands Date `9 O— 1993 1 936 03C No. 36028
State Capitol Building
Little Rock. Arkansas 72201 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
Received From
Address CITY ATTNY'S OFFICE 113 W. MOUNTAIN
FAYETTEVILLE AR 72701 784,99
PR CK # 506035
For 775-17963
WASHINGTON Sharon Hinzman
By