HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 4384 ORDINANCE NO. 4384
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED
IN REZONING PETITION RZN 024 .00 FOR A PARCEL
CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1 .36 ACRES AND LOCATED AT 1140
HENDRIX AND 110 GARLAND, FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, AS
SUBMITTED BY BROCK THOMPSON.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 : That the zone classification of the following described
property is hereby changed as follows:
From R- 1 , Low Density Residential to R- 1 .5, Moderate Density Residential as
shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2. That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is
hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above.
I , . -
' Fp ► t ► �
s . AND APPROVED this 2nd day of April, 2002.
fqI �� • � 4'
Q t, : AI APPROVED:
fF
By: Awf,
+GbXKCOODY, Mayor v �_
0o r z M
ATTEST:
)> oCO
o
� ;K: a 70
By: -v C-.) m
cn c .n
eather Woodruff, City Cle o
r �
Y N �
20 i21 71 75
0 Ord . 4384
EXHIBIT AA@
PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, SECTION 8,
TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS TO WIT: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH LIES SOUTH 765.00 FEET,
WEST 30.00 FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 40 ACRE TRACT AND
RUNNING THENCE S00012'40"W 104.71 FEET, THENCE WEST 330.00 FEET, THENCE
N00012'38"E 104.96 FEET THENCE N8905712211W 59.91 FEET, THENCE N0000013611W 104.94
FEET, THENCE EAST 237.01 FEET, THENCE S0000214211W 105.09 FEET, THENCE
S89057'22"E 153.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING CONTAINING 1 .37 ACRES
MORE OR LESS.
20 12; 1 " 1366
A �
I, Bette Stamps, Circuit Clerk anndd Ex-officido o
Recorder
for Washington County,
cenrrY
that this Instrument was filed for record In my office as
indicated hereon and %no Rina I$ now duly recorded
ithereon
n�Recoord acBook andmGmt pageend
as Indicated a thorean-
IN WITNESS `NNEREOp, I have hereunto set my
hand end affixed the Seel Ot sold Court On the date ;ndr
sated hereon.
we Stamps
Circuit Clerk and Ex-ofAcio do
by
i
0 0
NAME OF FILE: Ordinance No. 4384
CROSS REFERENCE:
04/02/02 Ordinance No. 4384
Exhibit AA@ (Legal Description)(RZN oz - i• oo)
04/30/02 Bill of Assurance from M.B.B. Investment Corp. (T. Brock Thompson,
President)
04/09/02 E-mail from Richard P. Osborne, Attorney at Law, to Heather Woodruff,
City Clerk, regarding Brock Thompson Rezoning
01 /18/02 Planning Division Correspondence
01/07/02 Planning Division Correspondence
01 /14/02 Planning Commission Minutes (Pages 12-24)
02/05/02 Staff Review Form
04/29/02 Memo to Tim Conklin, Planning Division, from Heather Woodruff, City
Clerk
NOTES:
• BILL OF ASSURANCE
FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
In order to obtain approval of a request for a zoning reclassifacation, the owner of
this property, (hereinafter"petitioner") M.B.B. Investment Corp., hereby voluntarily
offers this Bill of Assurance and enters into this binding agreement and contract with the
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
The Petitioner expressly grants to the City of Fayetteville the right to enforce any
and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court of Washington County,
Arkansas, and agrees that if Petitioner of Petitioner's successors violate any term of this
Bill of Assurance substantial irreparable damage justifying injunctive relief has been
done to the citizens and City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The Petitioner acknowledges that
the Fayetteville Planning Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonably
rely upon all of the terms and conditions with this Bill of Assurance in considering
whether to approve Petitioner' s rezoning request.
Petitioner hereby voluntarily offers assurances that Petitioner and Petitioner' s
property shall be restricted as follows if Petitioner' s rezoning is approved by the
Fayetteville City Council :
The structures will be 75% brick exterior
• = The structures will be one story
Extensive landscaping package
Sodded front yards
8 — 12 Mature trees
Privacy fencing for the property.
Drainage control — Detention pond
Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terms shall run with the
land and bind all future owners unless and until specifically released by Resolution of the
Fayetteville City Council. The Bill of Assurance shall be filed for record in the
Washington County Circuit Clerk's Office after Petitioner's rezoning is effective and
shall be noted on any Final Plat or Large Scale Development which includes some of all
of Petitioner's property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and conditions
stated above, M.B.B. Investment Corp. as the owner (Petitioner) voluntarily offers all
such assurances.
M.B.B. Investment Corp.
y,y By s�
X v { b� BROCK THOMPS N
y •. s
President
• 6 ,
=4 `• .y
ORDINANCE NO. 4384
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED
IN REZONING PETITION RZN 02-1 .00 FOR A PARCEL
CONTAININGAPPROXIMATELY 1 .36 ACRES AND LOCATED
AT 1140 HENDRIX AND 110 GARLAND, FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS, AS SUBMITTED BY4Ze4M ITS
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,
ARKANSAS:
Section 1 : That the zone classification of the following described property is
hereby changed as follows:
From R-1, Low Density Residential to R-1 .5, Moderate Density Residential as
shown in Exhibit AA@ attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2. That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is
hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above.
PASSED AND APPROVED this 2nd day of April, 2002.
APPROVED:
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Heather Woodruff, City Clerk
Heather Woodruff - Brock Thompson _ - Pagel
From: "Richard P. Osborne" <RPOLaw@Lawyer.com>
To: "Fayetteville City Clerk" <hoodruff@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 4/9/02 2:04PM
Subject: Brock Thompson
Hon. Heather Woodruff
Fayetteville City Clerk
By E-Mail
Re: Brock Thompson Rezoning
Dear Heather:
I know that you and Kit are awaiting receipt of the Bill of Assurance for
Brock's rezoning. I will get with Brock as soon as possible and get it to
you. Just wanted to let you know.
Thanks.
Rick
Richard P. Osborne, Attorney
26 East Center Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Office 479-521 -5555
Fax 479-444-0000
Copies: Hon. Kit Williams
City Attorney
Brock Thompson
CC: "Fayetteville City Attorney" <kwilliams@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>, "Brock Thompson"
<b ro c k a n d n i k i @ m a i l.co m>
FAYETTE V ILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (501 ) 575-8264
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Mayor Dan Coody
Fayetteville City Council
THRU: Hugh Earnest, Urban Development Director
FROM: Tim Conklin, A.I.C.P., City Planner
DATE: January 18, 2002
BACKGROUND
RZN 02- 1 .00 was submitted by Robert Schmitt for property located at 1140 Hendrix and 110
Garland. The property is zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1 .36
acres. The request is to rezone to R- 1 .5, Moderate Density Residential.
The applicant is requesting that this property be rezoned from R- 1 , Low Density Residential, to
R- 1 .5, Moderate Density Residential. The property, for many years has appeared on the City' s
zoning map to already be R- 1 .5, however it has been determined that this was the result of a
drafting error and the property is in fact currently zoned R- 1 . The applicant did rely on the City's
zoning map when considering the purchase of this property. After he had closed on the property
and requested a lot line adjustment, the drafting error was discovered.
This drafting error occurred during the process of converting the official City zoning map from a
hand drawn graphic to a digitized document that can be edited and displayed via computer
graphics, an error was made. This error was discovered by the City when a project proposal was
reviewed for the subject property. Staff researched this area of the map and determined that the
property was zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential on the City's 1970 zoning map and that no
change had occurred since that time. Planning Division as well as City Clerk files were
thoroughly searched to ensure that no ordinance had been approved changing this zoning
designation to R- 1 .5, Moderate Density Residential.
The subject property is located at the northwest comer of Garland Ave. (Hwy 112) and Hendrix
Street. Garland is classified a principal arterial on the City's adopted Master Street Plan and is a
heavily traveled thoroughfare.
CURRENTSTATUS
The Planning Commission voted 5-4-0 to recommend the City Council approve the requested
rezoning from R- 1 to R- 1 .5 with a Bill of Assurance limiting the number of dwelling units to a
maximum of nine dwelling units.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the requested rezoning.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED
IN REZONING PETITION RZN 024 .00 FOR A PARCEL
CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 1 .36 ACRES AND LOCATED AT 1140
HENDRIX AND 110 GARLAND, FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS, AS
SUBMITTED BY ROBERT SCHMITT,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1 : That the zone classification of the following described
property is hereby changed as follows:
From R. 1 , Low Density Residential to R- 1 .5, Moderate Density Residential as
shown in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2. That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is
hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above.
PASSED AND APPROVED this day of , 2002.
APPROVED:
DRAFT
By:
DAN COODY, Mayor
ATTEST:
By:
Heather Woodruff, City Clerk
EXHIBIT "A"
PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, SECTION 8,
TOWNSHIP 16NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS TO WIT: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHICH LIES SOUTH 765 .00 FEET, WEST 30.00
FEET FROM THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 40 ACRE TRACT AND RUNNING THENCE
S00° 12'40"W 104.71 FEET, THENCE WEST 330.00 FEET, THENCE N00° 12'38"E 104.96 FEET
THENCEN89°57'22"W 59.91 FEET, THENCEN00°00'36"W 104.94 FEET, THENCE EAST 237.01
FEET, THENCE S00002'4211W 105.09 FEET, THENCE S89057122"E 153 .00 FEET TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING CONTAINING 1 .37 ACRES MORE OR LESS.
FAYETTEVILLE
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
113W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone: (501 ) 575-8264
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Dawn T. Warrick, Senior Planner
THRU: Tim Conklin, A.I.C.P., City Planner
DATE: January 7, 2002
RZN 02-1 .00 Rezoning (Schmitt, pp 404) was submitted by Robert Schmitt for property located
at 1140 Hendrix and 110 Garland. The property is zoned R- 1 , Low Density Residential and
contains approximately 1 .36 acres. The request is to rezone to R-1 .5, Moderate Density
Residential.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the requested rezoning based on the findings included as
part of this report.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
O Approved O Denied
Date: January 14, 2002
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Required YES
O Approved O Denied
Date: February 5, 2002 (1 " reading)
Comments:
H:t USERSICOMMOMDAKA71REPOR7SIPC12002_reporislschmitl_mn02-Noc
a �►
BACKGROUND:
The applicant is requesting that this property be rezoned from R-1 , Low Density
Residential, to R-1 .5, Moderate Density Residential. The property, for many years has
appeared on the City's zoning map to already be R-1 .5, however it has been determined
that this was the result of a drafting error and the property is in fact currently zoned R-1 .
The applicant did rely on the City's zoning map when considering the purchase of this
property. After he had closed .on the property and requested a lot line adjustment, the
drafting error was discovered.
This drafting error occurred during the process of converting the official City zoning map
from a hand drawn graphic to a digitized document that can be edited and displayed via
computer graphics, an error was made. This error was discovered by the City when a
project proposal was reviewed for the subject property. Staff researched this area of the
map and determined that the property was zoned R-1 , Low Density Residential on the
City's 1970 zoning map and that no change had occurred since that time. Planning
Division as well as City Clerk files were thoroughly searched to ensure that no ordinance
had been approved changing this zoning designation to R-1.5, Moderate Density
Residential.
The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Garland Ave. (Hwy 112) and
Hendrix Street. Garland is classified a principal arterial on the City's adopted Master
Street Plan and is a heavily traveled thoroughfare.
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING
North: Single family home, R- 1
South: Single family home, R- 1
East: Single family home, R-2
West: Single family home, R- 1
INFRASTRUCTURE:
Access to this site is available and constructed. The project site is located at the northwest corner
of Hendrix Street and Garland Ave. Garland is classified a principal arterial on the City's
adopted Master Street Plan. Utilities are available to the site currently. There are two existing
small homes on the property which have been occupied. Upon redevelopment any upgrades or
extension of utilities to serve this site will be the responsibility of the developer.
H:I USERSICOMMOMDAWMREPOR7SIPC11002-mporisLschmitt_nn02-Idoc
N
a
LAND USE PLAN: General Plan 2020 designates this site Residential. Rezoning this property
to R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential is consistent with the land use plan and compatible with
surrounding land uses in the area.
FINDINGS OF THE STAFF
A determination of the degree to which the proposed zoning is consistent with land use
planning objectives, principles, and policies and with land use and zoning plans.
Finding: The proposed zoning is consistent with land use planning objectives,
principles, and policies and with the land use and zoning plans. This zoning
will allow for more intense development patterns downtown and will site new
residential areas accessible to roadways, alternative transportation modes,
community amenities, infrastructure, and retail and commercial goods and
services. These are designated as guiding policies within the City's adopted
General Plan 2020 which may be accomplished through this rezoning
application.
A determination of whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or needed at the time the
rezoning is proposed.
Finding: The proposed zoning is justified. This property is located on a heavily
traveled principle arterial. Incorporating the R-1.5 zoning in this location
will allow for a mix of housing types within the area and will also provide a
transition from the R-2 zoning across Garland to the R-1 zoning west of the
subject tract.
3. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would create or appreciably increase
traffic danger and congestion.
Finding: The proposed zoning will not create or appreciably increase traffic danger
and congestion. There are several means of accessing this site, the most
common of which will be to utilize Garland Ave. which currently carries a
large volume of traffic on a daily basis.
4. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would alter the population density
and thereby undesirably increase the load on public services including schools, water, and
sewer facilities.
Finding: The proposed zoning will increase population density slightly. The
maximum density which would be permitted on the 1.36 acre tract would be
16 units (12 units per acre) if the property were zoned R-1.5. Current zoning
of R-1 will allow a maximum of 5 units on the property. This increase in
population density will not undesirably increase the load on public services
H:1 USERSICOMMOMDA RN1IREPOR7SIPCi2002_reporislschmitt_rzn01-Noc
N a
including schools, water, and sewer facilities.
If there are reasons why the proposed zoning should not be approved in view of
considerations under b (1) through (4) above, a determination as to whether the proposed
zoning is justified and/or necessitated by peculiar circumstances such as:
a. It would be impractical to use the land for any of the uses permitted
under its existing zoning classifications;
b. There are extenuating circumstances which justify the rezoning
even though there are reasons under b (1) through (4) above why
the proposed zoning is not desirable.
Finding: N/A
H:I USERSICOMMOMDA NNr1REPORr31PC12002_reportslschmill _nn02-Hoc
a
§161.05 DISTRICT R-1.5 MODERATE
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
A. Purpose. The Moderate Density
Residential District is designed to permit and
encourage the development of detached and attached
dwellings in suitable environments, to provide a
development potential between low density and
medium density with less impact than medium density
development, to encourage the development of areas
with existing public facilities and to encourage the
development of a greater variety of housing values.
B. Uses.
1. Permitted Uses..
Unit I
City -Wide Uses by Right
Unit 2
Single -Family and Two -Family
Dwellings
Unit 26
Single -Family Dwellings
Unit 29
Single -Family, Two -Family and
Three -Family Dwellings
2. Uses Permissible on Appeal to
the Planning Commission
Unit 2
City -Wide Uses by Conditional Use
Permit
Unit 3
Public Protection and Utility Facilities
Unit 4
Cultural and Recreational Facilities
C. Density.
Families Per Acre 12 or Less
D. Bulk and Area Regulations.
One-
Two-
Three -
Family
Family
Family
Lot
60 ft.
70 ft.
90 ft.
Minimum
Width:
Lot Area
6,000
7,260
10,890
Minimum:
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
Land Area
6,000 sq.
3,630 sq.
3,630 sq.
Per
ft.
ft.
ft.
Dwelling
Unit:
E. Yard Requirements (feet).
FRONT
YARD
SIDE YARD
REAR YARD
25
8
20
Cross Reference: Variance, Chapter 156.
F. Building Area. The area occupied by all
buildings shall not exceed 50% of the total lot area.
G. Height Regulations. No building shall
exceed a height of 30 feet.
(Code 1991, §160.032; Code 1965, App. A, Art.
5(IIA); Ord. No. 3128, 10-1-85)
N: I USERSICOMMOMDA NNfIREPORTSIPCI2002_reporlstschmitt_rzn02-1doc
••
00
JAN 0 J
F'NN1NG' 'd.
TO: Janet Strain
Senior Planning Clerk
The City of Fayetteville, AR
FROM: Joyce Richards
1673 North Stephens
Fayetteville, AR 72703
521-4347
DATE: January 9, 2002
RE: Rezoning of lots at corner of Hendrix and Garland
My family and I
have
lived at
1673 North
Stephens since
we bought
the property in 1974.-
We
have also
owned the
property at 1231
South
Maxwell since 1996 and
our
son and
his family
live there.
I would ask you not to rezone the lots at Hendrix and Garland for
the following reasons:
1. A lot of traffic already travels up and down Hendrix in part
because that street is used as a cutoff to get to Mt. Comfort, thus
avoiding the bottleneck that exists in the Harps/Oak Plaza area. Many
people walk or bicycle on Hendrix either for pleasure or to get to
Garland to catch the bus; and there are no sidewalks. Increased traffic
would pose a larger danger.
2. Garland has a number of apartment complexes between Oak
Plaza and Agri Park including Magnolia Place, Crafton Place, Bradford
Place, Starfire, Garland Gardens and Maria H, plus the huge complex by
the fairgrounds and College Park a few blacks away on Mt. Comfort.
Additional multiple dwellings would only increase the traffic problem
that exists. I know that Garland is scheduled to be widened but I don't
think an existing problem needs to be compounded.
3. The apartment complexes located on. Garland are in or near
the "high crime" area reported by the Arkansas Democrat Gazette on
December 10, 2001. Multiple dwellings on Hendrix would increase the
population in this area and thus add to the problem expanding it to the
west.
4. Last fall two triplexes were built at the corner of
Hendrix and Addington two blocks west from Garland. If this current
rezoning request takes place, does this mean Hendrix will become an
apartment strip all the way down? Will a domino effect be put in
place? Will a precedent be started so that future rezoning on that
street will take place with ease?
5. The area between Hendrix and Wedington has had a number of
water breaks over the years. If this new development is put on that
line, it seems that additional breaks will occur.
I ask you not to rezone to R-1.5 but to leave the zoning at R-1.
E0 39Cd 31 3AO 9 3I?JItl21d SOLb96BT0S TE:ET LOOL/60/T0
40
.a
RZN02-1.00
Close Up View
11
SCHMITT
=IQ.IaIQIQ
U11:11E JD i:J
o �
IP
a Hr�a
M/JILVELL. OR Mgyw
LL DR
j/HJ C L_ a
R,2
cm H'
a Q
boa a
o a o 'I:;:, 11111
R.} f�
frnI 0c1 Li
R2
S^/
° V a o
Lf' '
R2 O / ❑
Overview Legend
Subject Property Boundary Master Street Plan
® RZN02-1.00 '\„, Planning Area O S , Freeway/Expressway
[br o cccra Overlay District '�'k? Principal Arterial
r-� Streets @00_008
Arterial
City Limits �.4' Minor A
'N-i Existing L.
— — I
e4wkPannedOutside City .
Colector
_.-- C_ • % Historic Collector
0 85 170 340 510 680
Feet
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 12
RZN 02-1.00 Rezoning (Schmitt, pp 404) was submitted by Robert Schmitt for property located at
1140 Hendrix and 110 Garland. The property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains
approximately 1.36 acres. The request is to rezone to R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential.
Estes: The next item on the agenda is item number three, this is a rezoning request submitted by
Mr. Robert Schmitt for property located at 1140 Hendrix and 110 Garland. The property
is zoned R- 1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately 1.36 acres. The
request is to rezone to R-1.5, Moderate Density Residential. Staff recommends approval
of the requested rezoning based on the findings that are included as a part of your report.
Is the applicant or the applicant's representative present?
Osborne: Yes Sir, we appreciate the opportunity to appear and we are very happy with the staff
recommendation and we stand on it. I am Rick Osborne representing Bobby Schmitt.
Estes: Thank you Mr. Osborne.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Estes: Is there any member ofthe audience who would like to provide public comment on this
rezoning request 02-1.00?
Davidson: Yes Sir. My name is Sharon Davidson, I live on Rodgers Drive in Fayetteville. Actually,
I would like to start with, I have heard the unfortunate news that Commissioner Estes' term
is about to expire on us and I consider that a big loss to us in Fayetteville. I have watched
him handle these meetings and people and projects and he has done it extremely well in my
opinion. I am a little concerned that we won't have his great expertise in the years ahead
dealing with the very reason why I'm standing up here right now, Mr. Schmitt.
Inappropriate R-2 zoning is one of his issues. We have issues all over the place with Mr.
Schmitt and actually I haven't had enough time to research this newest one myself. I notice
again he is wanting a favor from us while he is costing us exorbitant amounts of money to
accommodate him. His newest thing we can get to, I didn't hear much about it here. We
don't usually hear much about it because they don't want to tell us much about it. Let's
know that you can go to each one of his existing projects and find problems everywhere,
complaints everywhere. I am only aware of four projects that this man is involved in. I
guess this makes the fifth and there could be some hidden ones and I'm just coming familiar
with it. The first major problem was on Markham Hill with this gentleman. He chose to
insert a house in an area on a lot which he knew well was not zoned. Excuse meifsome
of my terminology is incorrect here. He knew what he was doing when he put this house
in. We have situations from contractors that the house is already taking in water in the
CI
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 13
basement. We have those types of issues with his projects. I believe that this is the
gentleman who had students sign papers stating they were domestic servants for other
students so that he could make money in an area that was not supposed to be treated that
way. I think that was the first I heard ofhim. Now we are coming up to Olive Street. He
has got this hill, it is sort of like a pock mark situation.
Estes: Ms. Davidson, this is a request for rezoning property.
Davidson: Ok, bring me back in line but the whole point is it is a request for something. We are
having issues with Mr. Schmitt upon the hill. I'm asking you is ifwe have to address this
issue.
Estes: Ms Davidson, do this for me, stay focused on the agenda item that is before us. It is a
request to rezone property located at 1140 Hendrix and 110 Garland. Please focus on
that issue and if you have any comments that you feel would edify us or educate us in that
regard please provide them.
Davidson: That is what I thought I was doing and that is our problem with this situation Sir. These are
relative to this situation and the fact that our city is at capacity or almost capacity for our
sewage system. The fact that there area lot of inappropriate projects going in and the fact
that this man has a track record for inappropriate projects leads me to say that I don't trust
this project. I would like to know a whole lot more about his plans for this project and I
would also like to see some good faith from this man in any of his actions or intentions with
the city. Here is a suggestion Mr. Schmitt. You want a favor here, every project wants
a favor, every project also circumvents our rules with deliberate actions. You would like
this zoned up. We are fortunate that we have gotten, and I thank you for that as well, the
R-1.5 zoning to try and have a little stop gap while we deal with our major issue in
Fayetteville as Commissioners now need to know is inappropriate R-2 zoning. This is very
indicative of how our city can be degraded within a few years as far as our neighborhoods.
Here is the deal, if he.wants to show good faith in what he is doing in our area, how about
voluntary downgrading, downzoning that piece ofproperty on Fletcher Mr. Schmitt?
You've shown such ill will to every neighborhood you have inserted yourself in, how about
that 1.5?
Estes: Mrs. Davidson..
Davidson: You can downzone right? Can I not request that be considered that he do that?
Estes: Mrs. Davidson, please keep your comments brief, keep them to the point, keep them
Ll
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 14
focused on the agenda item.
Davidson: It is all on the point, it is a very big point and it is the point. I say please do this man no
favors, please research what he is saying he wants to do. You well know Sir, he says he
wants to do one thing and he ends up doing another. This is where we need to start
addressing it. I ask you to please address the issue with the problem of this man and his
developments. Do not grant him any favors, variances or waivers. Please do not grant this
request for rezoning. Good day.
Estes: Thank you Mrs. Davidson. Is there anyone else who would like to provide public
comment on this issue? If so, please keep your comments brief, to the point and relevant
to the agenda item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak and we may
continue with the meeting. Please tell us who you are, where you live and provide us with
the benefits of your comments.
Sawyer: My name is Valerie Sawyer, I live at 1224 W. Hendrix. I represent myself, my son and
a couple of other property owners on my street. I have three concerns. One is that I do
realize that in Fayetteville there is always going to be a housing shortage. We keep
growing, we have got a college. I realize that we need more apartments but I still have
some concerns. One is traffic. There is already a lot of traffic on Garland. It needs to be
wider but there isjust ust no way to make it wider. Secondly, the apartments that are already
in that neighborhood bring in a lot of crime and there was an article in the paper recently
about the crime in those neighborhoods but my biggest problem is drainage. The ditches
that come from both directions down Garland go down at the back of this property down
a ditch that is parallel and between Hendrix and Maxwell. The ditch goes and eventually
ceases to be a ditch and it is just a big flood area that is behind my property. I also
represent the owners of my property. They were hoping that they would be back in town
in time to be at this meeting but they couldn't be here. After it rains, the yard to the side
of my house is a swamp. I signed a lease because I wanted my son to have a yard to play
in but after it rains for several days we can't play in that yard. I don't mind because the
birds like it and I like the birds but there is a pond behind my house for days after it rains
and if they pave that... some apartments were built, two triplexes were built down my
street and they just paved the whole thing because drainage is so bad in that area that once
they realized that they were just going to have mud for people to park in they just paved
this entire lot front to back and took out a lot oftrees. I just hope that someone, some of
you could come look at that property site after the next rain because my son and I walk
across it sometimes taking a shortcut to a friend's house and after it rains it is really
swampy over there. I hope that someone will come look at it and walk on it after a rain
and look at the ditch that suddenly ceases to be a ditch and becomes a pond before you
C
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 15
allow this type of project to happen. Ifyou could figure out a way to make it drain in a
responsible way then I wouldn't be quite so against it though I would prefer that my
neighborhood stay a neighborhood and not turn into apartments. That is all I have, thank
you.
Estes: Thank you Ms. Sawyer.
Richards: My name is Joyce Richards and I did forward to Ms. Strain a copy of my comments. I
will read them, I don't know if you got them.
Conklin: They are on page 3.6.
Richards: Ok. My family and I have lived at 1673 N. Stevens for many years, since 1974 when we
bought that property at 1231 S. Maxwell which backs up to the two triplexes which were
put in last fall. My son and his family live there and my concerns are number one, a lot of
traffic already goes up and down Hendrix. In part because that street is used as a cutoff
to get to Mount Comfort because ofthe bottleneck that is thereat Oak Plaza ifyou have
ever gone through there in the morning, the afternoon, anytime ofday, it is bad. Many
people walk up and down Hendrix or they ride their bicycles up and down there. There
are no sidewalks on that street ifyou are going to put more traffic through there it is going
to be a greater danger. Number two, Garland already has complexes up and down
between Oak Plaza and Agri Park, Magnolia Place, Garland Gardens just to name a few
and they are also not very far away from College Park over there on Mount Comfort.
Multiple dwellings would increase that traffic problem that is already there. I know that
Garland is scheduled to be widened but that doesn't help us right now. It doesn't mean
that it will help us if you put more apartment buildings up and down that street. Number
three, the apartment complexes on Garland are in or near that high crime area which was
in the Gazette. I put December 10th but it is really December 9th. I think ifyou put more
people in that area that you are only going to increase the possibility ofmore crime. The
more people in an area the greater the crime rate. I just don't think we need to expand
that problem anymore to the west or I would ask you not to. Number four, there were
two triplexes that were built down there. I guess my question to you is if we start rezoning
here does that mean that that is going to become an apartment strip all the way down
Hendrix? If it is going to go all the way down, will it come down my street, turn the comer
a domino effect? Does this start a precedent that means that we aren't going to be able
to come back to you to say please no more of this? She talked about the drainage but
there is also a problem with the sewer and water system because I know that there have
been water breaks up and down Garland because we have gone and watched them with
my grandsons where they come and fix it. I don't know if those even actually hook up to
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 16
there but I would assume that they would have some effect on it. I just ask you please
don't do this.
Estes: Thank you Mrs. Richards. Is there any other member of the audience who would like to
provide public comment on this rezoning request?
Lane: Good evening, my name is Jarod Lane. I live at 1227 S. Maxwell. I am just going to ask
you guys to please not pass this. I like to have my house I bought six years ago, I have
two small children and I like to have thatNorman Rockwell effect. I like my yard, I like
to be able to go up and down my street, I like to sleep at night. If we do this and we start
passing this and building these, Ms. McBroom owns a lot of property in the back ofmy
house, she is probably going to be able to build some more back there. All the college
kids like to stay up late and we have already got College Park up there and it makes a lot
of noise so please don't pass this. Thank you.
Estes: Thank you Jarod, is there anyone else in the audience that would like to provide public
comment on this requested rezoning?
Richards, A.: My name is Allison Richards, I live at 1231 S. Maxwell. I guess I would like to start out
briefly with waking up one morning to chainsaws and bulldozers on Hendrix bulldozing the
lot and putting in two triplexes in what has normally been a single family dwelling residence.
I have two small children, we ride bikes, we run. There aren't any sidewalks in that
neighborhood. The crime rate is high, we watch police cars go up and down the streets
and I would just like to ask you not to rezone, make more apartments in a residential
neighborhood.
Estes: Thank you Ms. Richards, is there anyone else that wishes to provide public comment on
this requested rezoning? Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the applicant's representative,
Mr. Osborne for any comments.
Osborne: Thank you Mr. Estes. The two triplexes to which they refer are Marc Crandall's project.
It is west of this. It is three or four lots down Maxwell Street. This property is on
Garland. The young lady had some good points, the first one or the second one I guess
it was. Traffic is a problem in that area, I think we all know it. We are contributing land
to widen Garland. I don't know what else we can do besides that. We have committed
to that. We, of course, will have a drainage plan which the city will have an opportunity
to approve. Crime, I think they are talking about College Park. We are talking about one
triplex, three or four blocks from College Park. I admit, College Park is noisy and there
is probably crime over there. There is probably less crime on this site with this triplex than
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 17
there would have been before. This was a mechanic's garage used as a C-1
nonconforming use in an R- 1 zone. Mr. Schmitt, I think you know this, Mr. Schmitt
bought this having been advised by the city that it was R-1.5. Thus, he bought it having his
plans for the triplex. We thought we were kind of downzoning when we bought it. We
were going to put a triplex there from day one. As I said, it was a mechanic's garage and
I think these people would prefer a triplex to a mechanic's garage in that place. That is
about all I've got to say. If you have any questions I will be glad to try and answer them.
Estes: Thank you Mr. Osborne.
Richards: Can I respond to that?
Estes: No Ma'am, the floor is closed for public comment, thank you. Mr. Conklin, could you
provide us with some background? We have our packet and have our material and have
read and studied it but that is exclusive to us and ofcourse hasn't been distributed to those
people that are concerned about this rezoning request. Would you give us some
background explaining to us why this item is on our agenda tonight and why it is before us?
Conklin: Sure. This item is on your agenda due to a series of events that have occurred over the
past several years. Back in 1995 our zoning map was changed from a hand drawn map
that was colored in with crayons to a digital zoning map. At the time that the map was
digitized or put into a digital format this area was shown as R-1.5. The applicant this
evening that is before you, looked at our zoning map that is on our website and on our wall
in our office that was redone into a digital format and it did show R- 1.5. He applied for
what is called a property line adjustment. At that time I asked my staff to go back and do
a zoning history of this particular piece of property to identify the ordinance that rezoned
it to R-1.5. At that time it was discovered that there were no ordinances that we could
find in our offices or the City Clerk's office that showed that property to be rezoned. We
asked the applicant to meet with us and we discussed the situation and advised him that
a rezoning request would have to be applied for and brought forward to the Planning
Commission and the City Council. That is where we are at today. I do not know when
exactly that drafting error occurred on our zoning map. I think it has been there for many
years. However, it has now been changed. It shows as R-1 and on the internet it has
been corrected as well. We took a couple of other steps a couple of years ago, we
transferred all of the official mapping down to our geographic information coordinator who
keeps up our zoning map. It is no longer done within the Planning Division. There are
some safeguards that have been implemented. This is one of the situations where we had
no idea that there was an error in the map until I had my staff go back and research this
particular piece of property and they could not find that. That is the main reason why we
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 18
are here tonight. It is true that the applicant did come to our office and did look at a map
that showed R- 1.5 on this piece of property.
Estes: Mr. Conklin, did a drafting error occur during the process of converting the official city
zoning map from a hand drawn graphic to a digital document and is that the reason that this
item is before us this evening is to correct that error?
Conklin: That is correct. To the best of my knowledge that is the only logical reason that I can think
of why it was shown that way. The person that digitalized our map misread a hand drawn
map and put R- 1.5 on the map in that area. I have looked back and I have not been able
to find any other ordinances or documentation with regard to that. Once we did discover
that, it was our duty to make sure that the applicant was aware that that piece of property
was not zoned -R-1.5, as was shown on the map and that the only way that property could
be rezoned is to go through this process through Planning Commission and City Council.
That is where we are at today.
Estes: My memory is the same as Mr. Osbome's. Ever since I can remember for the last forty
years there has been a mechanic's garage on that property, would that be a C-2 use?
Conklin: Yes, C-2.
Estes: Would R-1.5 be a downzoning from C-2? Commissioners, are there any other questions?
Man: Mr. Chair, I guess I have a question for Tim. Tim, I apologize that I don't have my land
use map with me tonight. Could you maybe at least, in looking at the property maps on
3.7 and 3.8, on our land use plan it refers in our back ground information that it is
consistent with the land use plan and allows us a transition from commercial to residential
or from R-2?
Conklin: We do have R-2 zoning immediately to the east. Our land use plan does show this as
residential land use.
Man: It says a mix of housing types within the area and we will provide a transition from R-2
zoning across Garland. How far back on our land use plan does the R-1.5 go?
Conklin: We do not show individual zoning districts on our land use plan.
Man: You just show it as residential.
Conklin: We show as residential with the policy being, we encourage mixed use type developments
where appropriate and allow flexibility for developers and individuals to live in communities
that have an opportunity for mixed residential housing types.
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 19
Man: Is there a typical transition geographic area that is done in planning that says R-2 is this
much, R- 1, R- 1.5. How do you transition to that? Is it blocks, is it multiple blocks, is it
sections? lam just trying to get a feel. One of the concerns I heard was inthis area now
becoming with this rezoning would we see this whole area develop into a multi unit as
opposed to single family unit zoning?
Conklin: Typically, in newer developments you will see a transition between commercial and then
you may have a block of multifamily that can step down to some townhouses and some
single family. I have seen that. In these areas you typically find a mixed use type of
residential housing types in some of these areas. I think you have to look at it on a case
by case basis and make your recommendation based on whether or not the findings can
be met and the bylaws.
Man: One other question. On the determination ofwhether it would alter population density and
in my mind that is an increase in traffic, etc. I drive through this area quite a bit and I
certainly understand the comments about the increased traffic and the increase in potential
danger. As a result of that, it says slightly. When does it become moderately or more
because we are going from a five unit capacity, ifl read this correctly, to twelve units per
acre or sixteen in this case. That seems more than slightly to me. I guess maybe in terms
ofwe already have just three streets up a back log of people trying to turn onto Sycamore
and Deane and Garland at rush hour time periods. What I don't want to do is create
another situation because of our zoning a hundred yards down.
Conklin: Garland Avenue is on our Master Street Plan as a principal arterial street. In the future it
is planned to be widened to that standard. The standard is designed to carry large volumes
of traffic, anywhere from 16,000 to 18,000 vehicles per day. When we look at traffic we
are looking at what the streets are, our Master Street Plan classifications and what these
streets are designed for. In the future what they are designed to handle. That is what we
are looking at in this location.
Allen: Looking at the map on page 3.7, is basically all of the property that is visible on this map
east of Garland R-2 and west of Garland R-1?
Conklin: Yes, that is pretty much true. College Park Apartments is zoned R-2. All to the east and
north on Garland is zoned R-2.
Man: Where is the triplex, the current ones? Not the one proposed with this zoning on this
particular drawing we are looking at.
•
•
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 20
Conklin: Ifyou look at Addington Avenue it goes north it would be on that lot, those two triplexes
right there.
Marr: Ok, thank you.
Hoffman: I have a question for our City Attorney. In reading the background, it looks like the
applicant purchased the property with the understanding from our map at the time that it
was R-1.5 and I think that has been established. If for some reason the zoning were not
to pass at this level or the Council level, would the city be responsible, could they be sued
for this or would that be something that the title company should've picked up on and it
would go to the title company?
Williams: s I wouldn't want to advise an applicant whether or not he should sue the city.
Hoffman: I'm not after that, I'm just curious.
Williams: Obviously, the city does have it's statutory immunity for negligent actions that we would
attempt to assert in any sort of suit ifthat happened. I am not telling you that that would
bean absolute bar to any potential liability that we would have. The applicant also might
look toward a title company or something like that that might have missed this. The title
company would be saying that they relied on the official map that was put on the website
and that we had. You are just making a recommendation to the City Council. City
Council has to make the final decision and they will be the ones deciding the liability
question also if it has to come up there. They certainly rely a lot upon your
recommendations. I think they usually follow what the Planning Commission does here so
it is very important to them. I think that a lot of the motivation probably from our Planning
staff was the fact that we did make a mistake and we acknowledge that mistake. It was
inadvertent, we did not want to make it, but it was made and it did put all of these parties
in an awkward and difficult position and I think that is why they encouraged them if they
wanted to go forward that they did have to come before the Planning Commission and the
City Council in order to rectify this problem. Even though we did make a mistake we have
to rely upon the actual ordinance and the ordinance said this is R-1.
Hoffman: Thank you. I absolutely agree that it puts everybody in a difficult situation. I have one
more comment about the former use of the property having been for a mechanic's garage.
In my mind that use is, although commercial in nature, not so much of an impact on the
neighborhood as an additional sixteen units might be because its hours of operation are
only during the daytime. I have heard a lot of concern expressed about night time activity
and a lot of activity happening after hours. The last question I have is for the applicant I
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 22
Bunch: It would be one lot for the existing structure and then a second lot for the proposed
structures?
Osborne: Yes.
Estes: Are there any other questions or comments? The existing structure is a mechanic's garage
and that is a C-2 permitted use. Some of the other things..
Shackelford: There is also a house.
Osborne: We are leaving the house and tearing down the garage.
Estes: Right. The garage is on the corner of Garland and Hendrix and that is a C-2 use. Other
C-2 uses that are permitted by right are adult live entertainment, clubs or bars. If it was
my property I would much rather something other than a C-2 and would much prefer 1.5.
As I look at the Commercial Thoroughfare of Garland it would seem to me that from a
planning perspective the appropriate use would be C-1. Again, I would much prefer it if
I was a property owner.
Richards: Wouldn't the school keep the live entertainment out?
Estes: The school could keep it from becoming a bar but it could not keep it from becoming a live
adult entertainment facility. That is a permitted use as a matter of right in a C-2 zoning
district.
Hoffman: It can't be within a thousand feet of the school.
Estes: I think it is to serve alcohol.
Hoffman: I don't know but I don't think we are talking about a strip bar though.
Estes: Well, just to reveal to you a little bit of my thought process, I'm going to vote in favor of
the rezoning request and the reason is because I consider it a downzoning. I consider it
much less intrusive and offensive than other possible zoning and the permitted uses that fall
within that zoning. Are there any comments?
Motion:
Ward: My thoughts on that particular piece ofproperty is that everything along Hwy. 112 and
Planning Commission
January 14, 2002
Page 24
Shackelford: Sure.
Bunch: On this lot line adjustment, a question for the applicant. Does the 1.36 acres include both
the proposed duplexes and the existing house that will remain? There has been a lot line
adjustment and we don't have that before us so we don't know how many acres the
existing house sits upon and whether or not this project would come through as a large
scale development. That is one of the questions that would also have an effect with the
neighborhood's concerns if we could see this project again. If it comes through as a large
scale development there would be a little more over site on it. Could the applicant please
tell me what the breakdown is on the size and whether you anticipate bringing this through
as a large scale?
Conklin: These were existing lots when we looked at the lot line adjustment. Because they are
existing and individually they are less than an acre we can not require them to go through
large scale development.
Bunch: Now what we have presented to us is a 1.36.
Conklin: It is more than one tract.
Bunch: Just for the record, that is two tracts and would not have to go through the large scale
development process.
Conklin: We've looked at it and yes, the ordinance reads that anything over an acre is required to
go through large scale development.
Bunch: Thank you.
Estes: We have a motion by Commissioner Ward and a second by Commissioner Shackelford
to recommend approval ofthis rezoning request subject to a Bill of Assurance that the
project will not exceed nine units. Is there any other discussion? Renee, would you call
the roll please?
Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call the motion to forward RZN 02-1.00 was approved by a
vote of 5-4-0 with Commissioners Man, Hoover, Allen and Bunch voting against it.
Estes: The motion
passes by a vote
of five to
four.
That is a
recommendation only to the
Fayetteville
City Council for
approval
of the
rezoning
request.
• STAFF REVIEW FORM •
X AGENDA REQUEST
CONTRACT REVIEW
GRANT REVIEW
For the Fayetteville City Council meeting of February 5, 2002.
FROM:
Tim Conklin Planning Urban Development
Name Division Department
ACTION REQUIRED: To approve an ordinance for RZN 02-1.00 as submitted by
Robert Schmitt for property located at 1140 Hendrix and (110 I-IEn4AIX The
property is zoned R-1, Low Density Residential and contains approximately
1.36 acres. The request is to rezone to R -j,6 Moderate Density Residential.
COST TO CITY:
Cost of this Request Category/Project Budget Category/Project Name
Account Number Funds Used To Date Program Name
Project Number Remaining Balance Fund
BUDGET REVIEW: Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached
Budget Manager Administrative Services Director
CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW: GRANTING AGENCY:
Accounting Manager *Date
Date
Purchasing Officer Date
Internal Auditor
ADA Coordinator
Date
Date
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommended approval and on January 14, 2002
Planning Commission voted 5-4-0 to recommend approval subject to a Bill of
Assurance limiting the maximum number of units to nine and to forward the
rezoning along to the City Council.
•
Date
' pate
Date
Cross Reference
New Item: Yes
Prey Ord/Res #:
Orig Contract Date:
Orig Contract Number
E
FA YETTEVPLLE
City Clerk's Division
113 West Mountain
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Phone: 479-575-8323 Fax 479-718-7695
To: Tim Conklin, Planning Division
From: Heather Woodruff, City Clerk
Date: April 29, 2002
F.mail:citycicrkQoLfaywevillaar.us
In regards
to Ordinance No.
4384 we have not received
the Bill of Assurance required, which is
needed to
complete the file.
Please reply and update us
on this document.
Thank you.
Heather Woodruff, City Clerk
113 West Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
575-8323
email: hwoodruff@d.fayetteville.ar.us
010 03 City f Fayetteville
update •ndex Maintenance
Document IterTr Action
Reference
Date
Ref. Taken
Brief
D
RES
4022002
4384
RZN
02 -
Enter Keywords........: ORD. 4384
File Reference #......:
security Class........:
Expiration Date.......:
Date for cont/Referred:
Name Referred to......:
REZONE
RZN 02-1.00
1.36 ACRES
1140 HENDRIX
110 GARLAND
THOMPSON, BROCK
MICROFILM
5/23/2002
9:28::16
escription
1.00/BROCK THOMPSON
Retention Type: _
**** Active ****
Cmdl-Return
Cmd8-Retention
Cmd4-Delete Cmd3-End
Press 'ENTER' to Continue
Cmd5-Abstract
Yes No
(c) 1986-1992
Munimetrix Systems Corp.
-4Jt t3/off. q3 Sy Rz�
ate` RECEIVED OV2 o�
JAN 31 ?M?
BILL OF ASSURANCE PLANNING D!'/,
FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
In order to obtain approval of a request for a zoning reclassification, the
owner of this property, (hereinafter "Petitioner") M.B.B. Investment Corp.,
hereby voluntarily offers this Bill of Assurance and enters into this binding
agreement and contract with the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
The Petitioner expressly grants to the City of Fayetteville the right to
enforce any and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court
of Washington County, Arkansas, and agrees that if Petitioner or Petitioner's
successors violate any term of this Bill of Assurance substantial irreparable
damage justifying injunctive relief has been done to the citizens and City of
Fayetteville, Arkansas. The Petitioner acknowledges that the Fayetteville
Planning Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonably rely
upon all of the terms and conditions with this Bill of Assurance in considering
whether to approve Petitioner's rezoning request.
Petitioner hereby voluntarily offers assurances that Petitioner and
Petitioner's property shall be restricted as follows if Petitioner's rezoning is
approved by the Fayetteville City Council:
The number and type of structures upon the property are limited to two
(2) triplexes on one (1) lot and one (1) triplex [integrating existing house as
S
one (1) unit of triplex] on the other lot for a total of three (3) triplexes on both
lots.
Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terms shall run
with the land and bind all future owners unless and until specifically released
by Resolution ofthe Fayetteville City Council. This Bill of Assurance shall be
filed for record in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's Office after
Petitioner's rezoning is effective and shall be noted on any Final Plat or Large
Scale Development which includes some or all of Petitioner's property.
IN. WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and
conditions stated above, M.B.B. Investment Corp. as the owner (Petitioner)
voluntarily offers all such assurances.
M.B.B. INVESTMENT CORP.
By OA
BROCK THO SON
President
DATE O
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this 30"' day ofJanuary, 2002.
-2-
a a
NOT Y PUBLIC
My Commission Expires:
RICHARD P. OSBORNE, NOTARY PUBUC
WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 03-0303
u
ty
� 1♦ a
-3-
M
o 4L: »; 1{yry{•o c+Q ,
.' .� 0 rr ,nS
I��
�tl �IU:ILL
I fit oa_
j r
il �I l t pl'i
•rtr�'1. `� `� tl�� __
.. �1A LLiI I{ l+a r
f C.a �___
i 1'tt4 i Ij Ap r o k,
7� t
(
• ,.�rl
II
M r °� • Ir �� . i,.
ITflj �. i�aa
a 9�rt
,; r , a IJ f d t Ii 1 tom { � wf a
fl i a
J trJLt
V Y I��y
111
'
N.
( � .I.
Lr::r:u �
3 ♦ A�i�
r
-
j,lav
9, I n .T1♦ _
r . 11 �� � 1�<
.1 Ir �.4Oti� F>r�,' rrt
1
;ka,°j _,._ `- i -• �r
imii
i1 1
[H
'i„ i [; 1. y'.:
` r_a 1
1(L y
F- �i �r r \\lam I_• cvt, t Ja ilq nI<
ter.. -a
��•° � °� � r<'\��r��lr �I1 � �41
�i�•l,�°`+ter la1
•::
V.
r l
- ._ 4 '-I f
t r
I J a I• I a
Q ii�Cl Ell__
Ij
- _ 1 a,,� - LJ \S
®
n
, .. Y a� ..
' �.�sn
t q ° ° � � �
a c e u r.
,'4 , j .t.
.7,'4.,-:
d pJ�yy4 if G ,c1L � An U ,s. ` o p:F`
> ( D � '. ��11.'/ �
F r .. C; m ` .r p 1
.I 1
r u ` i' �1r � do � •. -
a. �'' 9 � .,
I
ap n
I� p(
Q
r � I� 1
y
I � e _
t J� L
,
L{ . 1 a 5�s • r� r` Loa J
r �
1 Its tl ... .. I ti ,l j '
._i_',.+__
P.
e
\
1
SF -I 7__aoo
'/ 8< ,a861 .K .o'o£ - , `; —sew 1
hi J • I I 3 t
•
I �
I �• am . ley - - .
jI o 1A
I I I \ ❑ ✓ N p s j l', t % I N' ' 1. � \ `.
A M
I
I - /-J'"1
I` 14
/ I N �' soh
00+£I n i / ;-4a I+'
R amrn jr O 00£ Yom'
�` _>� } - Imo' 0 •
-\ I `om ` l .t;. ,
I1
S0002'42"W Aga N / : €JI' Q / 0
j. ,.:uk:c' 129 _ w flz
w
�j C p rC N f ti'v?isuz
.�
bay / .t7 ..w ;.p S Ct '
AV ply _____ ____ + ___'SS • iZ �
II O
1 ry~
��r .mow �,��,�a}-/
$6'ZLl --- I
HLNON
L. -
`� 0 - '-1
% �/
/
o
I X I
00+1
Il //. _ o� 1
,
S • CD
S
• Community Bank
of North Arkansas MEMBER FDIC I
••F
ID
1
March 19, 2002
City of Fayetteville City Council
Dear Alderman
This letter is in reference to property purchased on the comer of Hendrix and Garland by MBB Investment
Corp. (Brock Thompson). Mr. Thompson placed an application with Community Bank of North Arkansas to
purchase said property, with plans to build tri-plexes on said property. One of the conditions placed by the
bank for closing, was that the City of Fayetteville acknowledge in written form that the property was properly
zoned for this use. Upon receiving a document signed by an employee of the city so stating that the property
was zoned R-1.5, the loan was dosed.
It should be understood that this loan was dosed on the information provided by the City of Fayetteville and
that as a bank we rely on the city for accurate information to help protect not only the customers of the bank,
but also the bank itself
•
•
Sincerely,
l/ r
ohn A. Long
Vice President
Community Bank of North Arkansas
1685 East Joyce Boulevard • Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 • 501-973-2265 • fax 501-973-2250
• TESTIMONIALS 0
Neighborhood
Comments
A-
• from citizens on 3/14/02- 3/19/02
.'They should let him build like he was told he could. I've live in this city for 10 years. "
"I signed the anti petition originally, but having seen Mr. Thompson's plans, I have changed
my mind and would think this project will be a beautiful improvement to this area. His
intentions are sincerely for the betterment of the area! " Mona York (1505 N. Garland) 479-
582-4704, Lives beside the Project
"Very Nice" Melarie LaChance (1437 Garland) Across Hendrix from Project
"The building is pretty. " Nell Finley (1139 Hendrix) Across Hendrix from Project
1 have lived here all my life. That's a bunch of BULL."
"If it can happen to you, it can happen tome!"
"My son and I have had seriously considered moving from S. Maxwell due to this part of our
city becoming nothing but catering to those who prefer "slum " type living. I believe this may
be the answer for this part of out city. We need something like Brock 's project to give pride
• back to this neighborhood that has been destroyed due to non -caring citizens. " Deborah
Washington (1136 S. Maxwell)
"The city should buy back the land from you or let you build what they told you could build. "
"I go to college here and my friend had a class where the Mayor was asked a question about
it, they asked him what he thought, he said that they were going to make things right, that was
the first I had heard about it. We're going to be following it, good luck"
" I have lived in this area since 1951— we need something positive like this project to get the
area going again" Carmen Lierly (1417Addington, 1333 Mt.Comfort)
"I wasn't told the whole story when I signed that petition, I sure didn't know they were going
to look like that, they are nice. "
"I signed the petition but didn't know you were told you could build then they came back and
said you can't, that's not right. " "I'm calling Joyce!"
"I think they should let you build."
"I signed because I was told you were going to put up an apartment complex."
• **These testimonials were taken from 3/14/02 — 3/19/02; at Harp's on Garland/ Weddington
and the neighborhood of Hendrix / Garland by Brock Thompson.
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
1Z4J
wit i'.,✓*� l4v. Dnaee� �"'
Ala-
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
,4I L —L
Signature
S
1Je_iDonc L
v
Printed Name
/(3, So4* Mccw2//
FGA.y,c.-tf e,v; /lej lt,P
'77o3
,fir
• ,or ti�oo. Co
Snapshot of Project' Neighborhood Concerns •
CI
CI
Complaint
Joyce Richards —President of
Neighborhood Association
Solution
Brock, Niki and Evan Thompson
Number of Units
Bill of Assurance
(9 Total)
Two Stories
Making all single
story
Drainage — Water Displacement
Detention Pond (NO
more or Less)
Look of the Building
Picture of House
Targeted Tenants
High Rent
Interior Extras
Application and Credit Check
Detailed Landscaping
More Traffic
Multi -Family less trips than Family
Current Zone
Re -Zoned (Proposed)
5 or 6 Houses
9 Units
Two Story
Single Story
All Siding
Over 75% Brick
No alarm
Alarm system
- - -
Tile counter tops
About $600
Rent $1,000-$1,100
Any renters that can afford
Target Professionals
Minimum shrubs
Extravagant Landscaping
Minimum Tree requirement
8-12 Mature Trees
Wood Fence
Privacy/Boundary Fencing
Wood with Rock or Brick Pillars
9.57 trips per house *
6.6 trips per unit *
57 trips total*
60 trips total*
*Data - City of Fayetteville
Per Institute of Transportation Engineers
Trip Generation, 6`h Edition, 1997
Signatures
PETITION IN SUPPORT
• OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets. /)�
Arq
Printed Name
//34 Sr 'M 4x I1
FJC it{-vi/(e/ /f�� 79-70
50 3 7/6C 2ti 2c t.Q .
?aet (??Z) -- ' ..
/fe-f q5 `lo3v
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
loll
Signature
0
Printed Name
n
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
1f 9QAj-S lt1 �tUaN4
Signature (Lo ilk ui,- i+ looks
Printed Name
•
L�
)s33
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature % f �F
G/v tl&CYA-7704'
e� Z(w Y
Printed Name
/3)3
p-
' K 1 T
. �DaltiGrdti
• PO Box 9002
Fayetteviue, AR 72703
479-236-0787
March 17, 2002
I am writing this letter today in hope that the City of Fayetteville will use its good sense
in reasoning and find a fair solution on Mr. Brock Thompson's behalf. Approximately
three weeks ago a friend of mine told me about an issue where a landowner approached
the city and obtained information on the zoning of his land. The landowner wished to
build on his land and he wanted to ensure the land was zoned for the type of building he
planned to do. After the landowner obtained a statement from the city confirming that
the zoning of the land was. in compliance with the structure he wished to build, the
landowner obtained a loan from the bank and bought the supplies. My friend further
explained that the city then turned around and said that the land was not really zoned for
the type of building he wished to do and would not allow the construction. A few days
ago I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Thompson.
• When I first heard of this situation I was shocked. My shock derived not from any direct
interest in real estate but the message the city's decision sent. As a citizen and a voter in
Fayetteville, I put a great deal of trust in the city's action. This trust is based on the faith
that when the city.gives me permission to do something that they will stand behind that
decision. If for some reason that they cannot stand behind that decision they will resolve
it in a fair way.
In this case, a person went through the proper channels to build on his property. The city
gave him permission and he acted on that permission. At a later date the city removed
that permission but the harm had already been done. Based on these facts, Mr.
Thompson is in a terrible position from the city's action.
I can only hope that through the City of Fayetteville's sound reasoning they will find a
reasonable solution that will benefit all. I personally see only two possible practical
resolutions. One, the city rezone the land to what the original permission gave Mr.
Thompson. Two, the city reimburse Mr. Thompson for the construction supplies.
Obviously the first possible resolution is the least intrusive decision.
CJ
• PETITION IN SUPPORT SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
I
Li
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
'—� �lM 1/a > £ 1)
Printed Name
C]
C1
r 1
C
S
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Printed Name
akn.- L.Gv-a
Icam- Gtf
I
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
T]A N �IA�,� U i,l�i �►c
Printed Name
•
•
n
ti PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
IW3'7
Signature
Printed Name
CI
L
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
I .r("n I\!
Printed Printed Name
•
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT --
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
TEArJ
Printed Name
•
•
L�
PETITION IN SUPPORT
• OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
DV
Printed Na e
-fhti SLlec,\GQ Let Il tM �vkL(� L IIcC Nc TOLD NE Coc'v�
TQ& L(UZ IN TNk5 GkTLJ +'bp /b yE0Qs
•
0
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
rinted Name
•
j
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Printed Name
•
•
Nta
C
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
• OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
P LO-
�e�
ignat e
Print ame
•
C
•
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
• OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
.p xa d �Gt
Printed Name
•
•
I
I
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner 0f Hendrix and Garland Streets.
•�
c J_. .EA.
• •
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Sa1i4 Srni
Printed me
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
p. D 9
Signature
41XL awvt�� ti
Printed Name
•
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
• OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signat
9
C
0
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
•
L
• PETITION ISUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
•
Printed Name
PETITION IN SUPPORT
•
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Printed Name `�✓ k'� f N�aI
• V
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Printed Name
•
n
6
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
12(1 f
Signature
Printed Name
•
•
E
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
ytjt
Signatue
jP, p
Printed Name
•
I
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner 0f Hendrix and Garland Streets.
pC�N a, r`Atz�
Printed Name
CJ
CI
L
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
�j✓'(�(kLA4I �QVISDVI
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
�ignature (�
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN F SUPPORT
OREZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Printed Name
•
-
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signa }re
J L 0OEL
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
L. IancA U.
Printed Name
0
•
C
C
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
rr 4 f Po its
Printed Name
•
•
S
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
CI
CI
Li
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
3aia-1 G_'ba.-ioH
Printed Name
r
L�
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
,gnature
` VGZnd' Cvv,tron
Printed 14ame
•
s i
9
Srnrkn
Srnrkn
Grws as
\�-
Rob& t\\opt-
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Grt 4f
Printed NameG
•
L
C
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
S: g nature
cLarkr
Panted Name
I
•
I
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
'{'
Printed Name
•
•
S
S
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Si;iiatur
S-tePiien c-, J/y4r
Pr�ind Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
properh' at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
,..ountur
�fgvi5 t�ei�Y�Pf
Printed Name
•
E
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned
supports the rezoning to
R-1.5
0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland
Streets.
Signature
ie2
Printed Name
CJ
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Sig cure
Printed Name
CJ
•
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer 0f Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Mgtt, 4A. SCN,u/T�
Printed Name
•
•
•
C
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signat,3
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF:
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
$nature
-:2aMETT Jl:/Fc-LSND
Printed Name
CI
CJ
L
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
f.�"fq�Iy J2t�gC�%%q/1
i
Printed ame
•
•
I
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signate
Printed Name
L�
0
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
oropertya the come of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Printed Name
•
C J
S
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned
supports the rezoning to R-1.5
of the 1.36 acres of real
property
at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
5ignatur"e U
Printed ame
L
•
PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning
property at the corner of Hendrix and
Signature
T; h(.kv,� i
Printed Name
1.36 acres of
r
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
&49"f5. 41L�
Printed Name
r
L
CI
0
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
SW c0i11r11c
Printed Name
r
L
L
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
a
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
'9 i, s
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
ignaatttuure
&qke /S Pe veS
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIXAND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
A n /
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature'
\�r�F�v,___
Printed Name
•
•
n
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 0f the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Sgnature
(Ye
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
urouerty at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
&s 12 Ecw
Printed Name
•
CI
CI
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R- 1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Signature
Printed Name
•
CI
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
•
CJ
LI
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned
supports the rezoning to R-1.5
of the 1.36 acres of real
property
at the corner of Hendrix and Garland
Streets.
Signature
Printed Name
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Sig ature
2pmdr(� G,odnigh-'
Printed Name
L
r
L
I
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
• ♦ •r e
L J
•
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets:
ii / ll i.ii.Lul
•
•
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
fl ry• ,•
RE7ONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF`HENDRIX,A U GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the corner of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Printed Name
•
.
0
•
•
yam,
PETITION IN SUPPORT
REZONING REQU8ST.4:.;:
AT CORNER g ItEND ANSD GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the eorner'of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Iq
ignature
_�..� :.....::...:.._....:..
....
_............_...... __._....
• PETITION IN SUPPORT
OF
REZONING REQUEST
AT CORNER OF HENDRIX AND GARLAND
The undersigned supports the rezoning to R-1.5 of the 1.36 acres of real
property at the comer of Hendrix and Garland Streets.
Printed Name
ZZ too Ea_Uard, u .
Street Address
• Fayetteville, Arkansas 77161 . .
•
• BILL OF ASSURANCE
FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
In order to obtain approval of a request for a zoning reclassifacation, the owner of
this property, (hereinafter"petitioner") M.B.B. Investment Corp., hereby voluntarily
offers this Bill of Assurance and enters into this binding agreement and contract with the
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
The Petitioner expressly grants to the City of Fayetteville the right to enforce any
and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court of Washington County,
Arkansas, and agrees that if Petitioner of Petitioner's successors violate any term of this
Bill of Assurance substantial irreparable damage justifying injunctive relief has been
done to the citizens and City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The Petitioner acknowledges that
the Fayetteville Planning Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonably
rely upon all of the terms and conditions with this Bill of Assurance in considering
whether to approve Petitioner's rezoning request.
Petitioner hereby voluntarily offers assurances that Petitioner and Petitioner's
property shall be restricted as follows if Petitioner's rezoning is approved by the
Fayetteville City Council:
The structures will be 75% brick exterior
• The structures will be one story
Extensive landscaping package
Sodded front yards
8 —12 Mature trees
Privacy fencing for the property.
Drainage control — Detention pond
Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terms shall run with the
land and bind all future owners unless and until specifically released by Resolution of the
Fayetteville City Council. The Bill of Assurance shall be filed for record in the
Washington County Circuit Clerk's Office after Petitioner's rezoning is effective and
shall be noted on any Final Plat or Large Scale Development which includes some of all
of Petitioner's property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and conditions
stated above, M.B.B. Investment Corp. as the owner (Petitioner) voluntarily offers all
such assurances.
M.B.B. Investment Corp.
By
T. BROCK THOMPSON
President
•