Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5191 � IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUDoc ID : 012690380011 Tvpe : IIIIIIIII Recorded : 02/03/2009 at 11 : 49 : 00 AM ! Fee Amt : $65 . 00 Pace 1 of 11 Mashlnoton Countv . AR Bette Stamoe Circuit Clerk F11e2009-00003228 I ORDINANCE NO. 5191 AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT TITLED R-PZD 08-2898, SOUTHPASS, LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 540 AND CATO SPRINGS ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 265); CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 910.36 ACRES; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 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-A, Residential Agricultural to R-PZD 08-2898, Southpass, as shown in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2: That the change in zoning classification is based upon the approved master development plan, development standards, statement of commitments and the conditions of approval as submitted, determined appropriate and approved by the City Council; further, that the conditions of approval shall be filed and available for viewing in the office of the City Clerk/Treasurer of the City of Fayetteville. Section 3 : That this ordinance shall take effect and be in full force at such time as all of the requirements of the master development plan have been met. Section 4: That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above. ` GX�RK TRS,, , c\� •9061Y O,c. G� PASSED and APPROVED this 6th day of November, 2008. : FAYETTEVILLE ' APPROVE ATTEST: = _ By' By !f7 !�� nth/ �' DAN COODY, Mayor SOND E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer "!4wnnu"' � � : : • : All _f. i i i - Y„x��C�. v ' x r Y ver If I ix6, Fo s • x i e y rEs � rt �"�� hf 4 Vi IV a C 7W Y I tt IVVI � - ` ,� '' ' r rk � "` < y �s. ,,,,}}�� �rx Y '1°k .�:�-' �h' >stdt"4 "t. a> was`-• c Nr a vt iv �' arR3'� Iry sHzm fres- :' i'\' * s t R 41� 1V ,_ iV �tib'� �` i ♦ t k t jkuiR!t �S` �Cm r vim, k Y � M1"a , s \ S _. i y✓� { ; Z Aa. _ e .E s �� � `,a- av 7� H`/ - Ip �.yY t A' n�d E rryIf f.a r/. � �. t s \Y � Z �A rS*` d'/ �iv ' if ltdfe 3'S t htS $ d�C"+�,✓SSM Y a � a a "t 6 1 , t '' r'•t�. � �� ._ r a ° 1 -il�`' r \ �" ' t 'v�vr r LL e F i r yi ] y t F y: �t it i xIf y �> ✓ e .i r ..—... 1 { Sv 1-` s < a iaef ° i .VVV.IV.11 flf,f. If r4If I � tigt t rr .�, �tX 11, , i : EXHIBIT `B" R-PZD 08-2898 SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT (OVERALL DESCRIPTION) THE FRACTIONAL SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, RANGE 30 WEST AND A PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, RANGE 30 WEST AND THE FRACTIONAL NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE FRACTIONAL SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31 , RANGE 30 WEST AND THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31 , RANGE 30 WEST, AND THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 25, RANGE 31 WEST AND THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, RANGE 31 WEST, ALL IN TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO-WIT: BEGINNING AT A FOUND ALUMINUM MONUMENT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE FRACTIONAL NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30 AND RUNNING THENCE S8701511 0"E 1834.34' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S87015110"E 1315 .53' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST ' QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S8701511011E 1315 .53' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S87015' 10"E 1315 .53' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S87003' 16"E 1148. 15' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED ON THE WESTERNLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF U.S. INTERSTATE #540 NORTH, THENCE ALONG SAID ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY S09021 '05"W 48 .62' TO A ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY MONUMENT, THENCE S24041 '50"E 810.46' TO THE CENTERLINE OF ARKANSAS HIGHWAY #265, THENCE ALONG SAID ROAD CENTERLINE S49001 '25"W 147.54', S510504311W 278.391, S4701711711W 104.60', S4102711611W 126.251, S3800315911W 1730.471, THENCE LEAVING SAID ROAD CENTERLINE N87023'35 "W 37.23' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE N8701413211W 1322.98' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S0301013 "W 1314.09' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 , THENCE S030 10'31 "W 1314.09' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 , THENCE S0205615611W 214.50' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N87030129"W 293 .70' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE S33 °00'07"W 99.00' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N51 °59'53 "W 528.00' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N86059'53 "W 542.91 ' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 , THENCE N87009'20"W 423.69' TO A FOUND PIPE, THENCE N8700912061W 886.41 ' TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 , THENCE N87009120"W 785.52' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N87009'20"W 963 .77' TO A FOUND STONE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE FRACTIONAL SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31 , THENCE N8700311811W 962. 79' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE NO3006'30"E 249.93' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N86053'02"W 350.00' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01 °47'26"E 1060.68' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 36, THENCE N87° 16'27"W 1343 .38' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED IN THE CENTERLINE OF A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY, THENCE ALONG SAID GRAVEL DRIVEWAY CENTERLINE N04002'35"E 72.47', N 110 19'49"E 40.241 , THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WITH A RADIUS OF 101 .22' AND A CHORD BEARING AND DISTANCE OF N24009'50"W 87.35', N48°44' 10"W 34.21 ', THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WITH A RADIUS OF 215.87' AND A CHORD BEARING AND DISTANCE OF N67002'42"W 157. 18', N89017123 "W 123 .0915 N87° 11 '38"W 161 .280, THENCE LEAVING SAID GRAVEL DRIVEWAY CENTERLINE N01057'34"E 1055 .60' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE S8703113711E 1230.87' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED ON A BLUFF LINE, THENCE ALONG SAID BLUFF LINE N17008'05 "E 157.76', N23029130' E 127.51 ', NO2025'44"E 131 .20', N30029111 "W 198.420, N1601514511W 180.521, NO300015811E 113 .621 , N14013'54"E 202. 18', N24051 '0211W 100.731, N0804111711E 110.591, N6705314211E 173 .71 ' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE LEAVING SAID BLUFF LINE N87018122' W 147.50' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01028'04"E 659.86' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE S87013'07"E 660.25' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01027139"E 675 .06' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE S87009'38"E 1314.52' TO A FOUND STATE MONUMENT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE S02°25'51 "W 36.60' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING IN ALL 910.36 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO ALL EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD, IFANY. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 1 of 7 Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the following conditions of approval associated with R-PZD 08-2898 (Southpass). Conditions of Approval: 1 . Compliance with adopted land use policies and goals including City Plan 2025 and the PZD ordinance: As discussed in the findings in this report and with conditions herein, staff finds that SouthPass is in compliance with the adopted land use policies and City Plan 2025. While the project is not considered an infill development (Goal #1 ), this site has been anticipated for a number of years in the City Plan 2025 as an area for greenfield development in the City Neighborhood pattern, and in staff s opinion does not contribute to sprawl, if developed as being proposed. The proposed development is preferred over a typical suburban sprawl development that segregates various residential types and isolates commercial development in an area only accessible by vehicle, while dividing up sensitive natural environments (hillsides, floodplain, tree canopy) into individual lots. This project maximizes environmental protection, integrates a mix of residential housing types, and plans for the commercial development in a traditional downtown pattern. In addition, the opportunity for a mixture of building types and uses Iwithin all of the planning areas has been provided. The property's location is well-suited for growth in the manner encouraged by City Plan 2025, with direct access to I-540 and State Highway 265, which leads into the University of Arkansas. It is also in close proximity to the University of Arkansas Research and Technology Park and numerous other amenities. The proposed land use pattern is in a traditional town form, offering a variety of housing choices for residents and support services within walking distance, while preserving and enhancing the City's enduring green network with the addition of about 500 acres of greenspace into the City. 2. Architectural design standards, and overall compatibility and transition in the proposed development: Staff finds in favor of this determination. The building elevations of structures in this development are well-articulated and provide for a consistent and overriding theme throughout the development, which transitions well between the mixed use buildings/flats, commercial structures, townhouses, and single- family detached houses. The zoning criteria and elevations for the residential and non- residential structures requires buildings to front the street, and small building setbacks help create a streetscape and facilitate an overall compact and complete development. There is a wide variety of uses and structures prevent a visual monotony while maintaining a compatible architectural design throughout the site. Commercial and residential design standards will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. 3 . Connectivity: The primary entrances into the site are off of the extension of Shiloh Drive into the northeastern portion of the site and from Cato Springs Road along the eastern boundary of the property. Several streets are proposed directly off of Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265), and access into the southern portion of the site is provided off of Kessler Mountain Road (County Road 201 ). The internal street pattern in the Town Center and Crescent Park planning areas are based on a modified grid pattern. As the development spreads over the site, streets follow the topography and wind along CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 2 of 7 the ridgelines and valleys connecting the various clusters of development. Street connectivity, outside of the Town Center is on the whole low, however, due to existing constraints of topography and the cluster development pattern which preserves approximately 487 acres of parks and open space, over 53% of the entire site. However, pedestrian connectivity is excellent with a number of pedestrian and mountain biking trails that will traverse the entire 910-acre site connecting the clusters of development to the 200-acre regional park in the central portion of the site and the urban center in the northeast portion of the site. Staff generally recommends in favor of the access and connectivity as proposed with the understanding that additional street connections and stub-out points will be evaluated at the time of development for each planning area to ensure the SouthPass neighborhoods are well connected to other surrounding areas, as appropriate. 4. Street improvements: Detailed review for each phase of development will occur, as the development is considered by the Planning Commission. As with all conceptual PZDs, specific infrastructure improvements will be determined at that time. Typical improvements required by the Unified Development Code include 'sidewalks, street lights, turn lanes, curb, gutter and storm drainage, pavement widening and overlay where needed, and turn signals where needed. Unless specifically approved by the City Council as a cost-share agreement, the developer shall be responsible for all street improvements noted herein. After review of the traffic study submitted for SouthPass (July 16, 2008), the Addendum (August 22, 2008) and the existing street conditions, the following street improvements will be necessary, at minimum, to facilitate development of the project: A. Cato Springs Road: 1 . Fully actuated traffic signals, coordinated as part of a closed-loop traffic signal system, are warranted to be installed at the following intersections before completion of full build-out: a. Cato Springs Road and I-540 northbound on-ramp/Hwy 71 northbound ramps b. Cato Springs Road and I-540 northbound off-ramp c. Cato Springs Road and I-540 southbound ramps d. Cato Springs Road and Public Street #4 (Shiloh extension) e. Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road 2. Timing of construction of the recommended signalization will depend upon phasing of the development; a warrant analysis may be required with development review, to determine the specific improvements necessary. 3 . Cato Springs Road will be required to be widened to three and five lanes in some places, to accommodate the additional traffic volume. Improvements . shall extend to east of the 1-540 interchange, and will include widening underneath the existing overpass. B. Shiloh Drive: Shiloh Drive shall be extended to and through the site to connect Cato Springs Road to 6`h Street (Hwy 62). Timing of the construction of this street will depend upon phasing of the development and a determination of its necessity by the Planning Commission to ensure safe and efficient traffic circulation on CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 3 of 7 surrounding streets and highways is maintained. The Addendum to the Traffic Study (August 22, 2008), prepared by Peters & Associates, indicates that the Shiloh Road connection will be required no later than Phase 14, assuming all other recommended street improvements from the original traffic study (July 16, 2008) are complete and the phasing has proceeded in sequence to that which is proposed. The developer shall provide a traffic study, when the street connection is required, to address potential improvements to the Shiloh/Hwy 62 intersection, including traffic signals, widening, etc., in coordination with the plans of AHTD to improve this overall interchange. C. Kessler Mountain Road: Kessler Mountain Road shall be improved to a Local Street standard, at minimum, to serve the development planned. Detailed improvements will be reviewed at the time of development. D. Judge Cummings Road: This street shall be improved to a minimum Local Street Standard, and may warrant additional improvements, to include turn lanes, depending upon the traffic projected to utilize the street. E. Assessments: No specific transportation improvement assessment districts occupy this area at this time. It is likely, however, that as development phases are reviewed, assessments for larger improvements will be required on a pro-rata basis, to ensure Ifunding is available once the improvement is necessary and that the cumulative 1 impact of each phase is accounted for. F. Street stub-outs: As each phase and planning area is reviewed in detail, recommendations for street stub-outs to provide local street connectivity will be made, depending upon terrain, environmental features, and viability for future connections. G. Internal street design : Street layout, intersection alignment, lane width, curb radii, etc. will be evaluated once designed and submitted for development review. Several areas of concern have already been identified, such as the `angled' street intersection with Cato Springs Road. Future development shall be reviewed for compliance with the access management ordinances. (PC added 09/08/08) H. Updated traffic studies will be required as development phases are reviewed. Development of the property, in its various phases, may only be approved when appropriate infrastructure improvements have been planned or installed to accommodate the traffic volume at acceptable levels of service. Please refer to the overall PZD traffic study executive summary provided in the staff report for more information at this time. 5 . Master Street Plan Amendment — Shiloh Drive: Shiloh Drive is identified on the Master Street Plan as a Collector Street providing a connection from Shiloh Drive to Cato Springs Road through the site. SouthPass proposes to extend Shiloh Drive into the site where it would transition into the urban street grid. Connections to Cato Springs Road from Shiloh Drive would be provided through the downtown street grid of the Town Center Planning Area, in multiple locations. Staff recommends in favor of the realignment given that Shiloh Drive is proposed to be extended to the site and that street connectivity to Cato Springs Road is provided in several locations. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 4 of 7 6. Master Street Plan Amendment — Cato Springs Road: Due to the amount of traffic projected for the proposed development and regional park, staff recommends Cato Springs Road be reclassified to continue the Principal Arterial designation from the I-540 interchange south to the southern boundary of the Planning Area. Recommended street improvements include widening to a five-lane section in portions of the development, and this designation is more appropriate given the anticipated traffic volumes. 7. Right-of-way dedication: The applicant shall dedicate right-of-way in compliance with the adopted Master Street Plan for Cato Springs Road, Shiloh Road, Kessler Mountain Road, and Judge Cummings Road to be determined at the time of development. Right- of-way dedication for internal streets and alleys shall be required in compliance with the Master Street Plan to be determined at the time of development. 8. Variances: Variances from the requirements of the Unified Development Code relative to development regulations and Master Street Plan cross-section standards, such as curb return radii, street cross-sections, greenspace width, etc. can only be reviewed and recommendations made when the each area is fully designed for review. By this PZD approval, the City Council grants the Planning Commission the right to consider and approve variances from street design standards, Master Street Plan cross-sections interior to the project, and other variances that are provided for within the Unified Development Code under the purview of the Planning Commission. All decisions concerning these matters may be appealed by a member of the City Council. 9. Phasing: The project is subject to the 18 project phases over 20-25 years as described in detail in the project booklet. All permits required for development within these phases are required to be obtained within the specified timeframe. Extensions may be granted subject to approval in accordance with City ordinances. Changes in phasing shall require City Council approval. 10. Parks: SouthPass shall deed a minimum amount of 200 acres to the City for an onsite regional park prior to the Mayor signing the ordinance of approval for the annexation and PZD, and shall contribute $ 1 ,000,000.00 when the City is ready to award the first construction contract for the park, in accordance with the previously executed contract. Changes to or deviation from this contractual agreement shall be at the discretion of the City Council. In addition, all residential development on the site shall be required to meet the parkland dedication ordinance requirements through land dedication, money-in-lieu, or a combination thereof. 11 . Parking: Parking is proposed in four forms: garage structures, underground parking decks, on-street, and surface parking lots. A. Parking garage structures and underground parking decks are proposed for the more intense commercial core areas and under many of the multi-family structures. All parking garage structures shall meet the requirements of Ch. 166.22 as if the project were located in the referenced zoning districts. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 5 of 7 B. On-street parking: Much of the parking for mixed use and residential areas is proposed to be on-street. For all multi-family, non-residential and mixed-use structures, each on-street parking space provided along the project frontage of each respective building may count toward the total required parking for the development. C. Surface Parking: A majority of surface parking lots will be to the interior of the mixed-use and multi-family residential lots as shown on the submitted plans. All parking lots shall be located outside of any build-to line or zone, and where situated adjacent to a public right-of-way, shall be heavily screened with landscape walls or landscaping. D. Single Family lots: Most of the residences will be provided with private parking, either in alley-facing garages or driveways. 12. Water Tanks: As referenced in the contract between the City of Fayetteville and South Pass before final approval of these requests, deeds for the water tank site shall be q received prior to the Mayor signing ordinances of approval, should the requests for annexation and Master Development Plan PZD be approved. 13 . Tree Preservation and Landscaping: Tree preservation and landscape plans will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. A minimum of 25% tree canopy will be required in accordance with city ordinances; for areas within the HHOD, a minimum of 30% will be required. A vast portion of PA-613 : Open Space, will be dedicated as off-site tree preservation, to preserve these sensitive areas as indicated on the PZD plats. Landscape plans will be required to be submitted at the time of development in compliance with ordinance included such requirements as street trees and parking lot landscaping. 14. Buffer: In order to reduce land use compatibility impacts, development on the perimeter of the SouthPass property lines directly adjacent to undeveloped property shall be subject to the following condition (this condition shall particularly apply to Planning Areas 3A- Kessler Mountain Bluff Single Family, 3C Kessler Mountain Bluff Single Family Cluster, and the northern portion of Planning Area 2A Crescent Park Single Family): a 50-foot building setback shall be provided off of all perimeter property lines, and placed in a tree preservation area or conservation easement; where such areas are not adequately vegetated, additional plantings of dense evergreen trees and shrubs shall be provided for a visual and aesthetic buffer at the time of development. This 50-foot buffer area shall be reviewed by the Planning Division and Urban Forester prior to development approval. Street connections and stub-outs are anticipated to cross these areas, at the time of development, to provide connectivity to adjoining properties. 15 . Solid Waste: All trash enclosure locations and dimensions shall be fully reviewed and approved by the Solid Waste Division at the time of development. Where street cross- sections or curb return radii do not meet city standards, auto-tum or similar analyses shall be provided to determine if Solid Waste vehicles will be able to safely and efficiently access streets within the project boundary. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 6 of 7 16. Public Service Improvements: New police and fire substations may be required on-site in order to maintain adequate levels of service as the project develops. Impact fees for development on the property shall be contributed in accordance with City ordinances. 17. Development Review: All phases of the proposal shall be reviewed through the appropriate development review process (Large Scale Development, Preliminary/Final Plat, etc.), as determined by the Zoning & Development Administrator, prior to commencement of construction. 18. Architectural Standards: Buildings shall be constructed to be consistent with the concepts depicted in the building elevations in the PZD booklet. All buildings shall be designed and constructed to front onto public rights-of-way. All non-residential buildings or mixed use buildings shall adhere to Commercial Design Standards and all multi-family buildings shall adhere to Urban Residential Design Standards. 19. View protection: Staff recommends that structures that will be located at higher elevations, such as along Kessler Mountain Bluff, that will be taking advantage of views from the site, be designed with materials, colors and rooflines that are muted and will dissolve into the natural background as much as possible. The intent is to prevent egregious structures from reducing the natural beauty of the surrounding hillside. Where possible, the design of structures should take into account the height of the ridgeline and surrounding tree canopy, to reduce and mitigate the visual impact. 20. Impact Fees: All impact fees shall be paid in accordance with city ordinances. 21 . Signage: Signs shall be permitted in accordance with Chapter 174 of the Fayetteville Unified v U d De elopment Code, and shall be subject to signage re requirements for specific J4 P planning areas as designated in the zoning criteria. No pylon or pole signs shall be permitted on the property. 22. The definition of "family" in accordance with Ch. 151 of the UDC shall apply to the proposed PZD; Single family Planning Areas shall be treated as single-family residential districts, and all other planning areas shall be treated as all other zoning districts where residential uses are permitted. 23 . All statements and commitments imposed on the City as discussed in the PZD booklet shall be not applicable. Neither the Planning Commission nor the applicant may bind this City Council or a future City Council to cost-share agreements with the PZD approval. A separate agreement or contract with the City Council is necessary in order to facilitate any cost-sharing measures. 24. The Master Development Plan, Statement of Commitments and Architectural Standards submitted by the applicant shall be considered binding and tied to the zoning of the property. Conditions of approval as noted herein and other requirements placed upon the project with review of the Master Development Plan — Planned Zoning District by the City Council shall also be binding. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 7 of 7 25. Due to the very complex nature of this project, a detailed review of all aspects of the site and landscape plans in each phase of construction shall take place prior to issuance of building permits. Future development shall be consistent with the conceptual site plan and mix of uses as approved in the PZD. All development shall meet applicable zoning and development criteria at the time of development submittal, unless specifically waived or varied by the Planning Commission as part of the PZD approval. 26. No portion of any structure (i.e., porches, overhangs, etc.) shall encroach into building setbacks or utility easements. 27. Existing rights-of-way and utility easements that conflict with the proposed plans will have to be vacated at the time of development, and prior to issuance of building permits in those areas affected. 28. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications). 29. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable) for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private), sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the plat review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City' s current requirements. 30. All overhead electric lines 12kv and under shall be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall be located underground. 31 . Street lights shall be installed adjacent to all public and private streets (not alleys), with a separation of no greater than 300 feet. 32. All exterior lighting is required to comply with the City' s lighting ordinance. Alighting plan and cut-sheets of the proposed exterior light fixtures shall be required to be approved by Planning Staff prior to building permit. Washington County, AR I certify this instrument was filed on 02/03/2009 11 :49:00 AM I and recorded in Real Estate 1 File Number 2009-00003228 Bette stamps - Circuit Cie i by RECEIVED; 'JAN 2.0 2009 • CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE A*Awas amo nit . CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 1Cil• �a.�GeILG ' Northwest Arkansas Times Benton County Daily Record P. O. BOX 1607 FAYETTEVILLE , AR 72702 PHONE : 479-571 -6421 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION I , Cathy Wiles, do solemnly swear that I am Legal Clerk of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette newspaper. Printed and published in Benton County Arkansas, (Lowell) and that from my own personal knowledge and reference to the files of said publication , the advertisement of: City of Fayetteville Ordinance 5191 January. 13,2009 'Publication Charge : $215 .20 - P 1P Signed: Subscribed and sworn to before me This /.f day of a 0 2009 . 0 Notary Public My Commission Expires: 7,v? 0 a o /CZ �.• MM. ExA._ Do not pay from As ffidavit, an invoice will be sent' Qo > gPR1'' '•. N Wizgo PU �O o ® 1 v NIL+ ORDINANCE MO. 9191. • PLORDINANCE PLANNED ZONING ESTABLISHING DISTR CT TITLED RI1 PZD 2898 SOUIFLPASS. LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY �1 - OF FAYETTEVILLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF 1 1 INTERSTATE 540 AND CATO SPRINGS ROAD • (STATE HIGHWAY 265): CONTAINING APPROKI- r: r ..ARKANSAS MATELY 910.36 ACRES; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL I^ • ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE: _ • • w AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, .1, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C� OF FAVETTEVILLE, i ! ARKANSAST SecYon 1, That the zone clessllicetlon of the following described property is• hereby changed as 4 folbvrs:{ Residential Agricultural to RPZD 08-2698 Southpass, as shown in Exhibit + From fl -A, r•'Aand depicted in Exhibit -B' attacheG hereto and made a pan hereof. S ion n That the change in zoning tatemfication is based upon the aa conditions master develop -4 meet plan development standards, statement oofdc�ltmentS e City Counchefunhertllhai the condiaons I as submitted, determined appropriate and or v Y • of approval shall be tiled and available for viewing in the office o(the City Cle'klireasarer of the (' City of Fayetteville' f > Section 3: That this ordinance shall lake effect and be in lull force_ � at such time as a1101 the • requirements of the master development plan have tieen mt . e` `' r r ^^fm 4. That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arka`nsas, is hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1 above. ✓ l l l r �> OVER this 6th day of November. 2008. 1 1+ • I r PASSED ai, A �FR ' ' APPROVED: ATTEST: B By: 'f8ONDRA E SMITH, City GarkT+awm DAN COODY, Mayor y l , r T, . • i't Exhibit A is a map and ma Y be viewedinlhe office of.the CiryClerklTreasumr tluring normal busi- ness hours 'u EXHIBIT "B^ •+ Snt FHPARS DEV`""'"^(n„coal DFSCR1PTI0N1 njcAOT mllARrbR OF SECTION 30, RANGE 3( THE SOUTHWtm uur,nlcn u... QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE FRACTIONAL THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31; RANGE 30 WEST AND THE WEST HALF OF. EAST QUARTER, ThE NORTHEAST H A QUARTER, AND A F SOUTHEAST OUARTER OF NORTHW EST QG QUARTER, AND A PARTOF THENORTHWESTI THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, RANGE 30 WEST, -AND THE EAST HALF OF THE OHARTER AND APART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF WE NORTHWEST QUART ER OF A 1 ^I OF f11w, J1• PIN, THE THENCE A FOUND IRL CORNER OF NON 31, TH • FOUNDIROk TO A FOUND NORTHEAST f. LOCATED IN AFTER AND. WEST, ALL II' THE TO A SET$RUN FIN; OF SAID. SE„-"'TMENCE 587°0316E ILON TH WESTERNLY ER OF SAID SECTION 30, ON THE RIGHTAF-WAY OF U.S. INTERSTATE #540 RIGHT-OF-WAY 509°21'O6W 48.62' TO A ROAD RIGHT-OFWAY 46' TO THE CENTERLINE OF ARKANSAS HIGHWAY #265, THENCE 0.47'.25W 147.54, 651°SAID 27889', CENTERLINE 178' 104.60; 04T, THENCE LEAVING SAID ROAD CENTERLNE NBT23'35W iD AT -THE SOUTHEASTCORNER OF. SAID SECTION 30, THENCE 'IN, LOCATED EAT CTHE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST ER OF SAID SECTION 30, THEECEQUART'31 W 131409' TO ABET ST CORNER NORTHWEST OF THE NORTHEAST 4CE 503°10'34 W 131409' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE *IESA SE UPATER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SW - TO TO ASST IRON PIN, THENCE NB7'd029293.70' TO A SET IRON SET IRON PIN, THENCE N51°59'53W 528M.00 TO A SET IRON PIN, )UND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE IO 31, THENCE CORNER OF THE B7 '2TQUPRTF1 TO SAID SECTION 31, THENCE' N87°09'20OW B7°09'20 886.41' TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTH - QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 3LTHENCEN ATTHES 785.57 TO 20P79E3.7T TO A FOUND STONE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST .79rNWEST TO. QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST,QUARTER OF SAID O A 79' TO.A FOUND IRON PIN,'THENCE THENCE 249.93' TO A 2W SOUTHEAST A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01°47'26'E 1060$8' THESOl1THEA5T CORNER OF tHEi s'u OE A FOUND IRON QUARTER OF PINE OF101.22' AND A CHORD BEARING AND DISIANUb Jr Ncru a.. - ALONG A N67°02'42W 157.8'. N890017'23W 123.09'. NI'S OF 1AND 807 THENCE LEACHORD VING SAID GRAVEL DRIVE- WAY CENTERLINE N01°5734 -E 1055.60' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE 587'31'37-E 1230.87' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED ON A BLUFF LINE, THENCE ALONG SAID BLUFF LINE N17008.05 -E 157,76', N�13'54-E 202..118. N?05102W 1 .73. NOB I ITE 11110.59NNG7°5347E117 173.71' 7. N0358E 113.62. 1' TO AFOUND IRON PIN; THENCE LEAVING SAID BLUFF LINE N87°1822W 14750 TO A FOUND IRON PIN „THENCE NOl°2B'04'E 659.66' TO A FOUND, IRON PIN. THENCE 587°13'07'E 88025' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, ER OF TilE NORTHEAST OUE3PATER OFTHESOUTHEASTUARTEREOF SAID D AT THE NORTHWEST D ECTION2.HENCENS87°09'38'E 1314.6710 A FOUND STATE MONUMENT: LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST POINTQUARTER OF.THE F BEG NNING CONTT �NING INALL910.36 ACRES MORE OF LER OF SAID SECTION 25, ERS SUBJECT TO ALlW L EASE: MENTS AND RIGHTS-0F.WAV OF RECORD, IF PNY. j • • .- -_ RECEIVED JAN20 0 2009 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE , S City Council Meeting of October 7, 2008 Agenda Item Number CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO To: Mayor and City Council Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations From: Jeremy C. Pate, Director of Current Planning ` Date: September 18, 2008 Subject: Residential Planned Zoning District for Southpass (R-PZD 08-2898) RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of an ordinance creating a Residential Planned Zoning District (R-PZD) for Southpass, based on the development standards, plans and statement of commitments submitted. This action will establish a unique zoning district fora mixed -use project on approximately 910 acres. The proposal consists of 751 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200+ acre regional park. BACKGROUND A majority of the site is located in unincorporated Washington County and a small portion is in the City and zoned R -A, Residential Agricultural. The property is located south of the City of Fayetteville at the intersection of Interstate 540 and Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265). This project is designed to create a new urban center in a traditional mixed use town form in the flatter areas of the site adjacent to Cato Springs Road in the north, and clusters a variety of housing types over other areas of the site to avoid impacts to prominent hillsides, hilltops, and other environmental features. Central to the development is a new Community/Regional Park of over 200 acres of both passive and active recreation space, in addition to over 240 acres of preserved open space, together comprising 54% of the site area. The primary entrances into the site are off of the extension of Shiloh Drive into the northeastern portion of the site and from Cato Springs Road along the eastern boundary of the property. Several streets are proposed directly off of Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265), and access into the southern portion of the site is provided off of Kessler Mountain Road (County Road 201). The internal street pattern in the Town Center and Crescent Park planning areas are based on a modified grid pattern. As the development moves west over the site, streets follow the topography and wind along the ridgelines and valleys connecting the various clusters of development. DISCUSSION The Planning Commission voted 7-1-0 (Myres voting 'No') in favor of this request on September 8, 2008. Recommended conditions were approved by the Planning Commission and are reflected in the attached staff report. BUDGET IMPACT None. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A RESIDENTIAL PLANNED ZONING DISTRICT TITLED R-PZD 08-2898, SOUTHPASS, LOCATED SOUTH OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE AT THE INTERSECTION OF INTERSTATE 540 AND CATO SPRINGS ROAD (STATE HIGHWAY 265); CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 910.36 ACRES; AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; AND ADOPTING THE ASSOCIATED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 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 -A, Residential Agricultural to R-PZD 08-2898, Southpass, as shown in Exhibit "A" and depicted in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2: That the change in zoning classification is based upon the approved master development plan, development standards, statement of commitments and the conditions of approval as submitted, determined appropriate and approved by the City Council; further, that the conditions of approval shall be filed and available for viewing in the office of the City Clerk/Treasurer of the City of Fayetteville. Section 3: That this ordinance shall take effect and be in full force at such time as all of the requirements of the master development plan have been met. Section 4: That the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, is hereby amended to reflect the zoning change provided in Section I above. PASSED and APPROVED this APPROVED: By: DAN COODY, Mayor day of , 2008. ATTEST: By: SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer EXHIBIT "B" R-PZD 08-2898 SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT (OVERALL DESCRIPTION) THE FRACTIONAL SOUTHWEST QUARTER AND THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, RANGE 30 WEST AND A PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, RANGE 30 WEST AND THE FRACTIONAL NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE FRACTIONAL SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, RANGE 30 WEST AND THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER, THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, AND A PART OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF tHE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, RANGE 30 WEST, AND THE EAST HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE • SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER • OF SECTION•`25, RANGE 31 WEST AND THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER AND A PART.OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER AND THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, RANGE 31 WEST, ALL IN.TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO -WIT: BEGINNING ATA FOUND ALUMINUM MONUMENT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE FRACTIONAL NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30 AND RUNNING THENCE S87°15'10"E 1834.34' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S87°15'10"E 1315.53' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S87°15'10"E 1315.53' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S87°15'10"E 1315.53' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST -CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE.S87°03'16"E 1148.15' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED ON THE WESTERNLY RIGHT-OF-WAY OF U.S. INTERSTATE #540 NORTH, THENCE ALONG SAID ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY.509°2105'W 48.62' TO A ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY MONUMENT, THENCE S24°41'50"E 810.46' TO THE. CENTERLINE OF ARKANSAS HIGHWAY #265, THENCE ALONG SAID ROAD CENTERLINE S49°01'25'W 147:54', S51°50'43"W 278.39', S47°17'17'w 104.60', S41°27'16'W 126.25', S38°03'59'W 1730.47', THENCE LEAVING SAID ROAD CENTERLINE N87°23'35' W 37.23' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE N87°14'32'W 1322.98' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30, THENCE S03°10'31'W 1314.09' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, THENCE S03°10'31"W 1314.09' TO A SET IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, THENCE S02°56'56' W 214.50' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N87°30'29' W 293.70' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE S33°00'07"W 99.00' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N51°59'53'W 528.00' TO A SET IRON PIN, THENCE N86°59'53' W 542.91' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, THENCE N87°09'20'W 423.69' TO A FOUND.PIPE, THENCE N87°09'20'W 886.41' TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, THENCE N87°09'20' W 785.52' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N87°09'20"W 963.77' TO A FOUND STONE, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE FRACTIONAL SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 31, THENCE N87°03'18' W 962.79' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE NO3°06'30"E 249.93' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N86°53'02'W 350.00' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01 °47'26"E 1060.68' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 36, THENCE - N87°16'27'W 1343.38' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED IN THE CENTERLINE OF A GRAVEL DRIVEWAY, THENCE ALONG SAID GRAVEL DRIVEWAY CENTERLINE N04°02'35"E 72.47', N11 °19'49"E 40:24'; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WITH A RADIUS OF 101.22' ANDA CHORD BEARING AND DISTANCE OF N24°09'50' W 87.35', N48°44'10"W 34.21', THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT WITH A RADIUS OF 215.87' AND A CHORD BEARING. AND DISTANCE OF N67°02'42'W 157.18', N89°17'23' W 123.09', N87°11'38'W 161.28', THENCE. LEAVING SAID GRAVEL DRIVEWAY CENTERLINE N01 °57'34"E 1055.60' TO A FOUND IRON PIN;.THENCE 587°31 '37"E 1230.87' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED ON A BLUFFLINE;THENCE ALONG SAID BLUFF LINE N17`08'05"E' 157.76', N23°29'30"E 127.51', N02°25'44"E'131.20', N30°29'11"W 198.42', N16°15'45'W 180.52', NO3°00'58"E 113.62', N14°13'54"E 202.18', N24°51'02' W 100.73', N08°41'17'E 110.59', N67°53'42"E 173.71' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE LEAVING SAID BLUFF LINE N87°18'22' W 147.50' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01 °28'04"E 659.86' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE S87°13'07"E 660.25' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, THENCE N01 °27'39"E 675.06' TO A FOUND IRON PIN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE S87°09'38"E 1314.52' TO A FOUND STATE MONUMENT, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 25, THENCE 502°25'51'W-36.60' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING IN ALL 910.36 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. SUBJECT TO ALL. EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS -OF - WAY OF RECORD, IF ANY. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 1 of 7 Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the following conditions of approval associated with R-PZD 08-2898 (Southpass). Conditions of Approval: Compliance with adopted land use policies and goals including City Plan 2025 and the PZD ordinance: As discussed in the findings in this report and with conditions herein, staff finds that SouthPass is in compliance with the adopted land use policies and City Plan 2025. While the project is not considered an infill development (Goal #1), this site has been anticipated for a number of years in the City Plan 2025 as an area for greenfield development in the City Neighborhood pattern, and in staffs opinion does not contribute to sprawl, if developed as being proposed. The proposed development is preferred over a typical suburban sprawl development that segregates various residential types and isolates commercial development in an area only accessible by vehicle, while dividing up sensitive natural environments (hillsides, floodplain, tree canopy) into individual lots. This project maximizes environmental protection, integrates a mix of residential housing types, and plans for the. commercial development in a traditional downtown pattern. In addition, the opportunity for a mixture of building types and uses within all of the planning areas has been provided. The property's location is well -suited for growth in the manner encouraged by City Plan 2025, with direct access to I-540 and State Highway 265, which leads into the University of Arkansas. It is also in close proximity to the University of Arkansas Research and Technology Park and numerous other amenities. The proposed land use pattern is in a traditional town form, offering a variety of housing choices for residents and support services within walking distance, while preserving and enhancing the City's enduring green network with the addition of about 500 acres of greenspace into the City. 2. Architectural design standards, and overall compatibility and transition in the proposed development: Staff finds in favor of this determination. The building elevations of structures in this development are well -articulated and provide for a consistent and overriding theme throughout the development, which transitions well between the mixed use buildings/flats, commercial structures, townhouses, and single- family detached houses. The zoning criteria and elevations for the residential and non- residential structures requires buildings to front the street, and small building setbacks help create a streetscape and facilitate an overall compact and complete development. There is a wide variety of uses and structures prevent a visual monotony while maintaining a compatible architectural design throughout the site. Commercial and residential design standards will be reviewed in detail at the time of development: 3. Connectivity: The primary entrances into the site are off of the extension of Shiloh Drive into the northeastern portion of the site and from Cato Springs Road along the eastern boundary of the property. Several streets are proposed directly off of Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265), and access into the southern portion of the site is provided off of Kessler Mountain Road (County Road 201). The internal street pattern in the Town Center and Crescent Park planning areas are based on a modified grid pattern. As the development spreads over the site, streets follow the topography and wind along CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 2 of 7 the ridgelines and valleys connecting the various clusters of development. Street connectivity outside of the Town Center is on the whole low, however, due to existing constraints of topography and the cluster development pattern which preserves approximately 487 acres of parks and open space, over 53% of the entire site. However, pedestrian connectivity is excellent with a number of pedestrian and mountain biking trails that will traverse the entire 910 -acre site connecting the clusters of development to the 200 -acre regional park in the central portion of the site and the urban center in the northeast portion of the site. Staff generally recommends in favor of the access and connectivity as proposed with the understanding that additional street connections and stub -out points will be evaluated at the time of development for each planning area to ensure the SouthPass neighborhoods are well connected to other surrounding areas, as appropriate. 4. Street improvements: Detailed review for each phase of development will occur, as the development is considered by the Planning Commission. As with all conceptual PZDs, specific infrastructure improvements will be determined at that time. Typical improvements required by the Unified Development Code include sidewalks, street lights, turn lanes, curb, gutter and storm drainage, pavement widening and overlay where needed, and turn signals where needed. Unless specifically approved by the City Council as a cost -share agreement, the developer shall be responsible for all street improvements noted herein. After review of the traffic study submitted for SouthPass (July 16, 2008), the Addendum (August 22, 2008) and the existing street conditions, the following street improvements will be necessary, at minimum, to facilitate development of the project: A. Cato Springs Road: 1. Fully actuated traffic signals, coordinated as part of a closed -loop traffic signal system, are warranted to be installed at the following intersections before completion of full build -out: a. r Cato Springs Road and I-540 northbound on-ramp/Hwy 71 northbound ramps b. Cato Springs Road and I-540 northbound off -ramp c. Cato Springs Road and I-540 southbound ramps d. Cato Springs Road and Public Street #4 (Shiloh extension) e. Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road 2. Timing of construction of the recommended signalization will depend upon phasing of the development; a warrant analysis may be required with development review, to determine the specific improvements necessary. 3. Cato Springs Road will be required to be widened to three and five lanes in some places, to accommodate the additional traffic volume. Improvements shall extend to east of the I-540 interchange, and will include widening underneath the existing overpass. B. Shiloh Drive: Shiloh Drive shall be extended to and through the site to connect Cato Springs Road to 6s' Street (Hwy 62). Timing of the construction of this street will depend upon phasing of the development and a determination of its necessity by the Planning Commission to ensure safe and efficient traffic circulation on CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 3 of 7 surrounding streets and highways is maintained. The Addendum to the Traffic Study (August 22, 2008), prepared by Peters & Associates, indicates that the Shiloh Road connection will be required no later than Phase 14, assuming all other recommended street improvements from the original traffic study (July 16, 2008) are complete and the phasing has proceeded in sequence to that which is proposed. The developer shall provide a traffic study, when the street connection is required, to address potential improvements to the Shiloh/Hwy 62 intersection, including traffic signals, widening, etc., in coordination with the plans of AHTD to improve this overall interchange. C. Kessler Mountain Road: Kessler Mountain Road shall be improved to a Local Street standard, at minimum, to serve the development planned. Detailed improvements will be reviewed at the time of development. D. Judge Cummings Road: This street shall be improved to a minimum Local Street Standard, and may warrant additional improvements, to include turn lanes, depending upon the traffic projected to utilize the street. E. Assessments: No specific transportation improvement assessment districts occupy this area at this time. It is likely, however, that as development phases are reviewed, assessments for larger improvements will be required on a pro -rata basis, to ensure funding is available once the improvement is necessary and that the cumulative impact of each phase is: accounted for. F. Street stub -outs: As. each phase and planning area is reviewed in detail, recommendations for street stub -outs to provide local street connectivity will be.. niade, depending upon terrain, environmental features, and viability for future T:. connections. G. Internal street design: Street layout, intersection alignment, lane width, curb radii, etc. will be evaluated once designed and submitted for development review. Several areas of concern have already been identified, such as the `angled' street intersection with Cato Springs Road. Future development shall be reviewed for compliance with the access management ordinances. (PC added 09/08/08) H. Updated traffic studies will be required as development phases are reviewed. Development of the property, in its various phases, may only be approved when appropriate infrastructure improvements have been planned or installed to accommodate the traffic volume at acceptable levels of service. Please refer to the overall PZD traffic study executive summary provided in the staff report for more information at this time. 5. Master Street Plan Amendment — Shiloh Drive: Shiloh Drive is identified on the Master Street Plan as a Collector Street providing a connection from Shiloh Drive to Cato Springs Road through the site. SouthPass proposes to extend Shiloh Drive into the site where it would transition into the urban street grid. Connections to Cato Springs Road from Shiloh Drive would be provided through the downtown street grid of the Town Center Planning Area, in multiple locations. Staff recommends in favor of the realignment given that Shiloh Drive is proposed to be extended to the site and that street connectivity to Cato Springs Road is provided in several locations. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page4of7 6. Master Street Plan Amendment — Cato Springs Road: Due to the amount of traffic projected for the proposed development and regional park, staff recommends Cato Springs Road be reclassified to continue the Principal Arterial designation from the I-540 interchange south to the southern boundary of the Planning Area. Recommended street improvements include widening to a five -lane section in portions of the development, and this designation is more appropriate given the anticipated traffic volumes. Right-of-way dedication: The applicant shall dedicate right-of-way in compliance with the adopted Master Street Plan for Cato Springs Road, Shiloh Road, Kessler Mountain Road, and Judge Cummings Road to be determined at the time of development. Right- of-way dedication for internal streets and alleys shall be required in compliance with the Master Street Plan to be determined at the time of development. 8. Variances: Variances from the requirements of the Unified Development Code relative to development regulations and Master Street Plan cross-section standards, such as curb return radii, street cross -sections, greenspace width, etc. can only be reviewed and recommendations made when the each area is fully designed for review. By this PZD. approval, the City Council grants the Planning Commission the right to consider and. approve variances from street design standards, Master Street Plan cross -sections interior to the project, and other variances that are provided for within the Unified Development Code under the purview of the Planning Commission. All decisions concerning these.. matters may be appealed by a member of the City Council. 9. Phasing: The project is subject to the 18 project phases over 20-25 years as described in • detail in the project booklet. All permits required for development within these phases � e. are required to be obtained within the specified timeframe. Extensions may be granted subject to approval in accordance with City ordinances. Changes in phasing shall require, City Council approval. 10. Parks: SouthPass shall deed a minimum amount of 200 acres to the City for an onsite regional park prior to the Mayor signing the ordinance of approval for the annexation and PZD, and shall contribute $1,000,000.00 when the City is ready to award the first construction contract for the park, in accordance with the previously executed contract. Changes to or deviation from this contractual agreement shall be at the discretion of the City Council. In addition, all residential development on the site shall be required to meet the parkland dedication ordinance requirements through land dedication, money -in -lieu, or a combination thereof. 11. Parking: Parking is proposed in four forms: garage structures, underground parking decks, on -street, and surface parking lots. A. Parking garage structures and underground parking decks are proposed for the more intense commercial core areas and under many of the multi -family structures. All parking garage structures shall meet the requirements of Ch. 166.22 as if the project were located in the referenced zoning districts. • B. On -street parking: Much of the parking for mixed use and residential areas is • proposed to be on -street. For all multi -family, non-residential and mixed -use CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 5 of 7 structures, each on -street parking space provided along the project frontage of each respective building may count toward the total required parking for the development. C. Surface Parking: A majority of surface parking lots will be to the interior of the mixed -use and multi -family residential lots as shown on the submitted plans. All parking lots shall be located outside of any build -to line or zone, and where situated adjacent to a public right-of-way, shall be heavily screened with landscape walls or landscaping. D. Single Family lots: Most of the residences will be provided with private parking, either in alley -facing garages or driveways. 12. Water Tanks: As referenced in the contract between the City of Fayetteville and South Pass before final approval of these requests, deeds for the water tank site shall be received prior to the Mayor signing ordinances of approval, should the requests for annexation and Master Development Plan PZD be approved. 13. Tree Preservation and Landscaping: Tree preservation and landscape plans will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. A minimum of 25% tree canopy will be required in accordance with city ordinances; for areas within the HHOD, a minimum of 30% will'be required. A vast portion of PA -6B: Open Space, will be dedicated as off -site. tree preservation, to preserve these sensitive areas as indicated on the PZD:plafs..',.. •: Landscape plans will be required to be submitted at the time of developmentIin•!_ compliance with ordinance included such requirements as street trees and parking., lot landscaping. 14: Buffer: In order to reduce land use compatibility impacts, development on the perimeter of the SouthPass property lines directly adjacent to undeveloped property shall be subject to the following condition (this condition shall particularly apply to Planning Areas 3A - Kessler Mountain Bluff Single Family, 3C Kessler Mountain Bluff Single Family Cluster, and the northern portion of Planning Area 2A Crescent Park Single Family): a 50 -foot building setback shall be provided off of all perimeter property lines, and placed in a tree preservation_ area or conservation easement; where such areas are not adequately vegetated, additional plantings of dense evergreen trees and shrubs shall be provided for a visual and aesthetic buffer at the time of development. This 50 -foot buffer area shall be reviewed by the Planning Division and Urban Forester prior to development approval. Street connections and stub -outs are anticipated to cross these areas, at the time of development, to provide connectivity to adjoining properties. 15. Solid Waste: All trash enclosure locations and dimensions shall be fully reviewed and approved by the Solid Waste Division at the time of development. Where street cross - sections or curb return radii do not meet city standards, auto -turn or similar analyses shall be provided to determine if Solid Waste vehicles will be able to safely and efficiently access streets within the project boundary. 16. Public Service Improvements: New police and fire substations may be required on -site in order to maintain adequate levels of service as the project develops. Impact fees for CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 6 of 7 development on the property shall be contributed in accordance with City ordinances. 17. Development Review: All phases of the proposal shall be reviewed through the appropriate development review process (Large Scale Development, Preliminary/Final Plat, etc.), as determined by the Zoning & Development Administrator, prior to commencement of construction. 18. Architectural Standards: Buildings shall be constructed to be consistent with the concepts depicted in the building elevations in the PZD booklet. All buildings shall be designed and constructed to front onto public rights -of -way. All non-residential buildings or mixed use buildings shall adhere to Commercial Design Standards and all multi -family buildings shall adhere to Urban Residential Design Standards. 19. View protection: Staff recommends that structures that will be located at higher elevations, such as along Kessler Mountain Bluff, that will be taking advantage of views from the site, be designed with materials, colors and rooflines that are muted and will dissolve into the natural background as much as possible. The intent is to prevent egregious structures from reducing the natural beauty of the surrounding hillside. Where possible, the design of structures should take into account the height of the ridgeline and surrounding tree canopy, to reduce and mitigate the visual impact. 20. Impact Fees: All impact fees shall be paid in accordance with city ordinances. 21. Signage: Signs shall be permitted in accordance with Chapter 174 of the: Fayetteville Unified Development Code, and shall be subject to signage requirements for specific planning areas as designated in the zoning criteria. No pylon or pole signs shall be permitted on the property. • 22. The definition of "family" in accordance with Ch. 151 of the UDC shall apply to the proposed PZD; Single family Planning Areas shall be treated as single-family residential districts, and all other planning areas shall be treated as all other zoning districts where residential uses are permitted. 23. All statements and commitments imposed on the City as discussed in the PZD booklet shall be not applicable. Neither the Planning Commission nor the applicant may bind this City Council or a future City Council to cost -share agreements with the PZD approval. A separate agreement or contract with the City Council is necessary in order to facilitate any cost -sharing measures. 24. The Master Development Plan, Statement of Commitments and Architectural Standards submitted by the applicant shall be considered binding and tied to the zoning of the property. Conditions of approval as noted herein and other requirements placed upon the project with review of the Master Development Plan — Planned Zoning District by the City Council shall also be binding. 25. Due to the very complex nature of this project, a detailed review of all aspects of the site CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: R-PZD 08-2898 Page 7 of 7 and landscape plans in each phase of construction shall take place prior to issuance of building permits. Future development shall be consistent with the conceptual site plan and mix of uses as approved in the PZD. All development shall meet applicable zoning and development criteria at the time of development submittal, unless specifically waived or varied by the Planning Commission as part of the PZD approval. 26. No portion of any structure (i.e., porches, overhangs, etc.) shall encroach into building setbacks or utility easements. 27. Existing rights -of -way and utility easements that conflict with the proposed plans will have to be vacated at the time of development, and prior to issuance of building permits in those areas affected. ` 28. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications). 29. Staff approval of final detailed,plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable) for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protection, streets (public and private), • sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The'information submitted for the plat • review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. ' 30. All overhead electric lines 12kv and under shall be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall be located underground. 31. Street lights shall be installed adjacent to all public and private streets (not alleys), with a separation of no greater than 300 feet. 32. All exterior lighting is required to comply with the City's lighting ordinance. A lighting plan and cut -sheets of the proposed exterior light fixtures shall be required; to be approved by Planning Staff prior to building permit. Planning Commission Meeting September 08, 2008 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 125 W. Mountain St. PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Tele: Fayetteville,) 575 8267 TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Andrew Gamer, Senior Planner Matt Casey, Assistant City Engineer THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning DATE: 03 September, 2008 Updated September 18, 2008 - R-PZD 08-2898: (SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF 1-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL. and contains approximately 910.36 acres. The request is for Zoning and Land Use approval for a Residential Planned Zoning District with 751 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200+ acre regional park. Planner: Andrew Garner Property Description and Setting: Size: 910 acres Zoning: Washington County/ R -A if annexed Location: South of the City of Fayetteville at the intersection of Interstate 540 and Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265). Proximity: - I mile northeast to the University of Arkansas campus - 2 miles northeast to downtown Fayetteville - 1.25 mile north to 6th Street/I-540 - 1.5 mile to University of Arkansas Research and Technology Park - I mile south to Hwy 71B - 1-2 miles west to City of Farmington - 2 miles south to Exit 58 (Greenland) Adjacent Master Street Plan Streets: Shiloh Drive (a collector street); State Highway 265/Cato Springs Road (a collector street); Judge Cummings Road and Kessler Mountain Roads (local streets) Proposal: Master Development Plan of a Residential Planned Zoning District (R-PZD) K:IReports120081PC Repons117September 8tR-PZD 08-2989 (Sou:hpnsss).doc TABLE I SOUTH PASS LAND USE TABLE PLANNINGIAREAS ACREAGE (RESIDENTIAL' DENSITY NON- INTENSITY" "% ofn f4 UNITS I UNITS/ I' RESIDENTIAL I ISF/ CACA RE),I ACRES ACRE) SF PA\N-C 1:'�TOWN10ENTER _ L r v r T� . ;. _ ♦-�... rt`.�. /yw3 �'.♦ �'v nr✓�•''. PA1A: Commercial Core 10.90 175 16.06 112,000 10,275 PA1B: Mixed Use 28.90 823 28.48 112,000 3,875 PA1C: Lofts 18.00 630 35.00 20,000 1,111 TOTALS 57.80 1,628 28.17 I 244,000 4,221 I 6.35% �.PA'2 (CRESCENT PARK' ° > c :iJ nR .) ,7' V 'e♦ 'r a..t„ . <`ry �..: . ♦: .,.:. •'-e ... •; .-. , .i ,'-. ,, 'e��: '. RP .:�'. "_tY{�i ,>. L x. i .4:,. �. .. ♦Y-� �. j'tY4Yi:r PA2A: Single Family 67 400 5.97 0 0 PA26 Apartments 44.8 1,200 26.79 30,000 . 662 TOTALS I 111.80 I 1,600 I 14.31 I 30,000 I 268 112.28% FA"3:KESSLERMOUNTAIN,BLUFF,>l. .,,r;:Sr_r":kv: "r s�i'`k �`5;`i fir:^�yx *_ Y a 's.` Lwy.` } PA3A: Single Family 104.16 103 1.00 0 0 PA3B: Multi -Family 41.68 500 12.00 0 0 PA3C: Single Family 50.22 171 3.41 0 0 Cluster TOTALS 196 I 774 3.95 0 ..I- 0 21.54% PA4A-,..M1 !!i. i.L111.,4. V��.: �M1 •M f.WY. 1. .'Y.f(i♦I.rv. ..� :Single Family 30 77 4.21 0 0 PA4BMulti-Family 17.60 183 10.40 10,000 568 _ TOTALS I 36 I 260 i 7.22 I 10,000 I 279 I 3.94% APA=5: CIVIC AREA `3 :>.l. , I \� '3 4ti''pp1' P` ry 1f''4' to +. .'- o C _... C': j♦ ♦ y)i l._)... .• ..r.-..�- . `'Va � .:.T ... r ._ l 4I AtIY �'.)), . M^ i. �S�.ri. PA-5: CIVIC AREA I 21.30 I 0 I 0.00 I 30,000 I 1,408 I TOTALS I 21.30 I 0 I 0.00 I 30,000 I 1,408 I 2.34% 1PX-6 ;PARKS AND OPEN SPACE a .- , ;; :r,.l TYa o` rih '',t :a.. !bn S' Yti..thf V.a.L {`I i `..... LrI PA6A: Regional Park 240.60 0 0.00 30,000 125 PA6B: Open Space 246.90 0 0.00 0 0 TOTALS I 487.50 I 0 I 0.00 I 30,000 I 62 153.55% SITEMOTALS = Y? ; ;' 751 SF LOTS 2,881 ME UNITS 630 CONDO UNITS TOTS SITE #� I O 36 44;262 �+ 7. I344;0&9s Ig 1 378•• 1.100: Project Description: This project is designed to create anew urban center in a traditional mixed K IReporrs120081PC ReponsV7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc use town form in the flatter areas of the site adjacent to Cato Springs Road in the north, and clusters a variety of housing types over other areas of the site to avoid impacts to prominent hillsides, hilltops, and other environmental features. Central to the development is a new Community/Regional Park of over 200 acres of both passive and active recreation space, in addition to over 240 acres of preserved open space, together comprising 54% of the site area. This site layout and proposal would not be allowed under any standard zoning criteria, one of the purposes for which the Planned . Zoning District ordinance was created: to promote and encourage projects that meet the adopted goals and policies of the city, yet do not fit the mold of current development or zoning requirements and to allow for surrounding property owners to see the project's product with the rezoning request, as opposed to a request for a blanket zoning district with few limitations. The proposed zoning criteria for each Planning Area are provided in duplicate in the project booklet and on the plats. Please reference this provided material for more information. These documents are binding to the zoning of the property. Access and Connectivity: The primary entrances into the site are off of the extension of Shiloh Drive into the northeastern portion of the site .and from Cato Springs Road along the eastern boundary of the property. Several streets are proposed directly off of Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265), and access into the southern portion of the site is provided off of Kessler Mountain Road, (County Road 201). The internal street pattern in the Town Center and Crescent Park planning areas are based on a modified grid pattern. As the development moves west over the site, streets follow the topography and wind along the ridgelines and valleys connecting the various clusters of development. Street connectivity outside of the Town Center is on the whole low, however, due to existing constraints of topography and the cluster development pattern which preserves approximately 487 acres of parks and open space, approximately 54% of the entire site. However, pedestrian connectivity is excellent with a number of pedestrian and mountain biking trails that will traverse the entire 910 -acre site connecting the clusters of development to the 200 -acre regional park in the central portion of the site and the urban center in the northeast portion of the site. Additional street connections and stub -out points will be evaluated at the time of development for each planning area to ensure the SouthPass neighborhoods are well connected to other surrounding areas. Water & Sewer: Public water is adjacent to the site and a municipal water tank currently exists on the property. Sanitary sewer is not available to the site. Offsite improvements will be required to bring sewer to this site. Improvements to the existing sewer system may be required dependent upon the demand placed by the development. The capacity of the existing main may need to be studied at the time of development. K: IReports120081PC Reports/7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southp¢ss).doc Table 2 SouthPass Project Description Planning Description Area PA1: The most compact, dense, and intense planning area is the Town Center, located in the northeast Town comer of the site along the arterial street of Cato Springs Road and just southwest of the 1-540 Center intersection. The Town Center is based around a traditionally mixed use downtown form and features the center of commercial activity in the site. The design incorporates traditional town form design features including narrow streets, buildings close to the street, and wide urban sidewalks. There are several terminating vistas that will be focal points from the main thoroughfares. The Town Center provides non-residential amenities, restaurants, and shopping for residents in the immediate vicinity, and users of the adjacent 200+ acre regional park. The most urban and commercial area in the south transitions into a more mixed use area with non-residential uses at the street level and residences above. The topography in this area of the site rolls gently. PA2: The new extension of Shiloh Road defines the edge between Town Center and the Crescent Park Crescent neighborhood. Crescent Park starts ascending Kessler Mountain to the west of Town Center. This Park neighborhood fronts Shiloh Road with a number of multi -family buildings and row homes. Continuing west the neighborhood transitions to single. family residential, then the density. increases again with a number of multi -family buildings that front onto either public streets or shared green areas or courtyard. The center of Crescent Park contains a common destination for the pedestrian - shed in this neighborhood on a hilltop with wide vistas of Fayetteville and the surrounding countryside. A community meeting place and large central green are located in the interior. PA3: This neighborhood is located along the ridgelines, knolls, and hilltops of Kessler Mountain in the Kessler western portion of the site. This area is isolated from the Town Center by topography and the new Mountain regional park. This neighborhood provides a variety of residential housing options from large rural Bluff lots on the hillside, to dense clusters of multi -family and single family lots. The. layout of the development pattern incorporates the natural contours of the landform and the roads wind along the ridges and in and out of densely forested areas. This area of the site has a variety of topography changes and landforms and currently has a number of informal hiking and mountain biking trails that have been incorporated into the design. This trail system will provide opportunities for all residents to connect from this neighborhood to the regional park down below the mountain. PA4: This neighborhood is located in the southeast portion of the site on a knoll adjacent to Cato Springs Park Road that is approximately 80 feet above the planned regional park adjacent to the north. This Knoll neighborhood provides a variety of detached and attached homes on small lots designed for adults 55 and older. Shared indoor and outdoor amenities will be provided in courtyards and in the larger multi -family buildings. PA5: This planning area is comprised of three distinct areas including a church located on a knoll in the Civic northern portion of the site, an elementary school in the central portion of the site, and the existing Areas water tank site. Both the school and church are set apart from the Town Center, taking in views. PA6: A primary feature of this planning area is the active sports park with soccer, baseball, softball, and Regional multi -purpose fields for various "pick-up" games. An area for tennis courts will be situated near Park and parking lots and playgrounds. The organized fields will have bleachers, concession stands, and Open restroom facilities. An amphitheatre is located along the park road for concerts and other events. Space New police and fire substations will also be within this planning area. The existing 33 -acre landfill is located in this planning area and will be remediated and may be used for active recreation and forested area. Over 246 acres of this planning area is designated for open space and will serve as preservation areas for natural drainage systems, tree preservation areas, and natural buffers between SouthPass and surrounding rural -residential uses. An extensive trail system in this planning area provides non -vehicular linkages through the development. K:IReportsl2008WC ReportsII7-September 8IR-PZD 08-2989 (Southpassj.doc Traffic Study Summary: Existing 2 -way traffic at the site: 2,174 vpd Full build -out projected at the site: 39,339 vpd City -operations generated traffic (fire and police station, parks office, regional park): 2,410 vpd The provided traffic study from .Peters & Associates, dated July 16, 2008, recommends major improvements to Cato Springs Road to accommodate the additional traffic volumes anticipated by this development proposal at full -build out in 20-25 years. The proximity to I-540, however, alleviates much of the immediate concern, as it is assumed a great deal of traffic will utilize the interstate corridor traveling north and south of Fayetteville. In addition, options exist to travel into Fayetteville via Razorback Road, the northern extension of Cato Springs Road. Razorback Road leads directly to the University of Arkansas, and is a 5 -lane section with a median in places. Shiloh Drive will also be required to be extendedinto this property to accommodate the traffic demand and provide another street connection into the more developed portion of the City. Staff anticipates Shiloh Drive will facilitate local trips to businesses such as Wal-Mart and Lowe's, among others, on 6th Street. As indicated with the I-540 Study by AHTD in 2004, interim improvements to the intersection of 1-540 and 6th Street are currently planned for 2010- 2013. These improvements anticipate a heavy volume of traffic to continue utilizing' this intersection, and include widening of 6`h Street and re -location of the north -bound on -ramp. Long term improvements (2024) include the redesign of the interchanges, additional lanes for stacking and new signalization. As noted above, additional access to I-540 is available approximately 2 miles to the south, at the Greenland interchange, and Hwy 71. B can be accessed via Hammerschmidt Expressway or Cato Springs Road east of Razorback Road. Sept 08,2008 UPDATE: The Addendum to the Traffic Study (August 22, 2008) has been provided with the updated staff report, along with a break-out of all development phases and traffic generated, by year and by phase. This traffic break-out indicates that approximately one-half of the anticipated traffic. at full -build out will occur by 2024, which is the anticipated time -frame for the long-term I-540/6th Street interchange improvements. The Addendum study indicates that assuming all of the improvements recommended to Cato Springs Road have been completed with development, the connection of SouthPass to Shiloh will not be necessary until after Phase 14 (2027). Theoretically, the improvements to the I -540/6'h Street interchange would'be complete and offer much more efficient traffic circulation at that time. However, staff has altered the conditions of approval to reflect the statements of this study, and to ensure that at the time of the connection to Shiloh, the developer is required to provide a traffic study that evaluates the impact of the connection and improvements that may be necessary at that time. Public Comment: Staff has received several phone calls and letters from area residents inquiring about the nature of the project. Several comments have expressed concern with traffic impacts and development of the clustered lots west of the water tank site. K: IReporls12008IPC Reportsll7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc Recommendation: Staff recommends forwarding R-PZD 08-2989 to the City Council with a recommendation of approval, based on the findings included in this staff report, which support the proposed Planned Zoning District within the City Neighborhood Area on the adopted Future Land Use Plan, finding the project master plan complies with the City's adopted land use policies and PZD ordinance, with the following conditions of approval: Conditions of Approval: Planning Commission determination of compliance with adopted land use policies and goals including City Plan 2025 and the PZD ordinance. As discussed in the findings in this report and with conditions herein, stafffinds that So uthPass is in compliance with the adopted land use policies and City Plan 2025. While the project is not considered an infill development (Goal #1), this site has been anticipated for a number of years in the City Plan 2025 as an area for greenfield development in the City Neighborhood pattern, and in staffs opinion does not contribute to sprawl, if developed as being proposed. The proposed development is preferred over a typical suburban sprawl development that segregates various residential types and isolates commercial development in an area only accessible by ' •.. vehicle, while dividing up sensitive natural environments (hillsides, floodplain, tree canopy) into individual lots. •This project maximizes environmental protection, integrates a mix of residential housing types, and plans for the commercial development in a traditional downtown pattern. In addition, the opportunity for a mixture of building types and uses within all of the planning areas has been provided The property's location is well -suited for growth in the manner encouraged by City Plan 2025, with direct access to 1-540 and State Highway 265, which leads into the University of Arkansas. It is also in close proximity to the University of Arkansas Research and Technology Park and numerous other amenities. The proposed land use pattern is in a traditional town form, offering a variety of housing choices for residents and support services within walking distance, while preserving and enhancing the City's enduring green network with the addition of about 500 acres of greenspace into the City. PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINED IN FAVOR OF THIS CONDITION 09/08/08. 2. Planning Commission determination of architectural design standards, and overall compatibility and transition in the proposed development. Staff finds in favor of this determination. The building elevations of structures in this development are well -articulated and provide for a consistent and overriding theme throughout the development, which transitions well between the mixed use buildings/flats, commercial structures, townhouses, and single-family detached houses. The zoning criteria and elevations for the residential and non-residential structures requires buildings to front the street, and small building setbacks help create a streetscape and facilitate an overall compact and complete development. There is a wide variety of uses and structures prevent a visual monotony while maintaining a compatible architectural design throughout the site. Commercial and residential design standards will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. K: IReportsl20081PC ReportsV 7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpars).doc PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINED IN FAVOR OF THIS CONDITION WITH THE SLIGHT MODIFICATION AS NOTED 09/08/08. 3. Planning Commission determination of adequate connectivity. The primary entrances into the site are off of the extension of Shiloh Drive into the northeastern portion of the site and from Cato Springs Road along the eastern boundary of the property. Several streets are proposed directly off of Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265), and access into the southern portion of the site is provided off of Kessler Mountain Road (County Road 201). The internal street pattern in the Town Center and Crescent Park planning areas are based on a modified grid pattern. As the development spreads over the site, streets follow the topography and wind along the ridgelines and valleys connecting the various clusters of development. Street connectivity outside of the Town Center is on the whole low, however,, due to existing constraints of topography and the cluster development pattern which preserves approximately 487 acres of parks and open space, over 53% of the entire site. However, pedestrian connectivity is excellent with a number of pedestrian and mountain biking trails that will traverse the entire 910 -acre site connecting the clusters of development to the 200 -acre regional park in the central portion of the site .. . and the urban center in the northeast portion of the site. Staff generally recommends in favor of the access and connectivity as proposed with the understanding that additional street connections and stub -out points will be evaluated at the time of development for each planning area to ensure the SouthPass neighborhoods are well connected to other surrounding areas, as appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION. DETERMINED IN FAVOR OF THIS CONDITION 09/08/08. 4. Street improvements. Detailed review for each phase of development will occur, as the development is considered by the Planning Commission. As with all conceptual • PZDs, specific infrastructure improvements will be determined at that time. Typical improvements required by the Unified Development Code include sidewalks, street lights, turn lanes, curb, gutter and storm drainage, pavement widening and overlay where needed, and turn signals where needed. Unless specifically approved by the City Council as a cost -share agreement, the developer shall be responsible for all street improvements noted herein. After review of the traffic study submitted for SouthPass (July 16, 2008), the Addendum (August 22, 2008) and the existing street conditions, the following street improvements will be necessary, at minimum, to facilitate development of the project: A. Cato Springs Road: 1. Fully actuated traffic signals, coordinated as part of a closed -loop traffic signal system, are warranted to be installed at the following intersections before completion of full build -out: • a. Cato Springs Road and I-540 northbound on-ramp/Hwy 71 northbound ramps b. Cato Springs Road and I-540 northbound off -ramp c. Cato Springs Road and I-540 southbound ramps d. Cato Springs Road and Public Street #4 (Shiloh extension) K.'1Reports120081PC Reportst 7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc e. Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road 2. Timing of construction of the recommended signalization will depend upon phasing of thee development; a warrant analysis may be required with development review, to determine the specific improvements necessary. 3. Cato Springs Road will be required to be widened to three and five lanes in some places, to accommodate the additional traffic volume. Improvements shall extend to east of the 1-540 interchange, and will include widening underneath the existing overpass. B. Shiloh Drive: Shiloh Drive shall be extended to and through the site to connect Cato Springs Road to 6th Street (Hwy 62). Timing of the construction of this street will depend upon phasing of the development and a determination of its necessity by the Planning Commission to ensure safe and efficient traffic circulation on surrounding streets and highways is maintained. The Addendum to the Traffic Study (August 22, 2008), prepared by Peters & Associates, indicates that the Shiloh Road connection will be required no later than Phase 14, assuming all other recommended street improvements from the original traffic study (July 16, 2008) are complete and the phasing has proceeded in sequence to that which is proposed. The developer shall provide a traffic study, when the street connection is required, to address potential improvements to the Shiloh/Hwy 62 intersection, including traffic signals, widening, etc., in coordination with the plans of AHTD to improve this overall interchange. C. Kessler Mountain Road: Kessler Mountain Road shall be improved to a Local Street standard, at minimum, to serve the development planned. Detailed improvements will be reviewed at the time of development. D. Judge Cummings Road: This street shall be improved to a minimum Local Street Standard, and may warrant additional improvements, to include turn lanes, depending upon the traffic projected to utilize the street. • E. Assessments: No specific transportation improvement assessment districts. occupy this area at this time. It is likely, however, that as development phases are reviewed, assessments for larger improvements will be required on a pro - rata basis, to ensure funding is available once the improvement is necessary and that the cumulative impact of each phase is accounted for. F. Street stub -outs: As each phase and planning area is reviewed in detail, recommendations for street stub -outs to provide local street connectivity will be • made, depending upon terrain, environmental features, and viability for future connections. G. Internal street design: Street layout, intersection alignment, lane width, curb radii, etc. will be evaluated once designed and submitted for development • review. Several areas of concern have already been identified, such as the `angled' street intersection with Cato Springs Road. Future development shall be reviewed for compliance with the access management ordinances. (PC added 09/08/08) H. Updated traffic studies will be required as development phases are reviewed. K: IReportt120081PC ReporlsV 7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpassj.doc Development of the property, in its various phases, may only be approved when appropriate infrastructure improvements have been planned or installed to accommodate the traffic volume at acceptable levels of service. Please refer to the overall PZD traffic study executive summary provided in the staff report for more information at this time. 5. Master Street Plan Amendment — Shiloh Drive: Shiloh Drive is identified on the Master Street Plan as a Collector Street providing a connection from Shiloh Drive to Cato Springs Road through the site. SouthPass proposes to extend Shiloh Drive into the site where it. would transition into the urban street grid. Connections to Cato Springs Road from Shiloh Drive would be provided through the downtown street grid of the Town Center Planning Area, in multiple locations. Staff recommends in favor of the realignment given that Shiloh Drive is proposed to be extended to the site and that street connectivity to Cato Springs Road is provided in several locations. 6. Master Street Plan Amendment — Cato Springs Road: Due to the amount of traffic projected for the proposed development and regional park, staff recommends Cato Springs Road be reclassified to continue the Principal Arterial designation from the I- 540 interchange south to the southern boundary of the Planning Area. Recommended street improvements include widening to a five -lane section in portions of the development, and this designation is more appropriate given the anticipated traffic volumes. 7. Right-of-way dedication: The applicant with the adopted Master Street Plan for Mountain Road, , and Judge Cummings development. Right-of-way dedication fol in compliance with the Master Street development. shall dedicate right-of-way in compliance Cato Springs Road, Shiloh Road, Kessler Road to be determined at the time of internal streets and alleys shall be required Plan to be determined at the time of 8. Variances: Variances from the requirements of the Unified Development Code relative to development regulations and Master Street Plan cross-section standards, such as curb return radii, street cross -sections, greenspace width, etc. can only be reviewed and recommendations made when the each area is fully designed for review. By this PZD approval, the City Council grants the Planning Commission the right to consider and approve variances from street design standards, Master Street Plan cross -sections interior to the project, and other variances that are provided for within the Unified Development Code under the purview of the Planning Commission. All decisions concerning these matters may be appealed by a member of the City Council. 9. Phasing: The project is subject to the 18 project phases over 20-25 years as described • in detail in the project booklet. All permits required for development within these phases are required to be obtained within the specified timeframe. Extensions may be • granted subject to approval in accordance with City ordinances. Changes in. phasing shall require City Council approval. K:IReports120081PC Reportsll7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Souffipnss).doc 10. Parks: SouthPass shall deed a minimum amount of 200 acres to the City for an onsite regional park prior to the Mayor signing the ordinance of approval for the annexation and PZD, and shall contribute $1,000,000.00 when the City is ready to award the first construction contract for the park, in accordance with the previously executed contract. Changes to or deviation from this contractual agreement shall be at the discretion of the City Council. In addition, all residential development on the site shall be required to meet the parkland dedication ordinance requirements through land dedication, money -in -lieu, or a combination thereof. 11. Parking: Parking is proposed in four forms: garage structures, underground parking decks, on -street, and surface parking lots. A. Parking garage structures and underground parking decks are proposed for the more intense commercial core areas and under many of the multi -family structures. All parking garage structures shall meet the requirements of Ch. 166.22 as if the project were located in the referenced zoning districts. B. On -street parking: Much of the parking for mixed use and residential areas is proposed to be on -street. For all multi family, non-residential- and mixed -use structures, each on -street parking space provided along the project frontage of each respective building may count toward the total required parking for the development. C. Surface Parking: A majority of surface parking lots will be to the interior of the mixed -use and multi -family residential lots as shown on the submitted plans. All parking lots shall be located outside of any build -to line or zone, and where situated adjacent to a public right-of-way, shall be heavily screened with landscape walls or landscaping. D. Single Family lots: Most of the residences will be provided with private parking, either in alley -facing garages or driveways. 12. Water Tanks: As referenced in the contract between the City of Fayetteville and South Pass before final approval of these requests, deeds for the water tank site shall be received prior to the Mayor signing ordinances of approval, should the requests for annexation and Master Development Plan PZD be approved. 13. Tree Preservation and Landscaping: Tree preservation and landscape plans will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. A minimum of 25% tree canopy will be required in accordance with city ordinances; for areas within the HHOD, a minimum of 30% will be required. A vast portion of PA -6B: Open Space, will be dedicated as off -site tree preservation, to preserve these sensitive areas as indicated on the PZD plats. Landscape plans will be required to be submitted at the time of development in compliance with ordinance included such requirements as street trees and parking lot landscaping. 14. Buffer: In order to reduce land use compatibility impacts, development on the perimeter of the SouthPass property lines directly adjacent to undeveloped property shall be subject to the following condition (this condition shall particularly apply to K:IReports120081PC Reportsll7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Somhpass).doc Planning Areas 3A -Kessler Mountain Bluff Single Family, 3C Kessler Mountain Bluff Single Family Cluster, and the northern portion of Planning Area 2A Crescent Park Single Family): a 50 -foot building setback shall be provided, off of all perimeter property lines, and placed in a tree preservation area or conservation easement; where such areas are not adequately vegetated, additional plantings of dense evergreen trees and shrubs shall be provided for a visual and aesthetic buffer at the time of development. This 50 -foot buffer area shall be reviewed by the Planning Division and Urban Forester prior to development approval. Street connections and stub -outs are anticipated to cross these areas, at the time of development, to provide connectivity to adjoining properties. 15. Solid Waste: All trash enclosure locations and dimensions shall be fully reviewed and approved by the Solid Waste Division at the time of development. Where street cross -sections or curb return radii do not meet city standards, auto -turn or similar analyses shall be provided to determine if Solid Waste vehicles will be able to safely and efficiently access streets within the project boundary. 16. Public Service Improvements: New police and fire substations may be required on - site in order to maintain adequate levels of service as the project develops. Impact fees for development on the property shall be contributed in accordance with City ordinances. 17. Development Review: All phases of the proposal shall be reviewed through the appropriate development review process (Large. Scale Development, Preliminary/Final Plat, etc.), as determined by the Zoning & Development Administrator, prior to commencement of construction. 18. Architectural Standards: Buildings shall be constructed to be consistent with the concepts depicted in the building elevations in the PZD booklet. All buildings shall be designed and constructed to front onto public rights -of -way. All non-residential buildings or mixed use buildings shall adhere to Commercial Design Standards and all multi -family buildings shall adhere to Urban Residential Design Standards. 19. View protection: Staff recommends that structures that will be located at higher elevations, such as along Kessler Mountain Bluff, that will be taking advantage of views from the site, be designed with materials, colors and rooflines that are muted and will dissolve into the natural background as much as possible. The intent is to prevent egregious structures from reducing the natural beauty of the surrounding hillside. Where possible, the design of structures should take into account the height of the ridgeline and surrounding tree canopy, to reduce and mitigate the visual impact. 20. Impact Fees: All impact fees shall be paid in accordance with city ordinances. 21. Signage: Signs shall be permitted in accordance with Chapter 174 of the Fayetteville Unified Development Code, and shall be subject to signage requirements for specific K.IReportsl20081PC ReportsV 7-Sepsember 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Sou(hpas).doc planning areas as designated in the zoning criteria. No, pylon or pole signs shall be permitted on the property. 22. The definition of "family" in accordance with Ch. 151 of the UDC shall apply to the proposed PZD; Single family Planning Areas shall be treated as single-family residential districts, and all other planning areas shall be treated as all other zoning districts where residential uses are permitted. 23. All statements and commitments imposed on the ,City as discussed in the PZD booklet shall be not applicable. Neither the Planning Commission nor the applicant may bind this City Council or a future City Council to cost -share agreements with the PZD.approval. A separate agreement or contract with the City Council is necessary in order to facilitate any cost -sharing measures. 24. The Master Development Plan, Statement of Commitments and Architectural Standards submitted by the applicant shall be considered binding and tied 'to the zoning of the property. Conditions of approval as noted herein and other requirements placed- upon the project with review of the Master Development Plan — Planned Zoning District by the City Council shall also be binding. 25. Due to the very complex nature of this project; a detailed review of all aspects of the site and landscape plans in each phase of construction shall take place prior to issuance of building permits. Future development shall be consistent with the conceptual site plan and mix of uses as approved in the PZD. All development shall meet applicable zoning and development criteria at the time of development submittal, unless specifically waived or varied by the Planning Commission as part of the PZD approval. 26. No portion of any structure (i.e., porches, overhangs, etc.) shall encroach into building setbacks or utility easements. 27. Existing rights -of -way and utility easements that conflict with the proposed plans will have to be vacated at the time of development, and prior to issuance of building permits in those areas affected. Standard Conditions of Approval: 28. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western (las, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications). 29. Staff approval of final detailed plans, specifications and calculations (where applicable) for grading, drainage, water, sewer, fire protectioh, streets (public and private), sidewalks, parking lot(s) and tree preservation. The information submitted for the •plat review process was reviewed for general concept only. All public improvements are subject to additional review and approval. All improvements shall comply with City's current requirements. K: IReports12008IPC ReportsV 7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southp¢ss).doc 30. All overhead electric lines 12kv and under shalt be relocated underground. All proposed utilities shall be located, underground. 31. Street lights shall be installed adjacent to all public and private streets (not alleys), with a separation of no greater than 300 feet. 32. All exterior lighting is required to comply with the City's lighting ordinance. A lighting plan and cut -sheets of the proposed exterior light fixtures shall be required to be approved by Planning Staff prior to building permit. Planning Commission Action: ❑ Approval 11 Tabled X Forwarded to C.C. Motion: Graves Second: Lack Vote: 7-1-0 (Mvres voting 'No') Meeting Date: September 8, 2008 Comments: The "Conditions of Approval" listed in the report above are accepted in total without exception by the entity requesting approval of this development item. Signature K: IRepons120081PC Reporlsl /7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc Date Findings associated with R-PZD 08-2989 (SouthPass) Sec. 166.06. Planned Zoning Districts (PZD). (E) Approval or Rejection Criteria for Planned Zoning Districts The following criteria shall be considered by the Planning Commission and City Council in the review of a planned zoning district application based on the proposed master development plan: (I) Whether the application is in compliance with the requirements of the UDC and the City Plan 2025; FINDING: Staff finds the application to be in compliance with the Master Development Plan Planned Zoning District criteria and City Plan 2025 established by the City Council. The Future Land Use Map adopted as part of City Plan 2025 designated this site City Neighborhood and. Civic and Private Open Space/Parks. City Neighborhoods are intended to have a wide range of residential building types, encourage complete, compact and connected neighborhoods, provide non-residential uses that arc accessible for the convenience of individuals living in residential districts, encourage walkability as part of the street function, accommodate neighborhood shopping within walking distance of residential uses, or approximately one -quarter mile, and to encourage pedestrian -friendly, mixed use buildings through the use of transparent glass for commercial uses at street level and building entrances that address the street Civic and Private Open Space/Park Areas are intended for permanently dedicated open space or parkland. This development is designed to provide a new growth area and regional park for the City of Fayetteville. Rather than a typical, sprawling subdivision the proposal relies upon a complete, compact and connected approach in the northern Town Center and Crescent Park neighborhoods, and a cluster development pattern in other areas of the site where sensitivity to environmental features is a high priority. The property's location is well - suited for growth, with direct access to 1-540 and State Highway 265, which leads into the University of Arkansas. It is also in close proximity to the University of Arkansas Research and Technology Park and numerous other amenities. Rezoning this property to R-PZD 08- 2989 for a traditional town form and cluster development with a regional park and large amounts of open space is consistent with the City Neighborhood and Civic and Private Open Space/Park Area designations, and is also consistent with several of the six major goals of the City Plan 2025. The development proposes a maximum of 4,262 units, 344,000 square feet of non- residential space, a 241 -acre regional park, and approximately 247 acres of preserved open space. The form of development is compact and clustered to preserve a large percentage of the site (54%) in either parks or open space, and preserve the numerous environmental resources onsite including scenic views, mountains, valleys, streams, and forest. The development has been sensitively designed to concentrate the most intense development in the flatter areas of the site in the northeast corner adjacent to an existing major roadway. This will allow the density of development to take advantage of future Transit opportunities. K: I Reports120081 PC Reports/7-September 8(R-PZD 08-2989 (Soudrpass).doc The remainder of the development occurs in clusters over the site taking advantage of flatter hilltops and valleys to provide a variety of residential housing types. The regional park in the central portion of the site will be easily accessible from all areas of the development. This development is different in form, use and density than all the surrounding agricultural and rural residential uses in the immediate area and would require substantial infrastructure and public service improvements. However, as previously stated the site is adjacent to on/off ramps of 1-540, which provides convenient and efficient transportation for future residents, business and park visitors. For these reasons this site has been identified as a growth area for a number of years in the City's Future Land Use Plan. The most compact, dense, and intense planning area is the Town Center, located in the northeast corner of the site along the arterial street of Cato Springs Road and just southwest of the 1-540 intersection. The Town Center is based around a traditionally mixed -use downtown form and features the center of commercial activity in the site. The design incorporates traditional town form design features including narrow streets, buildings close to the street, and wide urban sidewalks. To place 1he size of this portion of the development in context, the 58 acres comprising this area of the project is about the size of the area from Dickson Street south to Mountain, and College A venue west to Locust Street. Moving west from the Town Center the intensity and density transitions to a variety of residential housing types in the Crescent Park Neighborhood, before transitioning into pockets of preserved open space along the Kessler Mountain ridgeline. To the south of Town Center is the regional park. This 200+ acre park encompasses a large flat area in the central portion of the site surrounded by steep hills in one area making a natural ,amphitheatre. The, park is wrapped by clusters of residential development that wind around the slopes and ridges of Kessler Mountain, in a development pattern much like Mt. Sequoyah had developed over the years, with a greater variety of housing types. A majority of the residential development outside of the Town Center is relatively isolated from planned non-residential use. While staff would typically recommend a more mixed use and traditional development pattern throughout the entire site, the unique topography of this location is a constraint to that type of development pattern, and lends itself to a cluster development as proposed. The natural landforms isolate the site into small distinct pockets of developable land, and make a traditional grid street system and a complete mix of non-residential uses infeasible. However, provisions have been written into the proposed zoning code that would allow for various non-residential uses as a conditional use. These uses would not likely be proposed until theneighborhoods build out and have enough population in that particular cluster to support the use. For example, Planning Area 3B - Kessler Mountain Bluff Multi -Family is a relatively isolated cluster of multi -family buildings (500 units, 12 units/acre) on top of the Kessler Mountain ridgeline. Specific mixed use buildings have not been designated at this time, however the zoning criteria allows Use Units 4 and 25 as a Conditional Use. This would allow for non-residential support services such as a day care facility, church, or office as a conditional use permit. In other primarily residential planning areas, revisions to the zoning documents have K. I Repoi rs120081PC Repot tsl / 7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Sourhpass).doc incorporated a much wider variety of potential non-residential uses through the Conditional Use Permit process, including office, cultural/recreational facilities, eating places, and neighborhood shopping. The proposed project has been sensitively designed to respond equally to the primary goals of City Plan 2025 goals that encourage both a traditional mixed use development and assembling an enduring green network. Staff finds that the project is very different from the surrounding land uses and zoning in terms of use, density, intensity, and form. The surrounding property is largely undeveloped agricultural and rural -residential land. SouthPass will undoubtedly result in significant land use change and compatibility impacts to surrounding properties. The aesthetic character of the area will change from undeveloped farmland, mountains, and forest to a new urban area for Fayetteville. The noise and light from SouthPass regional park may impact the surrounding sparsely populated areas, and traffic from SouthPass will result an increase in traffic volume on surrounding underutilized roadways, particularly Cato Springs Road. However, the design incorporates 53% open space over the site which will help provide natural buffers to much of the immediate surrounding property. While the project is not considered an infill development (Coal ill), this site has been anticipated for a number of years and in the City Plan 2025 as an area for greenfleld development in the City Neighborhood pattern, and in staffs opinion does not contribute to sprawl, if developed as being proposed. The City Council took these land use considerations into account during the adoption of City Plan 2025 and the Future Land Use Plan. City Plan 2025 discusses that growth is inevitable and desirable, but that growth should be planned to maintain community character and livability while accommodating and benefiting the City as a whole. SouthPass meets the overall goals of City Plan 2025 adopted by City Council based upon direct input from its citizens in the public participation planning process. SouthPass will provide a major benefit by helping create a 200+acre public park, providing a variety of housing types and a new urban center for the existing and future citizens of the City. The proposed zoning criteria and master plan are binding to development of the property and ensure that quality growth occurs in this area. (2) Whether the application is in compliance with all applicable statutory provisions; FINDING: The application has been reviewed and found to be compliant with applicable statutory provisions to process the application. (3) Whether the general impact of the rezoning would adversely impact the provision of public facilities and services; FINDING: The impact of the rezoning and subsequent development would require the provision of public facilities, at the cost of the developer and the City as this project is a public/private partnership including the development of a 200+ acre regional park. Without improvements to existing infrastructure, the proposal .would certainly adversely affect public facilities and services. However, as indicated in the submittal and the staff report, certain measures are to be taken to ensure adequate infrastructure improvements are made by the developer to ensure the level of service does not decline due to the K:IReportsl2oo81PC Repor(sl [7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Souihpassj.doc proposed development. Major improvements include the provision for a new police and fire station, a future elementary school, improvements to Cato Springs Road and the extension of Shiloh Road to the site. (4) Whether the rezoning is compatible with the surrounding land uses; FINDING: The rezoning request, combined with the Master Development Plan, would allow a mix of uses and density over the site. The proposed zoning criteria concentrates the density and intensity along the major thoroughfare, Cato Springs Road, and provides a transition and open space buffers to the existing undeveloped agricultural and rural - residential property adjacent to the entire site. As discussed in Finding No. 1, this traditional neighborhood and cluster development introduces a new City center and growth area of 4,262 residential units and 344,000 square feet of non-residential space in an undeveloped area. However the master plan has sensitively responded to existing Iandforms and incorporates a large amount of greenspace (53% of the site) to transition to surrounding properties. The major commercial area is adjacent to Cato Springs Road and the 1-540 transportation corridor, and naturally buffered by steep topography and dense forests on Kessler Mountain to the west. The multi-familyand single family cluster development west of the water tank site is adjacent to large lot rural residential land uses. In order to address land use compatibility issues a 50 -foot building setback and vegetated buffer has been incorporated into the plans along the perimeter property lines. The park Knoll area will also require screening to achieve an environment compatible with surrounding land uses, though this area is separated by a public street. Also see discussion provided in Finding No. 1. (5) Whether the subject land is suitable for the intended use and is compatible with the natural environment; FINDING: As discussed in Finding No. 1, the development incorporates numerous environmental design features including many large trees and contiguous open space preservation areas, numerous existing mountain hiking and hiking trails, and a layout and development pattern that follows the natural topography of the site. (6) Whether the intended land use would create traffic congestion or burden the existing road network; FINDING: The intended land uses, a mix of residential, commercial, and civic, would adversely impact the existing road network. Currently this development proposes several points of ingress and egress onto Cato Springs Road to the west, a new access point with the extension of Shiloh Drive to the site, and other points of ingress/egress onto Judge Cummings Road and Kessler Mountain Road to the south. With the incorporation of the recommended street improvements listed in the conditions of approval, staff finds that the proposed development would not overburden the existing road network. Cato Springs Road is an improved two-lane state highway with immediate access to on/off ramps at 1-540 providing easy access to a major north -south transportation corridor. Improvements to K: IRelrons120o81/'C Reports I I7 -September 81 R-PZD 08-2989 (Sowhpa.ssj.doc Cato Springs Road by the developer are extension of Shiloh Drive will be required improvements and the project's location a, 540, anticipated traffic impacts will not be study. Pertinent sections of the traffic study is available, at the Commission's request. needed to accommodate the project and the as the project develops. However, with these 1jaccnt to an underutilized on/off ramps at (- significant, based on the results of the traffic have been attached to this report; a full report (7) Whether the planned development provides for unified development control under a unified plan; FINDING: The booklet and master development plans submitted provide for said unified development control. (8) Whether any other recognized zoning consideration would be violated in this PZD. FINDING: No other zoning considerations are proposed to be violated. (B) Development standards, conditions and review guidelines (1) Generally. The Planning Commission shall consider a proposed. PZD in light of the purpose and intent as set forth in Chapter 161 Zoning Regulations, and the development standards and review guidelines set forth herein. Primary emphasis shall be placed upon achieving compatibility between the proposed development and surrounding areas so as to preserve and enhance the neighborhood. Proper planning shall involve a consideration of tree preservation, water conservation, preservation of natural site amenities, and the protection of watercourses from erosion and siltation. The Planning Commission shall determine that specific development features, including project density, building locations, common usable open space, the vehicular circulation system, parking areas, screening and landscaping, and perimeter treatment shall be combined in such a way as to further the health, safety, amenity and welfare of the community. To these ends, all applications filed pursuant to this ordinance shall be reviewed in accordance with the same general review guidelines as those utilized for zoning and subdivision applications. FINDING: The proposed SouthPass PZD introduces a new urban center for Fayetteville in the midst of undeveloped or sparsely populated agricultural land uses. This is not unlike the development of the Rupple Road/Persimmon Street area over the past 8-10 years; however, the positive benefit the City gains from this greenfield development is that it is planned. This project is designed to create a new urban center in a traditional mixed use town form in the flatter areas of the site adjacent to Cato Springs Road in the north, and clusters a variety of housing types over other areas of • the site to avoid impacts to prominent hillsides and hilltops. This development pattern is preferred over a typical suburban sprawl development that segregates various residential types and isolates commercial development in an area only accessible by vehicle, while dividing up sensitive natural environments (hillsides, floodplain, tree canopy) into individual lots. This project integrates a mix of residential housing types and plans for the commercial development in a traditional downtown pattern. As discussed in Findings No. I and No. 4 much of the edge, K.lReportsl10031PC Repor:sl /7 -September 81R-PZD 03-2939 (Soudhpass).doc of the site is buffered by open space preserve areas, however, there are some areas where dense single family lots are adjacent to undeveloped rural -residential property resulting in land use compatibility issues. This compatibility impacts have been reduced by providing a 50 -foot building setback/vegetated buffer along perimeter property lines. The architectural style of the development provides for well -articulated structures and a consistent and overriding theme. The variety of uses and structures prevent a visual monotony while maintaining a compatible architectural design throughout the site and accentuating the natural landforms and resources on the property. The mix of uses and relatively high density in certain areas encourages a balance of people able to live and work in the same area reducing daily vehicle trips that rely on the regional road network. A large amount of public space is proposed that will be a benefit to the community including a 200+ acre regional park, 240 acres of preserved open space with mountain biking and hiking trails, and a new urban center with a mix of commercial services. Significant trees have been incorporated into the design and the large preservation area will preserve large contiguous stands of native forest. This site contains as 33 -acre landfill that will be remediated and potentially reused as part of the regional park. Across the country, many cities have begun reclaiming the space left by unused landfills for parks and open space, BMX tracks, trails and active/passive recreation. Circulation is compact and connected in flatter areas and follows the terrain with limited connections in steep areas of the site. Also see Staff Finding No. 1. (2) Screening and landscaping. In order to enhance the integrity and attractiveness of the development, and when deemed necessary to protect adjacent properties, the Planning Commission shall require landscaping and screening as part of a PZD. The screening and landscaping shall be provided as set forth in § 166.09 Buffer Strips and Screening. As part of the development plan, a detailed screening and landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Commission. Landscape plans shall show the general location, type and quality (size and age) of plant material. Screening plans shall include typical details of fences, berms and plant material to be used. FINDING: A majority of the surface parking for the mixed use buildings and stand-alone commercial buildings will be internal and screened from the streets. Any large surface parking areas and mechanical and utility equipment facing the street will be screened in accordance with city ordinances at the time of development. Most of the perimeter of the SouthPass property is buffered in preserved open space areas that will provide appropriate screening between adjacent properties. As discussed in Findings No. I and No. 4 there arc areas proposed in SouthPass with very small lot single family residences that are adjacent to undeveloped or sparsely populated rural -residential land uses. These areas have provided additional screening and landscaping and buffering to reduce land use compatibility impacts. Staff has recommended conditions of approval to address this issue. Landscape plans will be required at the time of development and will include trees along the frontages of all streets, both public and private. (3) Traffic circulation. The following traffic circulation guidelines shall apply: A:IReportst20081/'C tielx)rtsII7-Septembe, 81R-/ZD 08-2989 (Sout/ipnss).doc (a) The adequacy of both the internal and external street systems shall be reviewed in light of the projected future traffic volumes. (b) The traffic circulation system shall be comprised of a hierarchal scheme of local collector and arterial streets, each designed to accommodate its proper function and in appropriate relationship with one another. (c) Design of the internal street circulation system must be sensitive to such considerations as safety, convenience, separation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic, general attractiveness, access to dwelling units and the proper relationship of different land uses. (d) Internal collector streets shall be coordinated with the existing external street system, providing for the efficient flow of traffic into and out of the planned . zoning development. (e) Internal local streets shall be designed to discourage through traffic within the planned zoning development and to adjacent areas. (0 Design provisions for ingress and egress for any site along with service drives and interior circulation shall be that required by Chapter 166 Development of this code. FINDING: The vehicular circulation system is comprised of a system of public streets and alleys as described earlier in this report accessing Cato Springs Road, Shiloh Drive, Kessler Mountain Road and Judge Cummings road. The dwellings face onto streets, and are generally accessed off of internal alleys, providing a hierarchy of circulation that encourage an efficient flow of traffic and a pedestrian friendly environment while minimizing impacts to sensitive landforms onsite. Internal streets follow a hierarchy, based on the context of use and anticipated traffic volume. See page 9 of the project booklet. Also see Staff Finding No. 6. (4) Parking standards. The off-street parking and loading standards found in Chapter 172 Parking and Loading shall apply to the specific gross usable or leasable floor areas of the respective use areas. FINDING: Parking is proposed in four forms: garages, underground parking decks, on - street, and surface parking lots. Much of the parking for mixed use and residential areas is proposed to be on -street. Parking structures and underground parking decks are proposed for the more intense commercial core areas and under many of the multi -family structures. A majority of surface parking lots will be to the interior of the mixed -use and multi -family residential lots as shown on the submitted plans. Most of the residences will be provided with private parking, either in alley -facing garages or driveways. The applicant requests Planning Commission approval to allow for on -street parking to count towards the fulfillment of parking requirements for non-residential uses, which staff supports. In addition, all parking structures will be required to meet the' location and/or. screening K:IReportsp0081PC Reporis\/7-September 81R-PZD 0S-2989 /Sonthpass).doc 1 '} standards set out by Ch. 166.22 of the UDC. (5) Perimeter treatment. Notwithstanding any other provisions of a planned zoning district, all uses of land or structures shall meet the open space, buffer or green strip provisions of this chapter of this code. FINDING: This requirement will be met. (6) Sidewalks. As required by § 166.03. FINDING: Public sidewalks will be designed and constructed adjacent to all public streets in accordance with City ordinance, unless otherwise approved at the time of development by the Planning Commission. The existing hiking and mountain biking trails through the site are proposed to be maintained and expanded with this development to provide pedestrian connectivity. (7) Street Lights. As required by § 166.03. FINDING: Street lights are to be provided adjacent to all public and private streets at a separation of no greater than 300 feet in compliance with City ordinance. (8) Water. As required by § 166.03. FINDING: Public water lines are being extended in accordance with city codes. (9) Sewer. As required by § 166.03. FINDING: Public sewer lines are being extended in accordance with city codes. (10) Streets and Drainage. Streets within a residential PZD may be either public or private. (a) Public Streets. Public streets shall be constructed according to the adopted standards of the City. (b) Private Streets. Private streets within a residential PZD shall be permitted subject to the following conditions: (i) Private streets shall be permitted for only a loop street, or street ending with a cul- de-sac. Any street connecting one or more public streets shall be constructed to existing City standards and shall be dedicated as a public street. (ii) Private streets shall be designed and constructed to the same standards as public streets with the exceptions of width and cul-de-sacs as noted below. K:I Reporls120081 PC Reports (I 7 -September SIR -fl!) 08-1989 (Sowhpass).doc (iii)All grading and drainage within a Planned Zoning District including site drainage and drainage for private streets shall comply with the City's Grading (Physical. Alteration of Land) and Drainage (Storm water management) Ordinances. Open drainage systems may be approved by the City Engineer. (iv) Maximum density served by a cul-de-sac shall be 40 units. Maximum density served by a loop street shall be 80 units. (v) The plat of the planned development shall designate each private street as a "private street." (vi) Maintenance of private streets shall be the responsibility of the developer or of a neighborhood property owners association (POA) and shall not be the responsibility of the City. The method for maintenance and a maintenance fund shall be established by the PZD covenants. The covenants shall expressly provide that the City is a third party beneficiary to the covenants and shall have the right to enforce the street maintenance requirements of the covenants irrespective of the vote of the other parties to the covenants. (vii) The covenants shall provide that in the event the private streets are not maintained as required by the covenants, the City shall have the right (but shall not be required) to maintain said streets and to charge the cost thereof to the property owners within the PZD on a pro rata basis according to assessed valuation for ad valorem tax purposes and shall have a lien on the real property within the PZD for such cost. The protective covenants shall grant the City the right to use all private streets for purposes of providing fire and police protection; sanitation service and any other of the municipal functions. The protective covenants shall provide that such covenants shall not be amended and shall not terminate without approval of the City Council. (viii) The width of private streets may vary according to the density served. The following standard shall be used: Paving Width (No On -Street Parking) Dwelling One -Way Two -Way Units 1 - 20 14' 22' 21+ 14' 24' *Note: If on -street parking is desired, 6 feet must be added to each side where parking is K: IReporlsl20081PC Repo? rs Il 7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Sowlrpass).doc intended. (ix) All of the traffic laws prescribed by Title VII shall apply to traffic on private streets within a PZD. (x) There shall be no minimum building setback. requirement from a private street. (xi) The developer shall erect at the entrance of each private street a rectangular sign, not exceeding 24 inches by 12 inches, designating the street a "private street" which shall be clearly visible to motor vehicular traffic. FINDING: The proposed streets are designed for pedestrian and multi -modal access to allow an alternative to vehicular travel in certain areas. The applicant intends to follow the City of Fayetteville standard street cross sections and design parameters inasmuch as possible. However, amendments may be requested as different project phases proceed through development approval. Staff has requested the City Council give the Planning Commission the discretion to consider and approve, if needed, deviations from the Master Street Plan cross -sections as each development is considered. Any private street constructed shall meet the above requirements. (11) ' Construction of nonresidential facilities. Prior to issuance of more than eight building permits for any residential PZD, all approved nonresidential facilities shall be constructed. In the event the developer proposed to develop the PZD in phases, and the nonresidential facilities are not proposed in the initial phase, the developer shall enter into a contract with the City to guarantee completion of the nonresidential facilities. FINDING: All development on the, site shall be phased according to the phasing plan and conditions herein. (12) Tree preservation. All PZD developments shall comply with the requirements for tree preservation as set forth in Chapter 167 Tree Preservation and Protection. The location of trees shall be considered when planning the common open space, location of buildings, underground services, walks, paved areas, playgrounds, parking areas, and finished grade levels. FINDING: The applicant has incorporated many significant trees as environmental design features and proposes to preserve approximately 247 acres in permanent open space (Planning Area 6B) that will provide, off -site tree preservation areas. A tree preservation plan will be required at the time of development in accordance with City ordinance. The minimum percent canopy required for a.PZD is 25%; those sites located within the HHOD require 30% preservation. (13) Commercial design standards. All PZD developments that contain office or commercial structures shall comply with the commercial design standards as set forth in § 166.14 Site Development Standards and Construction and Appearance Design Standards K:I Repor�.v120081PC Reportssll7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass)_doc for Commercial Strictures. FINDING: The non-residential structures on the site include the mixed use and stand- alone commercial buildings in Planning Area I- Town Center, office buildings in Planning Area 26- Crescent Park Apartments, civic buildings in Planning Area 5A -Civic Areas and any other commercial buildings that may be proposed as a conditional use in other areas of the site. All non-residential buildings shall meet this code section, and will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. (14) View protection. The Planning Commission shall have the right to establish special height and/or positioning restrictions where scenic views are involved and shall have the right to insure the perpetuation of those views through protective covenant restrictions. FINDING: The SouthPass site is identified as a scenic area from 1-540 and Cato Springs Road, and scenic views from on -site of surrounding mountains and distant views to downtown Fayetteville are evident. Some of the northern portions of the site are located within the 1-540 Design Overlay District. The project has incorporated the natural topography into the design to preserve the natural landform and views to and from the site. Much of the project will be tucked away in the valleys. Hilltops and ridgelines have generally been preserved to minimize development impacts to these sensitive areas. A majority of the west, north, and south borders of the SouthPass site will be protected from adjoining property by preserving existing tree canopy. The PZD plats have identified terminating vistas internal to the site at key locations at the conclusion of many thoroughfares. Staff does not propose height or positioning restrictions for this project; however, staff does recommend that structures that will be located at higher elevations, taking advantage of views from the site, be designed with materials, colors and rooflines that are muted and will dissolve into the natural background as much as possible. The intent is to prevent egregious structures from reducing the natural beauty of the surrounding hillside. (E) Revocation. (1) Causes for revocation as enforcement action. The Planning Commission may recommend to the City Council that any PZD approval be revoked and all building or occupancy permits be voided under the following circumstances: (a) Building permit. If no building permit has been issued within the time allowed. (b) Phased development schedule. If the applicant does not adhere to the phased development schedule as stated in the approved development plan. (c) Open space and recreational facilities. If the construction and provision of all common open spaces and public and recreational facilities which are shown on the final plan are proceeding at a substantially slower rate than other project components. K: I Reports(20081PC Repor(sV 7 -September 81R-Y%D 08-2989 (Southpass).doc Planning staff shall report the status of each ongoing PZD at the first regular meeting of each quarter, so that the Planning Commission is able to compare the actual development accomplished with the approved development schedule. lithe Planning Commission finds that the rate of construction of dwelling units or other commercial or industrial structures is substantially greater than the rate at which common open spaces and public recreational facilities have been constructed and provided, then the Planning Commission may initiate revocation action or cease to approve any additional final plans if preceding phases have not been finalized. The -city may also issue a stop work order, or discontinue issuance of building or occupancy permits, or revoke those previously issued. (2) Procedures. Prior to a recommendation of revocation, notice by certified mail shall be sent to the landowner or authorized agent giving notice of the alleged default, setting a time to appear before the Planning Commission to show cause why steps should not be made to totally or partially revoke the PZD. The Planning Commission recommendation shall be forwarded to the City Council for disposition as in original approvals. In the event a PZD is revoked, the City Council shall take the appropriate action in.the city clerk's office and the public zoning record duly noted. (3) Effect. In the event of revocation, any completed portions of the development or those portions for which building permits have been issued shall be treated to be a whole and effective development. After causes for revocation or enforcement have been corrected, the City Council shall expunge such record as established above and shall authorize continued issuance of building permits. (F) Covenants, trusts and homeowner associations. (1) Legal entities. The developer shall create such legal entities as appropriate to undertake and be responsible for the ownership, operation, construction, and maintenance of private roads, parking areas, common usable open space, community facilities, recreation areas, building, lighting, security measure and similar common, elements in a development. The city encourages the creation of homeowner associations, funded community trusts or other nonprofit organizations implemented by agreements, private improvement district, contracts and covenants. All legal instruments seiting forth a plan or manner of permanent care and maintenance of such open space, recreation areas and communally - owned facilities shall be approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the Planning Commission as to the suitability for the proposed use of the open areas. The aforementioned legal instruments shall be provided to the Planning Commission together with the filing of the final plan, except thatthe Guarantee shall be filed with the preliminary plan or at least in a preliminary form. (2) Common areas. If the common open space is deeded to a homeowner association, the developer shall file with the plat a declaration of covenants and restrictions in the Guarantee that will govern the association with the application for final plan approval. The provisions shall include, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: KiReports120081PC Reports)t7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Soudipass).doc (a) The homeowner's association must be legally established before building permits are granted. (b) Membership and fees must be mandatory for each home buyer and successive buyer. (c) The open space restrictions must be permanent, rather than for a period of years. (d) The association must be responsible for the maintenance of recreational and other common facilities covered by the agreement and for all liability insurance, local taxes and other public assessments. (e) Homeowners must pay their pro rata share of the initial cost; the maintenance assessment levied by the association must be stipulated as a potential lien on the. property. The association must be able to adjust the assessment to meet changing needs. FINDING: The applicant shall comply with these requirements. Sec. 161.25 Planned Zoning District (A) Purpose. The intent of the Planned Zoning District is to permit and encourage comprehensively planned'developments whose purpose is redevelopment, economic development, cultural enrichment or to provide a single -purpose or mixed -use planned development and to permit the combination of development and zoning review into a simultaneous process. The rezoning of property to the PZD may be deemed appropriate if the development proposed for the district can accomplish one or more of the following goals. (1) Flexibility. Providing for flexibility in the distribution of land uses, in the density of development and in other matters typically regulated in zoning districts. (2) Compatibility. Providing for compatibility with the surrounding land uses. (3) Harmony. Providing for an orderly and creative arrangement of land uses that are harmonious and beneficial to the community. (4) Variety. Providing for a variety of housing types, employment opportunities or commercial or industrial services, or any combination thereof, to achieve variety and integration of economic and redevelopment opportunities. (5) No negative impact. Does not have a negative effect upon the future development of the area; (6) Coordination. Permit coordination and planning of the land surrounding the PZD and cooperation between the city and private developers in the urbanization of K: Reports12008(PC Reports117-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc new lands and in the renewal of existing deteriorating areas. (7) Open space. Provision of more usable and suitably located open space, recreation areas and other common facilities that would not otherwise be required under conventional land development regulations. (8) Natural features. Maximum enhancement and minimal disruption of existing natural features and amenities. (9) General Plan. Comprehensive and innovative planning and design of mixed use yet harmonious developments consistent with the guiding policies of the General Plan. (10) Special Features. Better utilization of sites characterized by special features of geographic location, topography, size or shape. FINDING: Staff finds this proposal meets the intent of many of the parameters of.the City Plan 2025 as discussed in Staff Finding No. 1, as well as the above ten criteria, including flexibility in density, provision of a variety of housing types, creative arrangement of land uses that are harmonious and beneficial to the community, maximum enhancement and minimum disruption of existing natural features and common open spaces. The following guiding policies within City Neighborhood Areas and Civic and Private Open Space/Parks are applicable to this development, and help to achieve the six primary goals of the City Plan 2025: City Neighborhood Areas: a. Protect adjoining properties from the potential adverse impacts associated with non- residential uses adjacent to and within residential areas with proper mitigation measures that address scale, massing, traffic, noise, appearance, lighting, drainage, and effects all property values. b. Provide non-residential uses that are accessible for the convenience of individuals living in residential districts and where compatibility with existing desirable development patterns. c. Reduce the length and number of vehicle trips generated by residential development by enhancing the accessibility to these areas; encourage walkability as part of the street function. Neighborhood shopping should be within walking distance of residential use, or approximately on -quarter mile. d. Encourage developers to designate and plan for mixed -use corners at the time of approval to properly plan for accessibility to these areas. K:IReportsl20081PC Reports) I7 -September SIR-PZD 08-2989 (Souihpass).doc e. Encourage pedestrian friendly, mired -use buildings through the use of transparent glass for commercial uses at street level and building entrances that address the street f Where possible, encourage a block -and -street layout that promotes walkable, cyclist friendly road designs with slow design speeds. g. Encourage mixed -use development that is sensitive to surrounding residential uses and allows for day and night utilization of available parking. h. Utilize principles of traditional residential urban design to create compatible, livable and accessible neighborhoods. L Protect and restore Fayetteville 's outstanding residential architecture of all periods and styles. j. Utilize the Master Street Plan and incorporate bike lanes, parkways and landscaped medians to preserve the character of the City and enhance the utilization of alternative modes of transportation. k. Manage non-residential development within and adjoining residential neighborhoods to nrininrize nuisances. I. Minimize through traffic on minor residential streets, while providing connections between neighborhoods to encourage openness and neighborliness. m. Limit uses within City Neighborhood areas to those that primarily serve residents of Fayetteville rather than a regional population. n.. Develop strategies with the University of Arkansas to encourage students to live in the area, providing density sufficient to support public transit Civic and Private Open Space/Park Areas a. Encourage parkland dedication and conservation easements for trails that support the Fayetteville Alternative Trails and Transportation Plan, the 10- Year Parks Master Plan and the enduring green network. b. Provide an integrated network of open space areas throughout the City to serve local residents as well as provide a regional asset and visitor attraction. c. Plan for the long-term preservation and enhancement of open space (including undeveloped natural areas, utility corridors, and key scenic corridors) within the Fayetteville green network. d. Conserve open space within the Fayetteville green network through private acquisition and other acceptable conservation hnethods. K:IReportsI1008IPC Reports) 17 -September 81R-PZD 08-1Y39 (Southpnss).doc e. Encourage the creation of connected trails and walkways between community activity areas and neighborhoods and enhance with kiosks and rest stations. f Encourage community -based "green"infrastructure such as rain gardens, vegetated drainages and No -retention facilities. g. Encourage pocket parks, especially in the urban center areas. (B) Rezoning. Property may be rezoned to the Planned Zoning District by the City Council in accordance with the requirements of this chapter and Chapter 166, Development. Each rezoning parcel shall be described as a separate district, with distinct boundaries and specific design and development standards. Each district shall be assigned a project number or label, along with the designation "PZD". The rezoning shall include the adoption of a specific master development plan and development standards. FINDING: The submitted development plats and Master Development Plan booklets, along with the conditions of approval found applicable and appropriate, are binding with the approval of the requested rezoning. Should the Planning Commission forward this item to the City Council; an ordinance will be drafted for consideration of rezoning this property in accordance with the submittal herein. (C) R — PZD, Residential Planned Zoning District. (1) Purpose and intent. The R-PZD is intended to accommodate mixed -use or clustered residential developments and to accommodate single -use residential developments that are determined to be more appropriate for a PZD application than a general residential rezone. The legislative purposes, intent, and application of this district include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) To encourage a variety and flexibility in land development and land use for predominately residential areas, consistent with the city's City Plan 2025 and the orderly development of the city. (b) To provide a framework within which an effective relationship of different land uses and activities within a single development, or when considered with abutting parcels of land, can be planned on a total basis. (c) To provide a harmonious relationship with the surrounding development, minimizing such influences as land. Use incompatibilities, heavy traffic and congestion, and excessive demands on planned and existing public facilities. (d) To provide a means of developing areas with special physical features to enhance natural beauty and other attributes. A:IReports1200SIPC Reports I! ?-September 81R-PZ/) 08-2989 (Southpass).doc (e) To encourage the efficient use of those public facilities required in connection with new residential development. FINDING: Staff is recommending approval of this application, finding the proposed PZD meets the intent of the PZD ordinance as noted above. (2) Permitted Uses. All permitted uses identified within § 162 Use Units of the Unified Development Code shall be allowed as permissible uses, unless otherwise specified; subject to City Council approval of the Planned Zoning District request. (3) Conditional Uses. All conditional uses allowed within (Residential, Commercial, Industrial) zoning Districts established in the Unified Development Code shall be allowed with Planning Commission approval, unless otherwise specified, subject to the code governing Conditional Use requests. FINDING: Permitted and Conditional uses are outlined in both the Master Development Plan booklets and plats. (4) Condition. In no instance shall the residential use area be less than fifty-one percent (51%) of the gross floor area within the development. FINDING: The residential uses on this property will be at least fifty-one percent of the gross floor area within the development. (F) Bulk and area regulations (1) Residential density. Residential densities shall be determined on the basis of the following considerations: (a) The densities of surrounding development; (b) the densities allowed under the current zoning; (c) the urban development goals and other policies of the city's General Plan; (d) the topography and character of the natural environment; and (e) the impact of a given density on the specific site and adjacent properties. FINDING: Surrounding development is undeveloped rural -residential and agricultural. The city's development goals and Future Land Use Plan for this area support a higher density than the surrounding area. This site has been identified by City Council on the Future Land Use Plan as a growth area for a number of years. Also see Staff Findings Nos. (E)(1), (E)(4), (E)(5), and (B)(I). K:I Reports120081PC Reportsh'7-September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Sourhpass).doc (2) Lot area and setback requirements. Taking into consideration the unique aspects of each project, preliminary development plans for Planned Zoning Districts shall conform as closely as possible to the existing standards for lot area minimums and setback requirements under this chapter. FINDING: Lot area minimums and setbacks are varied on this project with structures oriented to the street and minimal front setbacks. This project provides for a variety of building footprint types of unit, with a mixed unit type and mixed density. Due to the unique nature of this traditional neighborhood and cluster development, it is not possible to conform to existing standards for lot area minimums and setback requirements. (3) Building height. There shall be no maximum building height except as may be determined by the Planning Commission during the review of the preliminary development plan based on the uses within the development and the'proximity of the development to existing or prospective development on adjacent properties. A lesser height may be established by the Planning Commission when it is deemed necessary to provide adequate light and air to adjacent property and to protect the visual quality of the community. FINDING: Building heights proposed for this project are typical of commercial, single and multi -family development with the highest buildings proposed in the lowest portions of the site. With this development the aesthetics of this area would change from rural to a City neighborhood. This is a complete change, however this change is consistent with the future land use plan designation for this property. (4) Building area. The Planning Commission shall review specific proposed lot coverages which generally correspond to the guidelines for lot coverage in the respective residential, office, commercial or industrial district which most depicts said development scheme. FINDING: The lot coverage or building area on this project is variable depending on the Planning Area and the environment proposed. The urban environment proposed in the Town Center portion of the site has no building area minimums typical of an urban condition, whereas the single family portions of the site are a maximum of 70% building area, consistent with typical small residential lot development. The lot coverages are appropriate given the built environment proposed. *Required Findings for Rezoning Request. Land Use Plan: The City Plait 2025 Future Land Use Plan designates this site as a City Neighborhood Area and Civic and Private Open Space/Parks. Rezoning this property to R- PZD 08-2989, with the associated Master Development Plan, allows ,this future land use to vary by integrating non-residential uses throughout the site, though the principal use on the property will remain residential with a 200+ acre regional park in the central portion of the site. The proposed plan, commitments, design standards and other conditions placed upon the K.'IReports1100811'C Reports)) 7 -September 81R-1'ZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc T project result in a development that meets many of the goals of the City Plan 2025 for new development. 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: Staff finds the proposal is highly consistent with, the land use planning objectives, principles and policies, as evidenced the number of guiding policies for City Neighborhood Areas this proposal meets, and the six major goals of City Plan 2025 as discussed in Staff Finding No. (E)(I). Rezoning the property will accommodate both the future land use plan for residential, non-residential, park and open space uses, and also allow for a variety of uses and housing types, sizes and development pattern, thus providing more choices for more citizens. 2. A determination of whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or needed at the time the rezoning is proposed. Finding: At this time the property is in unincorporated Washington County and a portion of the site is in the City and zoned R -A, which allows for residential and agricultural uses on minimum two -acre lots. The proposed mix of uses, residential density and site layout included with this re -zoning is more appropriate for this area than the existing zoning. In addition, in order to allow for development of the regional park, an adopted goal of the City, a rezoning of the site in such a manner is justified. Rezoning of this property as proposed is advisable in order to allow for development consistent with the Future Land Use Plan. 3. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would create or appreciably increase traffic danger and congestion. Finding: Staff finds this proposal will not create or appreciably increase traffic danger and congestion, with the street improvements recommended. 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: Staff finds that in evaluating this proposal, the population density would undoubtedly increase from that which, currently exists, and that the commercial and park uses proposed would create additional demand -on public services. Staff finds, however, that the load created on public services is not an undesirable or detrimental impact, with the improvements as recommended by K. IReports110081 PC Reports) l7 -September 81 R-PZD 08-2989 (Soudrpass).doc R-PZD 08-2989 Page 33 staff for this project. Streets: The site has access to Cato Springs Road. Cato Springs Road is currently an improved two lane paved state highway. Street improvements will be evaluated with the proposed development. Water: Public water is adjacent to the site. There is an 8 -inch water main along Cato Springs Road. There are also water storage tanks located on this site that are fed by a 30 -inch transmission main. The capacity of the existing system will need to be studied at the time of development. Sewer: Sanitary sewer is not available to the site. Off -site improvements will be required to bring sewer to this site. Improvements to the existing sewer system may be required dependent upon the demand placed by the development. The capacity of the existing main may need to be studied at the time of development. Fire: The subject property is located approximately 2.2 miles from Engine 6 - located at 900 South Hollywood with a projected response time of 5 minutes. The Fire Department discussed that the SouthPass annexation will affect response times along with calls for service in this part of the city. The number of residents proposed in this development alone would put the Fire Department in one of the threshold points for expansion. The developers have expressed interest in helping the fire department reserve a suitable location for a fire station within their development and have, identified a tentative location on their plans. Police: It is the opinion of the Fayetteville Police Department that this annexation will not immediately alter the population density and thereby undesirably increase the load on police services or create and appreciable increase in traffic danger and congestion in the area in the near future. The police department does state that with a development of this size and scale, there is a need for a public safety substation near the site with frontage access to Highway 265, to provide services in a timely manner for residents and businesses. Over the course of build -out in the next 15-20 years, we will begin to see undesirable increases in the population density, traffic danger and congestion, as well as load on police services, without these improvements. 5. 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; K. IReporz, 20181PC Reports)/7-September 8lR-PZD 08-2989 (Southpass).doc R-PZD 08-2989 Page 34 c. There are extenuating circumstances which justify the rezoning even though there are reasons under b (I) through (4) above why the proposed zoning is not desirable. d. Finding: N/A K:IReports120081PC Reponsl /7 -September 81R-PZD 08-2989 (Souihpass).doc vT q THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PC Meeting of July 28, 2008 PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE To: Fayetteville Planning Commission From: Greg Howe, Urban Forester Date: July 23,,2008 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 444-3470 ITEM #: R-PZD o8-2898: Planned Zoning District (Southpass Development) TREE PRESERVATION PLAN i. A full Tree Preservation Plan will be required once this development comes through the development process. This includes an inventory of all significant trees. 2. At the time of development, staff will assess the plans with a minimum canopy cover of at least 25%. Areas that lie within the Hillside Hilltop Overlay District • (HHOD) willhave a minimum canopy cover 01 30%. Mitigation will not likely be supported by staff without detailed supportive information such as an arborist report. 3. Significant trees and shared canopy along property lines is a high priority for preservation. Staff recommends working to save a vegetative buffer along all • adjoining properties. 4. Staff recommends looking at areas of quality trees throughout the development for preservation and greenspace. LANSCAPE REGULATION t. Landscape Regulations as defined in Chapter 177 will be required with development plan approval. This shall include but not be limited to street trees, detention facility plantings, adequate greenspace, etc. PARKS' RECREATION 113 West Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 To: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning Thru: Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director From: Alison Jumper, Park Planner Date: June 25, 2008 Re: Regional Park and Southpass Development History The development of a regional park has been an extraordinary mission for Parks and Recreation Staff and our Advisory Board. The concept of a regional park dates back to 2000 when we started our master planning process to determine the recreation needs of our citizens. In April 2000, Lose and Associates was hired to conduct a 10 Year Master Plan for Fayetteville Parks and Recreation. This process also included a series of public meetings and a public survey to identify the recreational needs of our citizens. The results were incorporated into the Plan and it was adopted by Parks and Recreation Advisory Board on April 26; 2001; Planning Commission on November 26, 2001; and City Council on February 19, 2002. The findings included a desire to create a city wide network of trails, provide more neighborhood parks, preserve open space and build a multi -sport complex. The term "multi -sport complex," which is now referred to as regional park, first originated from this 45 member committee discussing the future of Parks and Recreation. The committee was divided into 7 groups to develop a list of operation and facility additions and improvements. The list of facilities was related by each group and ranked in a finalized priority list. The Regional Park received a ranking of first priority in all groups except for one, where it received a second ranking. The regional park, however is not only for sports. This facility will have other amenities such as pavilions, picnic areas, playgrounds, aquatic features, trails, volleyball, tennis, nature areas, children's area, horseshoes, an amphitheatre and much more. Site Selection In December 2002, Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Staff identified 18 areas of land to evaluate for Fayetteville's new regional park. Staff viewed each of these plots of land, evaluating each of them based on criteria such as amount of available land, infrastructure availability, low environmental impact, cost - 'c r -e/usable land, accessible to.ci•:_�r "end visitors, and connections to Fayetteville 'i,.,ies such as hotels and restaur. . Parks and Recreation Staff narrowed the 18 areas to 4 recommendations and presented them to Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB). PRAB toured the properties on May 20, 2003. After touring these properties, PRAB asked Parks and Recreation Staff to further analyze each of these sites designing land use maps. At the August 3, 2003 PRAB meeting, it was determined the most suitable location for the regional park was located in South Fayetteville, off of 1-540 and Cato Springs Road, referred to as the Cummings property. Land Acquisition Based on these results, PRAB appointed three members to work with Staff to determine several possible funding methods for purchase and development of this land. When Mayor Coody presented his idea of a public/private partnership, the subcommittee and PRAB overwhelmingly endorsed the proposal. RFP 04=13 was advertised in May 2004 requesting interested developers to submit a proposal to purchase the land from the Cummings Family and deed a minimum of 200 acres for the future development of a regional park. A Professional Services Selection Committee reviewed and selected the proposal presented by Southpass Development. Resolution 138-04, approved on September 7, 2004, authorized the Mayor to execute an agreement with Southpass Development Company to accept 200 acres of park land, a 10 acre water tank site, one million dollars for park land development and other consideration for the city's acceptance of ownership of a 22 acre landfill. The remaining acreage surrounding the future park would be used for a mixed neighborhood development. Current Status . Since June 10`h 2004 City staff has been working with Southpass Development Company to create a master plan for the park. A conceptual plan was approved by Park staffand PRAB in May 2007.. Parks and Recreation staff anticipates receiving the deed for the parkland within the next few months and looks forward to working on the project. • FAYETTEVILLE_ TIIE CITY OF FAvrcrrE t'1LLE, ARKANSAS 113 west Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 ENGINEERING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE 479-575-8206 To: Andrew Garner, Planner July 16, 2008 From Glenn E. Newman, Jr., P.E. Staff Engineer Re: PZD Review Comments Development: SouthPass PZD Engineer: Appian Centre for Design All designs arc subject to the City's latest design criteria (water, sewer, streets and drainage). Review for PZD approval is not approval of public improvements, and all proposed improvements are subject to further review at the time construction plans are submitted. 2. The supplemental cost share agreements related to offsitc improvements (water, sewer, roads, etc) associated with the Community Park must be completed prior to approval at • Planning Commission_ 3. Kessler Mountain Planning Area does not.appear in all maps (sheet 4 Southpass Master Plan, sheet 9, Soutpass Street Deliniation, Sheet 13, Community Park) within the booklet. 4. Until the alignment and the required right-of-way of the roadway that serves as a boundary of the Community Park in numerous locations is reviewed and approved at the • construction review level, the property boundary cannot be established. The current alignment is conceptual in nature and may change during the construction review process. 5. Revise the layout to allow Shiloh to connect to Cato Springs as shown in the Master Street Plan or Provide a waiver request as indicated in letter of response. PZD Guidelines: 6. CI Streets and Lot Layout: Remove the commitment from the City to extend and make any necessary improvements to Shiloh Drive from Sixth Street to the point of cormection with the new Community Park. 7. C5 Storm Water Detention Areas and Drainage: Indicate a private storm water management association will be required to operate'and maintain the LID improvements. Including those dedicated to the public. 8. C7 Existing and Proposed Utility Connections and Extensions and other locations in the report: a. The statement that "EL -3 must also be upgraded" has a time frame associated with this possibility. This agreement must be executed and returned to the city post haste so that the upgrade will be included in the construction contract. 9. N I &2 Dedication of On or Off Site Improvements: Indicate a private storm water management association will be required to operate and maintain the LID improvements. Including those dedicated to the public. Plans: 10. Insufficient detail for complete engineering review. I. Each intersection and street alignment will be reviewed in detail at the time of development submittal. All designs must meet the minimum street standards and AASHTO guidelines. There appears to be numerous locations that does not meet this criteria. 12. Kessler Mountain Bluff Planning Area 313 appears to not have access. Show the proposed oflsite access for this area. Engineering Division comme,.;'-Matt Casey ANX 08-2899: (FRANK SHARP, 631/632?): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located S OF HWY 62W_ The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 53.53 acres. The request is to annex the subject properties into the City of Fayetteville. Planner: Andrew Canter RZN08-2900: (FRANK S[(ARP, 631/632?): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located S OF HWY. 62W. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 53:53 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to RSF-I, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, I UNIT PER ACRE_ Planner: Andrew Garner Public water is not available to this site. The nearest water is a 6" water main at Wolfdale Rd. which is about 1,000 feet to the south of this property. The capacity of the existing main may need to be studied at the time of development Sanitary sewer is not available to the site. The nearest sewer is a 6" sewer main at Holland Dr. and Holsten which is about 1,600 feet to the north of this property. Improvements to the sewer system may be required dependent upon the demand placed by the development. The capacity of the existing main may need to be studied at the time of development The site has access to Holland Drive and Wolfdale Road. Both are currently un-improved two lane road's. Street improvements will be evaluated with the proposed development. Standard improvements and requirements for drainage will be required for the development. This property is not affected by the 100 -year floodplain. FN08-2897: (SOUTH PASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APP[AN CENTER FOR GNforpropertylocated WEST OF I-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62 W. The property is in the ng Area and contains approximately825.00 acresThe request is to annex the subject propertiese City of Fayetteville. Planner: Andrew Gamer R -PR -P X898: Planned Zoning District (SOUTH PASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF 1-540 ARITSOUTLttJF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL: and contains approximately 910.36acres. The request is for review of a Zoning and Land Use approval only request for a Residential Planned Zoning District. Planner: Andrew Gamer Public water is located adjacent to the site. There is an 8" water main along Cato Springs Road. There are also water storage tanks located on this site that are fed by a 30" transmission main. The capacity of the existing system will need to he studied at the time of development Sanitary sewer is not available to the site. Off -site improvements will be required to bring sewer to this site. Improvements to the existing sewer system may be required dependent upon the demand placed by the development. The capacity of the existing main may need to be studied at the time of development. The site has access to Cato Springs Road. Cato Springs Road is currently an improved two lane paved state highway_Street improvements will be evaluated with the proposed development. Standard improvements and requirements for drainage will be required for the development. This property is not affected by the t00 -year floodplain. Fayetteville Fire Department ANX 08-2899: (FRANK SHARP, 631/632?): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located S OF HWY 62W. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 53.53 acres. The request is to annex the subject properties into the City of Fayetteville. RZN 08-2900: (FRANK SHARP, 631/632?): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located S OF HWY. 62W. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 53.53 acres. The request is to rezone the subject property to RSF-1, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY, 1 UNIT PER ACRE. This property will be covered by Engine 6 located at 900 S Hollywood. It is approximately 3.5 miles from the station with an anticipated response time of 7 minutes. The Fire Department anticipates 9 (6 EMS -3 Fire/other) calls for service once the development is completed and maximum build out has occurred. The Fayetteville Fire Department feels that along with the South Pass Development that joins this property that this will affect our response times along with our calls for service in this part of the city. The developers of Southpass have expressed interest in helping us locate a suitable location for a fire department within their development. ANX 08-2897: (SOUTH PASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF 1-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 825.00 acres. The request is to annex the subject properties into the City of Fayetteville R-PZD 08-2898: Planned Zoning District (SOUTH PASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF I-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 910.36acres. -The request is for review of a Zoning and Land Use approval only request for a Residential Planned Zoning District. This property will be covered by Engine 6.located at 900 S Hollywood. It is approximately 2.2 miles from the station with an anticipated response time of 5 minutes to the start of this development and approximately 7 minutes to the.northern most property line once the roads are put in place and build out has occurred. Based on the 3666 total units within this development, the Fire Department anticipates 608 (387 EMS -221 Fire/other) calls for service once the development is completed and maximum build out has occurred. The Fayetteville Fire Department feels that this development will affect our response times along with our calls for service in this part of the city. The number of residents in this development alone with put us in one of our trigger points for expansion. The developers have expressed interest in helping us locate a suitable location for a fire department within their development. If you have any questions concerning these comments please don't hesitate to call me l Rll9SItSS Captain, Fayetteville Fire Department Date 1/30/08 Jeremy Pate Zoning and Development Director City of Fayetteville 113.W. Mountain Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Dear Director Pate, This document is in response to the request for a determination of whether the proposed R-PZD 08-2898: (South Pass Development, 632): Submitted by Appian Center for • Design for property located W of 1-540 and S of HWY 62 and NW of Cato Springs Road would substantially alter the population density and thereby undesirably increase the load on public services and create an appreciable increase in traffic danger and congestion. The property contains approximately 910.36 acres. It is the opinion of the Fayetteville Police Department that this R-PZD will not immediately alter the population density, and will not immediately create an appreciable or undesirable increase in the load on police services. We further feel this R-PZD will not immediately create an appreciable increase in traffic danger and congestion within the near future. With a development of this size and scale, we feel there is a need for a public safety substation near the site with frontage access to Highway 265. Thi$ development is located near the city limits at the southern edge of our coverage area. With the proposed community having as large or larger population than adjoining cities, we feel it would require a public safety building for joint use by police and, fire, to provide services in a timely manner for residents and businesses. • The original annexation and rezoning will not result in the immediate impact on police services or traffic danger and congestion. However, over the course of build -out in the next 15-20 years we will begin to see undesirable increases in the population density, the traffic danger and congestion as well as the load on police services. Sincerely, Captain William Brown Fayetteville Police Department r:. rrl 1 r Rill K..'A;'N 7:rSA;Si Depaitmenl&:Qnifonm halouat ;:i:: Background on Former C& L Landfill Si orandum Solid Waste landfill Permit 0015-S was issued in October, 1972 to C & L Land Company The site is approximately 33 acres, located 1.5 miles southwest of the City of Fayetteville, just west of interstate 540, on • Cato Springs Road. The landfill was owned and operated by the Cummings family. Landfill was utilized by City of Fayetteville and Washington County. The landfill received primarily municipal solid wasteand some construction and demolition debris. The C & L landfill permit was voided on September 24, 1976. Inspections of the closed landfill were conducted by the S WMD in .1981, 1984 and 1999; The 1999 inspection noted no • erosion and noted extensive vegetative cover was present. ADEQ S WMD staff recently visited the site on October 27, 2003. The site was heavily vegetated for the most part with some erosion gullies'on the north side of the landfill where it abuts the adjacent hillside. No exposed waste was noted at the time of our site visit. August 1996 Site Assessment at C & L Landfill A Preliminary Site Assessment (PSA) was conducted by Terracon Environmental in 1996 for Dr. Douglas Cummings. The PSA Report was submitted to the City of Fayetteville on August 14, 1996.Terracon conducted a PSA to evaluate environmental concerns about the landfill site. This site assessment consisted of reviewing historical records, conducting interviews, conducting on -site visits, performing a limited subsurface exploration.of the site with concurrent sampling'of both ground water and surface waters in and around the fl landfill. A total of six bore holes were advanced to a depth of 4 to 16 feet in the subsurface immediately adjacent to the landfill site. During boring installation, soil samples, soil gas samples and the occurrence of leachate or ground water at depth were monitored during boring advancement. These boreholes were later converted into groundwater monitor wells. Water samples collected. on and adjacent to the landfill for laboratory analysis included 6 ground water and 2 surface water samples. Water•quality analysis was conducted for typical chemical indicators of landfill leachate. Laboratory analysis included chlorides, sulfates, phosphates, ammonia, nitrite, total organic carbon (TOC) and trace metals (iron, lead, zinc, chromium & manganese). Analytical Results From Ten -aeon Monitor wells #I and #4 had sulfate concentrations in ground water 15 to 32 times higher (152 ppm) than background surface water sulfate concentrations (20-ppm). Surface water sample #7 collected near the northeast comer of the landfill had sulfate concentrations which exceeded the background surface water .concentration by a factor of 59. Ground water in all boreholes except #6 had elevated chloride concentrations between (137 to 1251 ppm). Ground water sample ill, located down gradient from the landfill had a pl l of 3.0. Ground water sample #6 had a strong hydrogen sulfide odor Total Organic Carbon (TOC) in all background water samples was less than 5 ppm. All samples collected in or near the landfill had TOC concentrations above 5ppin. TOC concentrations exceeded the typical concentration of 5 ppm by a factor of 3 to 6. Two samtples had elevated TOC concentrations (735 ppm and 25 ppm) as well as a strong hydrocarbon odor in the samples. Terracon's Interpretation of Site Survey Results Terracon concluded ground water samples from the boreholes and one spring seep indicate the landfill appears to be impacting shallow ground water chemistry in and around the site. Ground water samples from two down gradient locations (#1 and #2) and a surface water sample (#7) immediately off site indicate there is an apparent impact from the landfill on water chemistry off site. Chloride concentrations in surface water sample (#12) are three times the concentration of background surface water sample (#11) suggesting some impact to Cato Springs Branch offsite. Terracon also stated eastward movement of shallow ground water perched on top of the underlying shale appear to have resulted in subsurface migration of impacted waters beyond the eastern boundaries of the fill- Exposed trash in contact with surface water run off appears to have contributed to chemical impacts on surface water as far east as Cato Springs Branch. ADEO SWMD Evaluation of Site Assessment Report The overall scope of Terracon's site assessment was limited. No "ideal" background ground water quality samples were taken up gradient from the site by Terracon (which they freely admit in the report). Ground water sample analyses were compared to "background" surface water samples. Consequently, the water quality concentration comparisons evaluated and reported oa'by Terracon are less credible than direct comparisons of up gradient and down gradient ground water samples from, the site. However, elevated chloride concentrations, elevated sulfate concentrations, hydrocarbon and hydrogen sulfide odors in water samples, as well as elevated TOC concentrations were discovered and all are indicative of possible impacts on water quality in and around this former landfill site. Based on the information presented in Terracon's report, it does appear both surface and ground water quality has been adversely impacted in and around this closed landfill. Until such time as additional site investigations are undertaken, the nature and extent of these impacts will remain undetennined. Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the most recent water quality data collected, it is apparent there minor impacts on local ground water and surface water supplies in and around the old C & L Class I landfill site. GWM wells installed around the site have shown some degree of GW contamination. Surface water samples taken downstream from exposed waste have also shown some impacts. The C & L Class I facility is an unlined pre -Subtitle D landfill. Current and potential future environmental impacts from this site should he determined by ADEQ staff and/or by an independent third party. The C & L Class I landfill site is being considered for Post Closure Trust Fund eligibility. Dispersal of monies from the Post Closure Trust Fund is recommended for the following activities: I) Field reconnaissance activities to inspect the facility cap and cover; :2) Hire an independent third party to perform and prepare topographic survey for the site; 3) Continuance of a GW and surface water sampling program in and around the site; 4), Determine if leachate sampling is possible and if so collect and analyze le.achate samples; 5) Evaluate landfill gas issues and perform landfill gas monitoring; 6) Evaluate the data collected and based on the findings, if necessary, S WMD Technical Branch staff should prepare corrective action plan for the facility; 7) Initiate recommended corrective action plan and the proposed corrective measures for this site. Corrective Measures may possibly include ongoing water quality sampling of on and off site G W monitoring wells and surface water; improvements to the facility cap and cover system; ongoing LF gas monitoring and installation of a LF gas collection system;. ongoing quarterly site inspections and monitoring of the facility. J 1 qp*lr .w..'e i J w 0± •0 v a Cl, 1n 9 U C N a'Oa, O y V N 3 E a a u v w a va N > L „ �C U N ••' fl + N C n ti- N O? .� a o 0 c _ E 0 L W o O a p V �a 3 vow �Eo O e o C O co > ON y c y No v N C O c N d >,tnc a ~ tO 03 N G n W E d 3l i L CU N N -C J O L y N LL Q d W H v N N V 0 p_ 0 ~> �w a D3� E aWQ w� o u� o Via_ `oc o Ea �'°3 `0 3 v -o C N C �J '^ '^� a 4)E J p L ywa aim C L O11 C M C y N 0+-' O 03 Z .C rnYn 2L ow= ow m w „ -D wcv a �o0 ^ E oe v v'MIv „ v a u V N c -0 "c0 p N L a -. 4)S �' co O V y0d w u' C:.. 0) 3.C o E JO JEO n0 V NM 'D mow L a) WLQ O n N LAN -'-I- 00 E°" l L 4 w y a m n > O �C O to N vii N a L O N L aim C d in w C v N 0 a '00 0m cpo a-, o :+) 1-v c a 0 c c0 00, a 'L° ;o,. 0$ °n oG0 p 0Co o 0 Edo Y L Qj 03u O 0 W p rn .c,' 00 '00 03 Cu 02 w c 0). ¢ .C« ooEo c4-' oU 4.o c -.- 3cE 3 w L°: `o .=t 0o na o c a. �`w'° o 3� E3c N a.0 Y ALL O o O 0 u „~ o -cE �Q� o c o f n -c a C o • w c v v a 10 u .Eon °N'o £� a 4-' o a gain ` C L G O )O !^ L iC ` u W C 0 -0 sftiw y� �w v o E�7onw c 010 ado Y 0. co _C Eo+ a `c ot',c-, 'L' 'N av my Zrc= He E0 a Yo 3° >aNc o of ac "w y$ toi u Jo) y-� O N N� `C ate+ On '^ 0� d� a C t G p N O CL,W OQ C m.K r V 0 p 00 d 'D— a uy G)W dfO OZ QiY =yp p Ca) Oy0V V(no)a) 03li y d O NL �N c C'-' L uL N Ld 4IYy pOp ao. LS oM £ Cw op.,v oa ya „c „vn d 3 �' a N o$ c +L' rn '^ w a oQ o y c Q L 3 O. U p U O I I c4)0o WpO UN �O T ONV 0C =OIL W Y3 OU =l7„ 3°' N` C-0-0 COOV� r'Oh cp V)OC Un� d fl Sc VNW° OHO wu v°i " ��≥ c o0y v„ 00 mna -.Oma)✓)pn 3v OI-'°U.� �Ca �GN' /uL yL c3-2 to oy o� u$ �. JuE cC apEp an"E LL NYI]Y Ott UJO.oyN > 3 N N> 0 0 O W E WO C NU O JN O�cC ZI-F- 3K KO �m4)WL Kil \ cW upd>� �ymcv FW- v t yV m a ZI-n 3o N OF v)`�aN W O`Lo'C N 01-M _' OSw c lL loi ma v�o C 0 w o' t d L� o E O N C w C o� y� O V 1 jE o a� N p M N O OJ . 0) 10 u N t 424- W c G -Co o J N 0C a Q) -4- 03Q) E` n.N 0.o nW Co - o Na pz J W Q >o v� OSC O > N C -C o wU Ec t oH to 0" p W J C) p O _ oa Ca. i� t o one ci to a C 0 W 4-U p W VL ca ay L a C.-. op3 o. 22 O N l7 C V y din O C t-. = V. C 4 N Oya 0) 0)Q- O4- O 4- IUt o V V 4-_O aa H Overview is '� _ E a?. s: 0 750 1.500 3.000 4,500 6,000 Feet ` 1 RPZD08-2898 SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT One Mile View Overview Legend Boundary Subject Property .'-, planning Area W!,W!,l RPZD08-1898 Overlay District L j Outside City ` 0 0.25 0.5 Legend ® Hillside -Hilltop O% erlay District 1 Mies RPZDOSOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT Future Land Use Use Overview Legend Subject Property MRPZD08-2848 Streets .., Existing dl!i Planned Boundary '.i Planning Area n Overlay Disinct I _II] Outside City Legend 0 750 1,500 3,000 4,500 6.000 Feet Southpass 2008 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes ■ July 28, 2008 ■ August 11, 2008 ■ August 25, 2008 ■ September 8, 2008 Planning Commission July 28. 2008 Page 12 of 18 ANX 08-2897: (SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF 1-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 831.00 acres. The request is to annex the subject properties into the City of Fayetteville. R-PZD 08-2898: (SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted byAPPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF 1-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 910.36 acres. The request is for Zoning and Land Use approval for a Residential Planned Zoning District with 809 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200+ acre regional park. Commissioner Lack discussed the time limits established by the bylaws; 20 minutes for an applicant, 10 minutes for citizens. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report, discussing the history of the project, site characteristics, the annexation request and also discussed the PZD request. This meeting is intended to introduce the Commissioners to the project, and allow some major issues to be worked out. Gamer discussed some of the major points as identified in the staff report. The applicant is requesting rezoning approval only for a master development plan for a R-PZD, proposing a maximum of4,320 attached and detached dwelling units, as well as 344,000 s.f of non-residential and commercial space. The overall density proposed is 4.7 units/acre. The form of development is designed to create a new urban center, surrounded by neighborhoods and a regional park. Staff is recommending in favor of the annexation request; staff is recommending the PZD be tabled at this time in order for staff to work with the applicant and address additional items in the PZD packet and take a look at the traffic study in detail. Todd Jacobs, applicant, requested additional time for presentation, about 40 minutes total. Commissioner Anthes suggested that since the presentation was intended to be a review of the broad issues, a full 40 -minute presentation may not be necessary. Jacobs stated that since it was such a large project, a longer presentation would be necessary to cover the project. . Commissioner Lack asked that the applicant try and keep the presentation under 30 minutes. Jacobs described the existing site and project proposal. He discussed site characteristics; context; each planning area; phasing; site design characteristics, etc., utilizing a powerpoint presentation (Refer to DVD for fill presentation). No public comment was received. Planning Commission July 28, 2008 Page 13 of 18 Commissioner Lack stated he would like the Commissioners to discuss the annexation first. Commissioner Anthes stated that one of the criteria in the annexation guiding policies calls for a fiscal. impact assessment on large annexations. I've never seen one done in the City of Fayetteville in the five and a half years I've been on this Commission. What is a large annexation if 831 acres is not, or, when does it kick in that the City would request a fiscal impact assessment on an annexation? Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, stated that staff did note in the staff report, under this finding, that this is a rather large annexation and a fiscal impact analysis is desired, but that staffdid not conduct a fiscal impact analysis for this request. It is anticipated that the city will provide a level of support for infrastructure and improvements due)to our agreement with the applicants and a contract agreement that states the city will cost -share extending sewer. A supplemental cost -share agreement is also being prepared for a proposal to the City Council for at least infrastructure improvements. That's not necessarily an economic analysis of the viability of the project or an analysis of what tax revenue may be brought in to the city, or what property tax proceeds may occur. That's not something that we have done in the past; my office has never prepared one. We discussed this at length some years back through a dedicated group, and one of our City Plan 2025 goals is to review our annexation policy because this is never utilized. Commissioner Anthes stated that it would be helpful for staffand the Council to clarify when they are and when they are not going to require the analysis. If we are not going to require them, we should amend our annexation policy. If we are, we ought to have some criteria that says this is when it kicks in, and then hold to it. We also need to address what would be included in that assessment. I think it's confusing to have this language in the policy and I would like to have it clarified. As far as the annexation goes, other than the fiscal impact analysis, I think the Parks Dept, Mayor's office, and City Council have spoken clearly about their desire to have this piece of property in the City of Fayetteville. It meets many of the criteria in the annexation guiding policy as stated in staffs findings. I find special consideration for the environmentally sensitive areas section, given that there is a landfill that has adversely affected surface and groundwater in the area, and needs some cleanup. In addition, that Kessler Mountain is the top of the watershed, and there are several drainage and streams as well as the great number of acres in the HHOD. For that reason I think it meets the criteria for annexation. Motion: Commissioner Anthes made a motion to forward the request to City Council with a recommendation of approval.' Commissioner Graves seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Commissioner Graves stated that there was an annexation task force set up a few years ago that made recommendations with regard to that particular item, including trying to define what a large annexation was. It might be worth revisiting. I don't remembet off -hand if it was supposed to be provided at this level or the City Council level, so if a fiscal impact analysis were done for the City Council it might be more appropriate than at this level. On something this size especially, it would be helpful, if not to this particular Commission at least to City Council, in making thejudgments that Planning Commission ` July 28, 2008 Page 14 of 18 we want our Council members to make. I would ask our staff and City Council to go back and look at that report, and maybe tighten up the language. Commissioner Lack stated the Commission should proceed into discussion of the PZD. Staff has given us a good list of criteria and a good list of items that, on their review, they recommend we need to discuss. We can start with those items. Phasing is something we need to have lots of discussion about. Segregation of uses is something we need to discuss. Item #1 that staff has recommended we discuss is compliance of this proposal to City Plan 2025, and compatibility with surrounding land uses. Commissioner Anthes stated that the way this project is planned within itself, the applicant has addressed many goals of City Plan 2025, including the neighborhood form we have requested, especially on a difficult site to develop. Obviously this is what the PZD ordinance was written for, complicated projects of this nature. I would like to reserve any comments about compatibility with surrounding land uses until we got further into the project and had further discussions. Commissioner Lack concurred that this is what the PZD ordinance was fashioned for. Overall, with City Plan 2025 compliance, we have 910 acres of land that is mixed -use, which is basically the size and population density of a small city. We need to look at the segregation of uses present in some portions of the site. The Town Center and commercial areas look.like what we would expect out of the 2025 Plan, but as we move into the next phases, I'm seeing two areas that while they are proposed to be built at the same time, are segregated single-family and multi -family uses. Even to the point of the phasing on that — and I can understand the economic directive — requires it be built out as residential only in the first phases. On phase 1, it looks like the waterway/millrace was not in phase 1, but in the booklet it appears to be the waterway and the buildings to the western side were in the phase I development. Jacobs stated that the west side of the millrace is in Phase I development, and that has underground parking. That entire area will have to be undercut and excavated. That provides.some of the retail, office space, and lofts in phase 1. Commissioner Lack stated that although it was not evident by the rendering, he would expect that would have some retail potential at the bottom level at least. Jacobs stated he had programmed the building at the comer closer to the great lot for retail; and some office in order to feed off the park as we talked about. Commissioner Lack stated that multi -family was allowable in that zone. If the western half is included, that helps. However, within the single-family and multi -family, it looks like the uses are more segregated. Jacobs stated that for the western area, the millrace, they did program in office and retail uses as a conditional use in some of these areas. Commissioner Anthes stated that pgs. 10 & II have use unit and zoning comparison charts I had I Planning Commission July 28, 2008 Page15of18 the same questions and started looking at it, and was happy to see in some of the multi -family areas, there are use units that allow for neighborhood shopping goods, home occupations and other uses by conditional use permit, and I would expect as we get into these Planning Areas, we would need to look at these conditional use permits very carefully for the reasons you state. Commissioner Lack stated the Crescent Park single/multi-family areas are concerning, in that he does not see more potential for other uses. Lack asked if any other Commissioners had comments on item one. Commissioner Anthes discussed her consultation with Kathy Deck at the UA Center for Business and Economic Research, and had asked Ms. Deck about population projections for Washington County in the next 25 years. Projections show growth of just over 90,000 people in the County in the next 25 years. If Southpass does have a build out population to 10,823, taken as number of units times 2.5, that means Southpass will house 12% of the population increase for the entire county. Deck stated that the mere building of housing does not create housing demand. However, she wanted to place that in perspective for the Commissioners. Commissioner Lack asked about condition #2, development patterns with the Planning Areas. Commissioner Pate discussed condition #2, which along with conditions #4 and following are intended to go through as the applicant did the Planning Areas and discuss suitability of land development on that area. That's one of the findings in our PZD ordinance. As we toured the site last Thursday we discussed suitability for development. Discussion could include whether you feel that's the appropriate place for that development patter and secondly, any major comments/issues with compatibility within the'site or outside the site, as noted by Commissioner Anthes. Commissioner Lack asked about the build -to line. He wondered if the applicant had any dialogue about that. Where the city ordinances in downtown development district currently require a percentage of lot width, these planning guidelines recommend a percentage of the building facade to be built -to. Jacobs stated he has talked to staff about the downtown codes and the build -to lines versus being more flexible. Our tendency for Southpass and the Town Center is to match what you currently have in the downtown code. We're oriented more toward the form -based codes, we do have the look that we intend, but there is some flexibility for the architects to come in and with those buildings, we have lowered this from 85% to 75%. This is one of the sections we need to look at again on a technical basis and see if that is what we want. Commissioner Lack asked if it is a building fa�ade or a lot width area. Jacobs stated that they had decided on building lot vs. building facade. I thought we had changed it because we had some confusion back and forth with the city's ordinance, particularly with the 75% of the building facade up to the build -to line. Commissioner Anthes stated she does not know how to discuss #2 until we get into more detail of Planning Commission July 28, 2008 Page l6 of l8 each of the Planning Areas. She stated she would support staff's recommendation on items #3-10 as listed in the report. Commissioner Lack directed fellow Commissioners to page 16 & l7 of the PZD booklet to discuss phasing. Phase I is to be completed in 3 years from time of approval, which is the western halfof the Canal village, and the park entrance roads. He hadn't noticed the importance of the central park at first. lie stated he was a little confused at first about the planning of the road through the development before the presentation, but understands now. Lack was concerned about Shiloh Rd. coming through, and did not see that in the bookbook. lie asked when Shiloh Dr. was slated to come through. Jacobs stated that Shiloh Dr. is once phase I is established and the park came online, there is a large transmission line that will have to be relocated. The section with that transmission line buried into the boulevard is the same one that crosses Dickson St. As part of Phase 1, Shiloh Dr. will be built, Phase 2 the next portion, and then from our Ph. 2 out to existing is in the cost -share agreement that the City is working on, and I am not sure about the phasing. The large boulevard section will be the design. The City may know a little bit more of the phasing for the off -site Shiloh. Commissioner Lack asked if it might be reasonable to see Shiloh Dr. connected by phase 2? Jacobs stated he could not speak to that. The City will be responsible for that. Commissioner Lack asked about the density that will be present on -site by phase 2. Jacobs stated phase I is 82 SF, 350 MF; phase 2 would be around 50 SF, 200-300 MF. Commissioner Lack stated he will learn more about that at the next reading, with the traffic study. This will have a huge impact, with one access point to Cato Springs Road. Commissioner Anthes stated that the Shiloh Dr. issue and traffic issues are huge. She asked if the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission has looked at this project and if they had put it into their traffic model for the region. Pate stated he did not believe so. Commissioner Anthes asked when the Fayetteville Street Committee will assess the traffic study, and what their plans might be for Cato Springs and Shiloh. Pate stated that typically the PZD process does not involve the Street Committee, specifically. What we would see and what Mr. Jacobs is referring to in terms of a potential City involvement is a bond issue, potentially a bond issue to extend Shiloh Dr. into this development. That would be a voter issue and would be determined after the current transportation bond issue is completed. The overall traffic impact analysis with the study provided by the applicants will let us determine the portions of this development and portions of the regional park that will have an impact, and City Council will have to make some decisions on funding for those improvements and how traffic will best move in Planning Commission July 28, 2008 Page l7 of 18 this area - Commissioner Anthes stated that it is frustrating because the booklet says that some improvements will need to be made to Cato Springs, but not what the magnitude of those improvements are. What improvements are necessary in order to carry a city's worth of traffic on one road? The thing 1 keep getting to is, who would build a city of 11,000 people with a tourist attraction that periodically raises the population exponentially and have five ways in and out, but have those five ways in and out go to one road: Cato Springs Road? Shiloh Drive may not be able to happen because that road goes through property that nobody on this development team owns and dumps a messy intersection at 6°i & 540. Further, I do not see how a bond issue for a extending a road to a private development at the "end of the line," so to speak, would be that popular. (Video skips here) Commissioner Lack stated he shares those concerns and would expect that the Commission would seek information on when different phases could start by when the infrastructure would be there to carry the traffic. - Commissioner Anthes repeated that her concern was that it was one road that all connections are dumping into. I don't care how big you make it. You think people are upset about Mt. Comfort and Wedington right now? No matter how many lanes we put out there, it's one road. You have an accident, nobody gets in and out of the whole "city." Are there were any potential alternate connections over the mountain? Jacobs discussed the potential for other connections down Finger Road by the water tanks, the only other road in this area. Commissioner Anthes asked if the applicant has explored that connection or talked to the property owners. Jacobs stated he has not yet talked to the property owners at this time, but if you look at the phasing plan, that a conceptual road is stubbed out for that potential connection, but he has not asked adjacent property owners about their feelings on that connection. Going over the mountain is next -to - infeasible, there are bluff lines on both sides. It is not impossible but highly expensive and difficult from an environmental standpoint. There is an exit is to Greenland and 1-540 that way (south). Commissioner Anthes asked what the applicant views as the real difference between Shiloh and Cato Springs, since they are both parallel routes that lead to intersections at 1-540. Jacobs stated the reason the town center abuts Cato Springs is that it will be an extension of the boulevard that comes into the University. It also provides extremely good access for the people that live there whether they're going to Fayetteville or Bentonville. In the traffic study, we can do some calculations and find out when Shiloh is warranted to come on-line with the traffic study, and have that information available at the next meeting. - Planning Commission July 28, 2008 Page l8 of 18 Commissioner Anthes stated that that was a big issue Commissioner Lack asked about the rest of phasing. This has taken a diversion because of phasing of the roads and access is a critical issue. Commissioner Anthes stated she needs to know more about the project; she needs to understand what the magnitude of the phases are, be more familiar with the use units so I understand what the mix of uses is in each of those phases, road improvements, water and sewer, etc. It's hard to make comments until I know more about project in general in order to comment. Regarding condition #25, I want to echo staffs comments. Drawings need to be accurate to the booklet. I also have concerns about the size of buildings being 300 feet in length. Condition #27 with density shown and density proposed: Condition #29; 1 would like to see real connections, not just stub -outs. #31 - # of lots, again, you need to maintain consistency between the booklet and zoning. Commissioner Lack stated that the phasing works fairly well in general. Just looking at Har-Ber Meadows which had Hwy 412 frontage in Springdale, it took many years before it could support commercial. With the potential to get some commercial in an early phase, lie is okay with the phasing of the bulk of commercial in later phases. Commissioner Anthes stated the applicant is talking about building a 2nd downtown within two miles of our existing downtown, which is already struggling with commercial and retail use. As a zoning decision, I want to know how retail/non-residential and single-family fits in here. Jacobs stated he used two groups for economic/market analysis, and discussed the anticipated market and demographics. Motion: Commissioner Anthes made a motion to table the request, with the items as listed to be addressed and further information to be provided at the next meeting. Commissioner Kennedy seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 6-0-0. Planning Commission August / /, 2008 Page 4 of l 4 Unfinished Business: R-PZD 08-2898: (SOUTH PASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted by APPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF 1-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The.property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 910.36 acres. The request is for Zoning and Land Use approval for a Residential Planned Zoning District with 809 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200 -t - acre regional park. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, presented the staff report, giving an update from the previous meeting, the summary of traffic study results, and anticipated street improvements. Gamer recommends tabling to allow additional time for discussion. Todd Jacobs, applicant, discussed the context of transportation/street connections in this area of the City. The site is located in proximity to five of the largest roads in Fayetteville in terms of size, capacity, and amount of traffic they can handle: 6th Street, Fulbright Expressway, Razorback Rd., 71- B,1-540, and 15th St. Due to easy access, and access to arterial streets, this is possibly the best place for this use. Jacobs discussed the existing Razorback bus Tine (purple route), how it could offer service to this area, offer service to the U of A, and other parts of the city for students, professionals, etc. He discussed the possibility of an internal trolley route that could occur within the development at full build -out. Jacobs discussed the phasing of the project. Phase I would be a PPL with 10 commercial outlots, along with the lots identified for immediate development in Phase I of the booklet. Fie discussed the mixture of uses within Ph. I (refer to updated phasing chart): 26,000 square feet of non-residential with phase 1, 333 total dwelling units. Phase 2 would have 267 dwelling units, 30,000 square feet of office/retail in 3-4 years. Phase 3 would include 81 single family lots in Crescent Park. Phase 4 would include 182 dwelling units, 6500 square feet of retail/office space, with those uses being civic and live/work primarily. Phase 5 would include 170 dwelling units, 6500 square feet on 7 acres. This area is still within a 5 minute walk of the town center. Phase 6 would include 186 dwelling units and 6500 square feet of office/retail. Phase 7 would include 241 dwelling units and 6500 square feet. By this phase, we hope to have enough people, traffic and activity to have the retail to get going in the town center. No public comment was received. Commissioner Trumbo stated that the recommendation is to table; lie asked the Commission to talk about the traffic study and phasing. When you are referring to peak hours, when is that? Jacobs stated the peak hours were from 7-9:00 AM, and 4:30-5:30 PM. Commissioner Anthes expressed thanks for putting the project in context regionally and within the regional street system. She asked if the actuated traffic signals are tied to phases right now. Jacobs stated that the traffic study right now is for the full build -out. As park phases come on, we Planning Commission August 11, 2008 Page 5 of /4 would develop a new traffic study to determine proper improvements. For Phase I, it doesn't warrant widening or signals, but we haven't gotten beyond that. We would like to do more of the town center up front, but we can't justify it functionally right now. Commissioner Anthes asked the applicant to describe where the 5 lane road section and the 3 lane road section will be along Cato Springs Road. Jacobs described the rural to urban boulevard section transition on Cato Springs Road. Commissioner Anthes asked if staff has evaluated the level of service for Cato Springs Road, noting that some are at L.O.S. D and F. Glenn Newman, City Engineer, stated that Engineering looks typically at the overall intersection level of service; it depends on the volume of traffic at that intersection. He discussed that updated traffic studies would be required as the project is phased into make specific determinations. Overall the plan looks good for volume with signals and improvements as planned. Commissioner Anthes stated she understands, then, that staff is satisfied with the general picture, but with more detailed review, you may recommend more improvements? Newman stated this was correct. Commissioner Trumbo asked would they still grade out at 'F' with the signals in place? Newman stated that they would; the current traffic study evaluates them all comprehensively. Commissioner Lack stated it is very helpful to see the regional traffic system relevant to this project; where traffic goes once it gets beyond the one basic intersection. It does highlight that everything goes through one intersection of Cato/I-540, with the exception of Shiloh.. He stated he still needs to have more time to look at the traffic study, especially broken down into phasing. With the size of the development, proper planning needs to incorporate more than one way in than that proposed. We will need to look at other means of access. Shiloh Dr. doesn't necessarily help. Improvements south for different access on Cato Springs might help. Potential access to other sites may be necessary: Holland Dr., Finger Rd., Kessler Mountain Rd. Commissioner Anthes discussed condition #3 and #5 on connectivity and staffs recommendation that additional connections be found. She asked what other locations staff sees in the future for posible street connections? Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, discussed the concept of large vs. small roads; as noted in our City Plan 2025, the preference would be to see more, smaller roads for connectivity rather than fewer, larger roads. He stated that this development may drive other development in the area and other connections may become available to provide multiple opportunities of traffic movement. There will likely be several recommended connections through neighborhoods onsite to future neighborhoods offsite; in comparison, staff would not likely recommend additional arterial or Planning Commission August 11, 2008 Page 6 of 14 collector connections over these hillsides. Where stub -outs occur will be very important to provide • opportunities for other connections as development occurs. Commissioner Anthes asked ifstaff and the applicant have evaluated the magnitude of the off -site street , including the option of improvements to Cato south to Greenland. Pate discussed traffic impacts. Because this is the largest single development project the City has ever seen, it is logical that it will also require the most extensive street improvements for any development seen. Staff has discussed the width of the bridge under the overpass; the extension south for Greenland exit to be evaluated, etc. The totality of improvements will be immense; ultimately, the City Council will discuss what percentage the City will bear, in relation to the 6% of the traffic generated by the Community Park. Richard Alexander, developer, discussed the 25 year build -out that is proposed; the magnitude will be driven by the accommodation of a regional park. A large portion of Cato Springs Rd. widening over 25 years will be a long time out, we are phasing over time. The size of each phase will be relatively small for the first 5-10 years The park will determine what the city needs for traffic. The size of each development is relatively small, and we don't anticipate most of these major improvements in 5 years. 25 years ago we didn't have 71 B — no other 4 -lane roads fed this town, but we've grown into it. Commissioner Anthes stated she wanted to ensure the developers were aware of the magnitude of the improvements that would be required of them. She asked what sources the funds would come, especially as these are not state highways eligible for federal funding, and if the developers have had a conversation with staff about the expected assessments that would be required. Alexander stated that funding issues will take place as development occurs. Funding will come from this development, parks, and surrounding development. He has contemplated it, but it's hard to project 25 years out. We won't even know what 1-540 will look like at that time. Commissioner Winston asked when Shiloh will need to be extended. Pate discussed the phased traffic study that staff has requested. The Shiloh extension would likely be determined with the results of the phased traffic study. i Commissioner Anthes asked if there were any talks with the owners of the intervening parcel necessary to extend Shiloh, or about options for acquiring that land. Pate stated there were no formal talks or other information available at this time, to his knowledge. Commissioner Anthes asked how Shiloh Dr. will be extended. Pate stated that it would likely be extended by private and public acquisitions of land. Commissioner Lack asked to clarify the connectivity. It is beyond our purview to say how a right- Planning Commission August/ I1, 2008 • Page7of14 of -way might have to be brought in, but the City Council has asked us to review PZDs. My • recommendation is to review and understand the traffic study, and at what phase a connection would need to be made, make a recommendation to the City Council for that break-point; condition the phasing such. Commissioner Trumbo stated he wouldn't be surprised if people do use the Greenland exit, and this may need to be looked at for future improvements as we move forward. Commissioner Lack stated a regional park will play a huge part into the Greenland/South Access, because those events will disperse in many directions. Commissioner Winston stated that the peak times of commuters and regional park would probably differ. Discussion ofPhasing Commissioner Anthes discussed the correlation of phasing and planning areas. It might be easier to discuss planning areas, as the PZD booklet is organized in that way. Commissioner Trumbo agreed. Pate discussed phasing and planning areas, and how they relate. Commissioner Lack stated that west of water tanks, he saw retail. Is that the case? In phase 7, how does the retail work? - Jacobs discussed live/work as a component of the project. He asked if the Planning Commission is looking for' something specific on the phased traffic study, before we go ahead in the discussion. Commissioner Cabe stated that we are comparing apples and oranges when looking at phases and planning areas. Phasing is in blocks of planning areas, up until about phase 14. Through Phase14 the bulk of the town center is done. He stated he would recommend breaking it into PA's up until Phase 14. Discussion of Planning Areas PA-Ia/Ib/Ic: Town Center Pate explained that the booklet is the easiest document to utilize in the review of this project. He discussed these Planning areas in detail. Commissioner Anthes stated she was in support ofthe proposed use units. She commented on the description of "false fronts" in each Planning Area, and asked if the applicant meant that all four sides of the building will be well articulated. Planning Commission August 11, 2008 Page 8of14 Jacobs stated that yes, they will make that change. He discussed building height, parking types. PA -2a, Crescent Park Pate discussed changes in this Planning Area since the previous review, and described PA -2, which is primarily single family similar to RSF-8, but more Conditional Use Permit opportunities have been added. The Conditional Use Permit lets the neighborhood and Planning Commission evaluate the impact of the proposal. Commissioner Anthes stated there was a logical layout of lots, blocks, and an interconnected street pattern; and she appreciates the addition of these use units as a Conditional Use Permit. PA-3a/3h/3c: Pate discussed conditions #1-5, relating to some of the planning areas. Staff has provided some recommendations for the size of multi -family buildings; the size of lots in 3B & 3C are discussed in conditions. Commissioner Winston asked about topography in PA -3C. Pate stated there was a flat area west of the water tanks; the change in topography should be reflected in the zoning criteria. The recommendation is to break out the planning areas further. Commissioner Lack asked why multi -family was taken out of PA -3A. Jacobs stated that because multi -family was already in the other, adjacent PA's — they were okay with leaving it in, though. Commissioner Lack stated he appreciates the inclusion of a broader scope of use units, and would welcome discussion about putting multi -family back in. Commissioner Anthes stated she agrees with staff about multi -family being removed from 3A. In the multi -family and higher density areas, where are the use units for the corner coffee shop, etc? Jacobs stated he believes he originally had them in; we're willing to place them back in as a Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Anthes stated she was looking for Use Units 13, I5, 24, and 40 in areas of higher density. In general, on the road network, she would hope scenic overlooks would be planned for. Garner discussed overlooks on the property, and any parking along the street would need to plan for vertical/horizontal curves. John, Nock, developer, stated that up on the ridge, they have to weigh the benefit of a traffic overlook versus a pedestrian overlook. They envision more opportunity to walk out and look. When Planning Commission August 1I, 2008 Page 9 of 14 designing the project, Urban Design Associates told us to think Eureka Springs. The vistas are incredible, and we value them. Commissioner Anthes asked if the ridgeline road could avoid being directed into thesingle-family cluster by the water tower site. She discussed road geometry, the precedent of cornice roads and the thru-road network and wayfinding cues. Is it easy for visitors to find their way through the entire site? Nock discussed topography and trees on the property, and the impact that further development might have in these areas. There are only certain ways to access some of these areas, and we don't want to. mess this up. The idea is for low impact. We are open to suggestions, if something that has been missed. . Commissioner Anthes asked about the footprints of the multi -family buildings in these areas. Are these roughly illustrative? Also, why has multi -family been included in this area? Jacobs stated he believes the land use and views shouldn't be limited to single family estate lots. We prefer to offer the opportunity and flexibility, not limited to a single demographic with large -acre lots. PA -4 Pate discussed PA -4 with the minor updates from previous submittal. He stated we will work with applicant to update multi -family areas to be consistent throughout the project. PA -S Civic Commissioner Anthes asked about the intent of making the church a remote destination rather than a walk -able destination? It seems remote compared to the rest of the site. Nock discussed theidea of an iconic architecture opportunity— the idea is to provide an opportunity to provide iconic architecture on this hill, set apart from the rest of the development. PA -6 Regional Park Pate described PA -6. Commissioner Winston asked if the Parks and Recreation Board has made decisions on how the park will develop? Pate stated that yes, they have approved the concept of what you see here; details for phasing, funding, etc. will be worked out in detail as we go through the project. Commissioner Cabe asked if the park is the driving force behind this project? Do we have an idea of phasing for the park? Isn't the park the 900 pound gorilla that no one wants to talk about? Is Planning Commission August 11, 2008 Page 10of14. there a way to see this is one thing that is big for me — the cost, money, timing. I can't make them go together. This is causing me much more problem than the zoning criteria. I need to see more about how the plan for the park works with the plan for development. Pate stated that we can get Parks to present various aspects of the plan at the next meeting, and discussed what could be presented. Commissioner Trumbo asked if Jacobs had seen the conditions of approval Jacobs stated lie has skimmed the conditions, and doesn't see anything we can't agree with. We'll go over it in more detail with staff before the next meeting. Commissioner Trumbo stated he was in favor of conditions #1 and 2. Commissioner Lack stated he was also in favor of conditions #1 and 2. For condition #3, phasing of the park brings up another dynamic. What kind of nod to parks does the traffic study incorporate? Jacobs stated he could sit down with Parks to determine phasing. They will break it down to 14 phases, and tie parks in with our phasing. The traffic study right now incorporates the park traffic. Commissioner Lack stated that regarding condition #20, view protection, staff's recommendations on this condition. lie sees this more as established views, such as Old Main from downtown. He would like to open dialogue about it; it may not hinder the applicant at all, but would like to discuss. Motion: Commissioner Anthes made a motion to table the request to the August 25°i Planning Commission meeting. Commissioner Lack seconded the motion. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-0-0. Planning Commission August 25, 2008 Page 4 of 17 Unfinished Business: R-PZD 08-2898: (SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted byAPPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF I-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 910.36 acres. The request is for Zoning and Land Use approval for a Residential Planned Zoning District with 809 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200+ acre regional park. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave a brief staff report. Connie Edmonston,Parks Director, gave a presentation on the Southpass history. Lose & Associates reviewed the City parks system as part of the Parks Master Plan process.and used four different methods to obtain public input: (1) ten public meetings throughout city; (2) personal interviews; (3) surveys to public; and (4) a committee. The Master Plan process established priorities for the citizens for the park system including: city-wide network of trails, neighborhood/community parks, preservation of natural acres/open space, and a multi -sports complex (regional park). The background oh site selection for a regional park was discussed. The criteria listed in renewing 18 sites was discussed. As shown in the map on the PowerPoint slide, sites 'O', 'N', 'F', and 'I' were selected as the final four sites. Alison Jumper, Parks Planner, discussed the reasons for choosing the Cummings property for the regional site. She discussed funding options, the final and chosen option of which was a public/private partnership with the City and a private developer. After reviewing proposals, the Southpass Development project team was chosen for the partnership. Phasing of the regional park was discussed. It was discussed that majority of soccer current soccer programs are on land the city does not own, so soccer and the `great lawn' were the phase I choices. The subsequent phases were discussed: phase 2 — youth baseball; phase 3 — youth softball and multi -purpose fields; phase 4 — tennis complex and dog park; and phase 5 — multi -purpose fields and amphitheater. Priorities for the phasing will be based on current needs and funding levels, which will incorporate private donations, fundraising. and other funding programs. David Wright, Recreation Superintendent, stated that 95% of users will be residents of our community and as indicated in surveys are in favor of a regional park. The park is overwhelmingly for our citizens' use. He discussed the current Parks programs. Fayetteville Parks and Recreation hosts the largest soccer program in the State. Baseball/softball from March to July and adult softball is a 9 -month program. Ultimate Frisbee is year-round. In softball, we turn back 20% of applicants because of lack of field availability. He discussed participation, which has flattened out in recent years due to lack of space and discussed that youth programs are given the space priority over adult programs. Activity locations include Lewis/Asbell, Walker/White River, Hampton/Wilson, Lake Fayetteville/Hampton, etc. He discussed service levels of parks, of all sizes and levels. The service levels of the existing parks will not deviate from those four goals identified by the Master Plan with the addition of a regional park. The regional park will have a positive economic impact and will Planning Commission August 25, 2008 Page5of17 bring a place for active and passive recreation, a park for everyone in Fayetteville. He discussed that different youth sports programs are spread over the City and the regional park would allow for all youth programs in one place to prevent having to drive to various sites. An added feature to the regional park will be the community development. Regional park space is not typically shared with a mixed use development. This will be one of the most unique parks in the country. Todd Jacobs, applicant,, discussed the provided information (passed out Southpass site traffic generated totals). After phase 14, Shiloh Drive would be needed (after year 20). He discussed a graphic that was passed out, with break-out of AM peak hour traffic, after full build out. He discussed that at full build out, the volumes of traffic and levels of service for vehicles going under the overpass and into Fayetteville will be comparable to the volumes of traffic and levels of service at College Ave./Rolling Hills intersection (15 cars per minute; 4 cars per second). Graphic shows the overall traffic impact is not as bad as you think. Shiloh Dr. would be built with phase 15. These are the updates. Public Comment: Sharon Davidson, citizen, stated that she supports parks, however, this is not the right place for a park, or the right development team. My problem is this is a landfill. I also have issues with Greenland School District and tax issues of the borderline of commercial being built. The cost of infrastructure is going to be enormous. The problem is a liability issue of taking on a private landfill •— we don't know what's in there. We will be liable and will have to pay for years. This development is counter to City Plan 2025 goals as it is sprawl. The parks department has been utilized for cheerleading for this private developer:: The original contracts are very disturbing. I am all for parks, but don't do everything the developer wants us to do. Mary Connetica, citizen, stated she uses all of the City parks with her dog. She is greatly opposed to the entire project for many of the reasons stated in the previous comments including: the landfill, the sprawl of whole project, creation of attainable housing, will have to have police, fire services,. _.. . sewers. Also, we have a wonderful city square here, the one they are talking about will be a mile and a half down the road. The parks are not all cared for as it is; she discussed Walker Park. Philip Watson, citizen, stated he was a representative from local ultimate (frisbee) club. They do not have the field space to expand and they obviously don't want to push softball kids off the parks. He discussed that there is lots of potential for youth programs. Our organization has already had to use Burns Park in Little Rock instead of here for tournaments/events because of the lack of field space, would bring economic growth to the city. With more field space ultimate Frisbee would bring 3-4 tournaments a year to the City. No additional public comment was received. Kit Williams, City Attorney, stated he has prepared a memo including the contract between Southpass and the City; he discussed the memo. The agreement/contract does not require approval of the Southpass development plan, but does indicate that City Council has approved the size and location of park and surrounding development. The City has already accepted landfill, which had Planning Commission August 25, 2008 Page 6of17 solid waste from the City of Fayetteville. It has been examined, many tests conducted by State EPA. I have received a letter from that attorney stating that post -closure trust funds were available to close the landfill, if needed. The existing contract between the City and Southpass does not foreclose your rights to examine the project in context with the UDC. Commissioner Trumbo asked about the timeframe of constructing phase 1 of the park. Edmonston stated that $2.8 million has been saved right now, plus $1 million will be received from the developer. Once deeds for the park have been received they can begin a fundraising campaign. Commissioner Trumbo asked about the overall cost. Edmonston stated it would be around $15 million, not including infrastructure. Commissioner Trumbo asked when we would have a park if this was approved. Edmonston stated it depends on when deeds can be received; we don't have a -time frame until we know better the costs of everything else. - .:. Commissioner Trumbo asked how long this regional park will support the needs of the City. Edmonston stated it depends or how fast the City grows; how fast recreation programs grow. They. would love to build it all at once, but it just isn't possible. Commissioner Graves stated;he had a couple of questions about what we should be considering, since City Council has already approved the size and location. His major concern is traffic; has this been passed on by the City Council? The contract lists 800 acres and the proposed development is for 910 acres, which would be extra traffic not anticipated. Williams stated that traffic can certainly be considered, and he doesn't think the City Council considered that detail as it was too early in the process. He doesn't think that detail was presented, but the City Council understands this is a large project. Edmonston stated that this project will dedicate an additional 200 acres of parkland to meet parkland dedication requirements, above and beyond the regional park. Commissioner Graves stated the percentage of traffic going south to Greenland seems high. How many vehicles per day (vpd) will be coming out of this per day? Jacobs stated that on traffic going south, we looked at who would be leaving here, demographics, etc. The bulk of 300 going south are looping back, going north of 1-540. Every phase will also have an updated study to ensure and verify the traffic. Commissioner Graves asked if any analysis has been done on PM peak hours trips. Planning Commission August 25, 2008 Page 7 of 17 Jacobs stated he used a worst -case scenario only, which is during the AM peak hours. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, and Commissioner Graves discussed traffic numbers, including the park, and outside traffic coming to the site. Commissioner Anthes asked about the economic impact and burden of cost for the City; when will numbers be known for the infrastructure cost? I don't want us to be surprised. Edmonston stated roughly $1.7 million for phase 1, but that doesn't include infrastructure. Commissioner Anthes stated she thinks the public will be interested in knowing the costs associated with the infrastructure as well as the park itself. Edmonston stated that she only knows the cost of facilities at this time. Commisioner Anthes stated that the landfill is already a City liability, and that we don't expect to •develop the landfill site, correct? • .. . Williams stated that that was correct.• Commissioner Anthes stated` she wants to see a traffic synopsis for each phase and staffs' recommendation • regarding the ,updated, '.traffic report received today before . making , a: recommendation to the Council.- Motion: Commissioner Myres made a motion to table the request to the September 8, 2008 Planning . .. Commission meeting: Commissioner Anthes seconded the motion. Commissioner Anthes stated thanks to the City Attorney for the memo. I take very seriously the role of a Planning Commissioner in upholding council's policies, and it is prudent for us to know if the council has made previous decisions that affect our review of the project in conjunction with the UDC. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 8-0-0. Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 4 of 18 Unfinished Business: R-PZD 08-2898: (SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT, 632): Submitted byAPPIAN CENTER FOR DESIGN for property located WEST OF I-540 AND SOUTH OF HWY 62W AND NW OF CATO SPRINGS ROAD. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 910.36 acres. The request is for Zoning and Land Use approval for a Residential Planned Zoning District with 809 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200+ acre regional park. Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report and discussed information presented since the last meeting, specifically traffic, potential future local street connections, etc. He recommended forwarding the Southpass PZD to City Council with a recommendation of approval, based on findings within the staff report, and with conditions as listed in the staff report. He made a revision to strike the last sentence of condition #2 and to add language under condition 4G that "Future development shall be reviewed for compliance with the access management ordinances of the City of Fayetteville". He discussed conditions #5 and 6 (Master Street Plan Amendments to Shiloh and Cato Springs). He also discussed that the buffer adjacent to offsite properties, Condition #14, has been incorporated into site plans. He also called attention to Condition #19, view protection, noting that staff is recommending some additional design standards to preserve scenic views. Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning, discussed supplemental materials and maps that were included in the Planning Commission packets. Austin Rowser, applicant, stated he was the design engineer for the project. He discussed that it has been stated by some in previous planning commission meetings that this is a suburban sprawl project and not compliant with City Plan 2025. However, this site and the area are shown as a Future Growth Area on the Sector Map on the City Plan 2025. The Future Land Use Map also from City Plan 2025 shows this area as City Neighborhood, Residential Neighborhood, Civic/Open Space, and Natural Areas. We've attempted to conform to the goals of the Plan, stay consistent with that throughout the site. We heard from Parks Department at the last meeting that this site was chosen for a major regional park, mainly because of its easy access to 1-540 ramps. He discussed traffic generation of Southpass by phase and the total for each phase, as estimated by the traffic engineering through fall build -out. There are three primary routes out of site: Cato north, Cato south, and future Shiloh Road extension. He discussed that access to I-540 and Fulbright Expressway are provided by right-hand turning movements. He discussed the vehicle capacity on Cato and subsequent reduction in traffic when Shiloh is opened. He understands that the impact from traffic is real, and the improvements are real and will be sufficient. Richard Alexander, applicant, stated he would like to address something Commissioner Graves mentioned about the size of the property increasing from that included in the original contract. He discussed that the selection process for this site began by the City in 2002. This has always been a city project. The Cummings family would not sell just 200 acres, only 800 acres. City sent out an RFP for a private developer to purchase the property and give the city 200 acres, a $10 million gift. Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 5of18 In order to make the project work with the 800 acres, the developer purchased an additional 83 acres to accommodate the major elements of the park, into the center of the development. This allowed development to occur not on the hillsides. Twenty-five acres were also available on Kessler Mountain Road and have been included in the project. That's where the extra 100 acres came from. When you take out the 33 acres of landfill and 10 acres of water tank, the total project is 860 acres. By doing this, we were able to not disturb the majority of greenspace. Total undisturbed area (by development) is 53%, or 482 acres. Most of the area of the project is parks and greenspace. The driving force for most of the development was siting the park, not vice versa. The master plan design was then wrapped around the park. The location of the park was determined appropriate by the Parks staff and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. Public Comment: Maryann Connetka, citizen, stated she was a Fayetteville resident and has spoken before, but has come up with some other reasons to delay this project. She asked. about sprawl and discussed vacancies of housing in Northwest Arkansas. She also wanted to refer to an article in the NWA Times, where the City Attorney Kit Williams discussed that it is not fair to compare the Renaissance Building to Southpass. I did not know it was the City Attorney's job to promote developers. Barbara Moarman, citizen, stated she brought a letter for the Planning Commission to read. She is in direct impact.path to the north of Southpass. Why has an informal environmental study of the land in question not been completed? She discussed potential impacts of Southpass including access, quality of life, and environmental impacts. She read from a landfill study (1996) that there were impacts to local water quality. No one has said anything about the landfill until someone wants to make money on it. I feel it has been dealt with irresponsibly. There has been no formal needs study. I realize that one is not required. There has been no complete economic analysis. There is no signed cost share agreement between the City and the developers. There is no statement of what the whole cost of project is going to be. Taxpayers need to know what our burden is going to be, clearly defined. I also feel there are some exceptions that have been made for proponents of this project.. State legislation has been passed to exempt responsibility for the landfill. The requirements for PZD development in the Hillside (Hilltop Overlay) district have been or reduced or exempted. A PZD maybe approved with less % of undisturbed acres. Instead of lighter regulations for a project of this size, the restrictions should be tighter. I don't think you have studies in hand for his project, you should table or deny the project. Commissioner Trumbo asked that comments be directed to the project. We, as a Planning Commission, cannot consider who the developer is, what projects they have done, how many houses are empty in the City. We are bound by the criteria we have to review. Connetka asked who will review that? I have nothing further. No more public comment was received. Commissioner Trumbo asked City Attorney to discuss the landfill again. Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 6 of l8 Kit Williams, City Attorney, discussed landfill closure, the post -closure trust fund, and city liability. The City now owns landfill; which has already been decided by City Council. I hope I'm not viewed as a proponent of the developers. The UDC is the language we use to consider a project. A developer, good or bad, cannot be considered in the context of the review of a development application. Our code does not allow the performance of a developer to be considered, in favor or against. Commissioner Graves stated he had a couple of questions regarding the definition of urban sprawl, development of landfill, environmental or economic analysis. Pate stated that urban sprawl was defined as unplanned growth at the edge of the city; he discussed the population of Fayetteville will increase by 40,000 by the year 2025. This is a greenfield development, however it meets all the goals of City Plan 2025. The landfill is not in an active portion of the site and will likely be capped and used for passive recreation. There has not been an environmental or economic analysis of this project. He stated that this project has to meet the PZD ordinance, hillside ordinance and greenspace requirements. He discussed that much of the west side of the project will be in a conservation easement and/or used for passive recreation. He said that the methodology for economic analysis of large annexation was not agreed by council and therefore an analysis has not been conducted. Commissioner Anthes discussed the landfill. Are there any creative measures that might be required, any idea of timeline for remediation? Williams stated there was no idea on the timeline at this time. Commissioner Anthes asked when the City Council sees this project, conceivably they could direct staff to go forward with remediation? Williams stated he was not sure who initiates that, City or State. It could work well with remediation when the initial development was occurring. Commissioner Anthes asked if any run-off will be present in the park from the landfill. Rowser described the drainage patterns, which shows that the drainage from the landfill does not go through the park. Commissioner Anthes asked if the drainage from the landfill will go into the Millrace portion of Southpass, which incorporates a drainage as a water feature. Rowser stated that, yes, oneof the drainages going through the landfill would be diverted into the Millrace. Commissioner Anthes asked about the developer's stance on the landfill. Alexander stated that he hopes the city and ADEQ will undertake whatever it takes to remediate, if Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 7 of 18 anything. The City will deal directly with ADEQ. Commissioner Anthes stated that she hopes that with the development, park, everyone involved would begin putting pressure on state office to deal with the landfill, with the public coming here. Alexander stated he understands it is relatively benign. When we started this process, we made it clear that we would not be responsible for the landfill. Commissioner Anthes asked if the contract as stated, with current development team, has changed. Alexander stated the development team has changed and it is now Hank Broyles, John Nock, and himself. Commissioner Anthes asked if the school district issues have been resolved. Alexander stated he hoped to have taxes generated from this go to the Fayetteville School District. They have concentrated most of development within Fayetteville School District. We can't control - the school district issue as, private developers. They hoped to have the City take the lead on that. Williams stated it was understood in the context of the contract that the City doesn't control where school district boundaries lie. He believes the City has suggested to the school districts that the area for this project be placed within the Fayetteville School District, and the City has now fulfilled that portion of the contract. That issue is in Greenland's court, and is their decision. The developers were aware that the City didn't control the school districts at the time that language was placed in the contract. Alexander stated he thought that was correct, and stated again that they designed the project for most of the millage to go to the City of Fayetteville. Williams stated his understanding was that any of the contingencies could be waived by the developer, as we don't control that. Commissioner Anthes asked what portions of the site the developer plans to go vertical with. Alexander discussed that they anticipated constructing Phase I, then seeing where it went from there. Commissioner Anthes discussed that the developers have the righ(to develop property, and also have prior determination by the City Councilfor development on this site. Williams stated that was absolutely correct. City Council did know the general scope and location of the project. As you stated, property owners do have rights; they have to meet certain regulations, or the UDC, and this should be used in your consideration. City Council has approved the project in size and location, but did not determine that it was compliant with UDC. Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 8of18 Commissioner Anthes asked that when this site was assigned as a Growth Sector/City Neighborhood designation — staff and City Council were anticipating the Southpass project, correct? Pate discussed that yes, City Council had previously made a policy decision for the Southpass property on this site and staff reflected that decision in our recommendation with the City Plan 2025. Commissioner Myres asked about the 3 -lane and 5 -lane sections. Pate described the sections, transitions and the break to a rural section south of the site. Commissioner Lack stated the breakdown of traffic by phase was helpful. He does have an issue with condition #19, regarding view protection. He respects staff's viewpoint on this, but disagrees. I read this as protecting views of Old Main, scenic corridors from building mass and form. He is not comfortable with the restrictions in this condition. Motion: Commissioner Lack made a motion to strike condition #19. Commissioner Graves seconded the motion. Commissioner Anthes asked if staff could explain its position. Commissioner Pate discussed staff findings and the recommendation, and referred to scenic views on and offsite that would be protected by this condition. Commissioner Anthes asked the applicant if they were happy with condition #19. Alexander stated that if it makes you happy, we're happy. Commissioner Anthes stated that she does not find the condition overly restrictive. Commissioner Graves stated that the his only problem with the condition is a precedent. He is not sure what criteria to protect. It is too fuzzy for my taste, no criteria. Upon roll call the motion failed with a vote of 4-4-0, with Commissioners Bryant, Winston, Anthes, and Myres voting no. Commissioner Anthes discussed sports park lighting. She hopes that the park division will ensure that the park is sensitively lit due to its visible location and due to its proximity to surrounding development. Connie Edmonston discussed at the last meeting that earthwork may be done as in - kind for the $l million, but the contract adds $1 million in cash. Is that up for discussion? Williams stated it was more appropriate for City Council, it may be looked at then. Commissioner Trumbo asked to go through determinations. #1? No comment. #2? Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 9 of 18 Commissioner Lack stated agreement with these conditions. Commissioner Trumbo asked about #3, connectivity. Commissioner Anthes stated that because we will be able to review future development as a Large Scale Development or preliminary plat, she is comfortable with the condition as worded. The potential connectivity maps provided by staff do show potential for local roads that will ensure the connections can be made. Because I know other connections can be made, to north, east, and even Rupple Road, that helps me a lot. Would we at a future time be looking at a Master Street Plan amendment for Rupple Road? Pate stated not at this time, it would have to be looked at later. Commissioner Anthes stated she finds in favor of connectivity, with conditions as they read. Commissioner Graves stated he doesn't like depending on other jurisdictions such as Greenland for• access. The thing that confuses me is the parking, and the fact that it will be reviewed in the future for connections and stub -outs. In general, this type of annexation and development is what the Planning Commission asks for, instead of small pieces one after another, we can see the development as a whole and can plan accordingly if we know what the input is and can plan for it. He is also in support of #3. Commissioner Trumbo asked if there are any other comments on any other conditions. Commissioner Anthes stated she wanted to reiterate on the street connections and would like to have the main through street routes identified; and encourage that scenic overlooks be identified. This development will require everyone to drive to a regional park. This is a decision that has been made, but I hope our neighborhood parks will maintain a priority in our parks system, within a walkable distance of homes. Commissioner Myres stated it was typical to give a reason why not supporting a project, but I can't offer a new one. Partly because of the transportation issue, it bothers me a lot, and the centralization of parks. I can't think of any reason legally I can't support it, but I can't in good conscience vote yes. Motion: Commissioner Graves made a motion to forward the request to City Council with a recommendation for approval, with conditions as listed. Commissioner Lack seconded the motion. Commissioner Anthes stated that everyone knows I struggled with this project. When our city decided to build Boys and Girls Club on the west side of town, we knew development was coming. The development around the Boys and Girls Club has not created a community and is unsustainable Planning Commission September 8, 2008 Page 10of18 in its form. While I've publicly shared concerns regarding this development, it is in compliance with City Plan 2025, UDC, HHOD, and PZD ordinances and is preferable to spreading of low -density single-family housing. It is exciting for this entire area to be planned at once, and as a large project has many advantages. Upon roll call the motion passed with a vote of 7-1-0, with Commissioner Myres voting no. Public Comment Southpass 2008 ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFICATION OF UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SOUTHPA'-SS'COMMUNITY ANNEXATION AND PZD-LANDUSE ZONING July I5, 2008 APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACT INFO: SouthPass Development LLC 217 East Dickson Street, Suite 204 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1425 Contact: Steve Aust Planning Commission Meeting: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Appian Centre for Design 217 East Dickson Street. Suite 104 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1444 Fax: 479-442-1450 Monday, 07-28-2008 5:30 pm Fayetteville City Administration Building 113W: Mountain Street, Room 219 SouthPass is a proposed project on the old Cummings property that plans to create a new urban center in a traditional mixed use town form. This 910 acre project, located less than one mile from the University of Arkansas campus and two miles from downtown Fayetteville, will feature over 480 acres of Regional Park that will serve the residents of Fayetteville and local community The SouthPass Master Plan emphasizes the principles of new urbanism, conservation design, a variety of land uses, traditional neighborhood design, parks and walkability. SouthPass incorporates diverse and distinctive homes, apartments, livefwork units and a network of well connected walkable streets and blocks. Throughout the 480 acres of public parks and open space, trails, and preserved woodlands will connect neighborhoods and establish the community identity. The SouthPass vision is to create interconnected streets and a series of community neighborhoods that will be a model for sustainable development patterns in Northwest Arkansas ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS COMMENTS Return Comments concerning SouthPass Community back to City of Fayetteville Planning Division 125 W. Mountain Street 4. Fayetteville, AR 72701 I have been notified of the above meetings for the described project. I do not object to the project described above. 1 do object tq,the project describe gl)ave because: of Property Owner (Printed) � 9 Yrc/ H 0YGN�i ire of Proferiy Owner v ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFICATION OF UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE'SOUTHEASSyCOMMUNITY ANNEXATION AND PZD-LANDUSE ZONING July 15, 2008 APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACT INFO: SouthPass Development LLC 217 East Dickson Street, Suite 204 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1425 Contact: Steve Aust Planning Commission Meeting: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Appian Centre for Design 217 East Dickson Street. Suite 104 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1444 Fax: 479-442-1450 Monday, 07-28-2008 5:30 pm Fayetteville City Administration Building 113 W. Mountain Street, Room 219 SouthPass is a proposed project on the old Cummings property that plans to create a new urban center in a traditional mixed use town form. This 910 acre project, located less than one mile from the University of Arkansas campus and two miles from downtown Fayetteville, will feature over 480 acres of Regional Park that will serve the residents of Fayetteville and local community The SouthPass Master Plan emphasizes the principles of new urbanism, conservation design, a variety of land uses, traditional neighborhood design, parks and walkability. SouthPass incorporates diverse and distinctive homes, apartments, live/work units and a network of well connected walkable streets and blocks. Throughout the 480 acres of public parks and open space, trails, and preserved woodlands will connect neighborhoods and establish the community identity. The SouthPass vision is to create interconnected streets and a series of community neighborhoods that will be a model for sustainable development patterns in Northwest Arkansas ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS COMMENTS Return Comments concerning.SouthPass Community back to City of Fayetteville Planning Division 125 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 I have been notified of the above meetings for the described project. do not object to the project described above.* I do object to the project described above because:. ri"Ic, f�41ZP�. jyas rCL �us7 ` Name of PJQpejLv Owner (Printed) / cZ,ifl p ct� O r'e7a-fl J� <<'4a) Signa e o Property Owner r �m Y a C `_ ; ,4 'Ltdir v4Cwt ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFICATION OF UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARING FOR ANNEXATION AND REZONING OF SHARP PROPERTY July 15, 2008 APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACT INFO: Frank Sharp 2062 South Smokehouse Trail Fayetteville, AR 72701 Phone #479-957-4069 Appian Centre for Design 217 East Dickson Street. Suite 104 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1444 Fax: 479-442-1450 Planning Commission Meeting: Monday, 07-28-2008 5:30 pm Fayetteville City Administration Building 113W. Mountain Street, Room 219 The subject property is located west of South Holland Drive and contains approximately 54.96 acres. The proposal is to annex the subject property into the City of Fayetteville and be re -zoned to RSF-2, which would only allow two single family houses per acre. ADJOINING PROPERTY OVV�IMENTS . Return comments concerning the annexation & rezoning of the:;r`e, k h1,,i roperty into Fayetteville back to the City of Fayetteville Planning Division 125 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701• V 1 have been notified of the above meetings for the described project. Iao iiol otiject to lh`eeprojecPdc'si'ritiedabtsve:'" -- — - - do object to the project described above because: rVc fl'dorR e of roperty Owner (Printed) Sig atu of Property Owner ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS NOTIFICATION OF UPCOMING PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE SOUTHPASS COMMUNITY ANNEXATION AND PZD-LANDUSE ZONING July 15, 2008 APPLICANT/REPRESENTATIVE CONTACT INFO: SouthPass Development LLC 217 East Dickson Street, Suite 204 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1425 Contact: Steve Aust Planning Commission Meeting: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Appian Centre for Design 217 East Dickson Street Suite 104 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Office: 479-442-1444 Fax: 479-442-1450 Monday, 07-28-2008 5:30 pm Fayetteville City Administration Building 113W. Mountain Street, Room 219 ?.'•Sputftf?as fi a proposed project on the old Cummings property that plans to create a new urban center in a tradit onaltmixed use town form. This 910 acre project, located less than one mile from the University of Arkansas campus and two miles from downtown Fayetteville, will feature over 480 acres of Regional Park that will serve the residents of Fayetteville and local community The SouthPass Master Plan emphasizes the principles of new urbanism, conservation design, a variety of land uses, traditional neighborhood design, parks and walkability. SouthPass incorporates diverse and distinctive homes, apartments, live/work units and a network of well connected walkable streets and blocks. Throughout the 480 acres of public parks and open space, trails, and preserved woodlands will connect neighborhoods and establish the community identity. The SouthPass vision is to create interconnected streets and a series of community neighborhoods that will be a model for sustainable development patterns in Northwest Arkansas ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS COMMENTS Return Comments concerning SouthPass Community back to City of Fayetteville Planning Division 125 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 I have been notified of the above meetings for the described project. ✓ I do not object to the project described above. I do object to the project described above because: Z213^t4 LL C_ Nameof PProperty Owner (Printed) Sign oaftti�f f Property Owner Please provide the following comments to the Planning Commission and place them in the public record. The Butt Family Trust, with my wife, Shirley and me as trustees, is the owner of approximately 40 acres adjacent to the proposed Southpass project, sharing about 1/3 of the northern boundary. Two of our neighbors have homes on five -acre lots that share additional boundary with Southpass, and another 80 acres adjacent to the northwest corner of Southpass is in a conservation easement. Our home, known as Deepwood (see www,deeowoodhouse.com<htto://www.deeDwoQ(mouse.00m/>), is only a few hundred feet, if that, from the duster of lots shown on the site plan immediately west of the two existing water tanks. This residence was designed and constructed by the late Herbert Fowler, former professor of architecture at the University of Arkansas. The house has been widely recognized for its unique architectural design, and being almost 50 years old, may be eligible for historic designation. The site plan does not show the surrounding land uses and improvements and is therefore deceptive and confusing. The duster of lots shown on the site plan immediately west of the two existing water tanks back up right to our property line with backyards of proposed dwellings. There is plenty of space in Southpass and no apparent reason that development has to crowd adjacent property lines. Although I have been unable to obtain the plan that conforms to the.location designations in the PZD Application and Materials Submittal, I believe I am referring to the "Kessler Bluff area. Southpass is being touted as a new urbanist and sustainable project, but the Kessler Bluff portion has no new urbanist or sustainable characteristics. It is pure classic sprawl. The residential uses shown in the Kessler Bluff area are isolated from schools, services and public transportation. There is no new urbanist street grid. Infrastructure will be relatively expensive and extensive compared to. the other developed areas. Substantial woodlands will have to be cleared. Residents will have to depend on their cars to get to school, work and shopping. This Kessler Bluff area is currently a popular mountain biking location with several well -used trails, and the development will destroy this. I urge you to abandon the sprawling development shown on the northeast comer of Southpass and build instead lower down the hills and closer to schools, work and shopping. This email is being sent from my home computer. Tom Butt 235 East Scenic Avenue Point Richmond, CA 94801 RECEIVED JUL28 8 2008 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE PLANNING DIVISION Andrew Gamer comments on Southpass, Community Park, Kessler Mountain developments Pa e 1 From: Barbara Moorman <blmoorman@sbcglobal.net> To: <agarner@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 7/28/08 4:27PM Subject: comments on Southpass, Community Park, Kessler Mountain developments Dear Mr. Garner. Here is an abbreviated list of topics in objection to the proposed Community Park, Southpass and other developments for Kessler Mountain on today's Planning agenda. I would appreciate your passing this message along to Planning Commission members. Problems for Finger Road neighborhood: 1. noise amplified from games, entertainment 2. increased traffic via as yet unknown access 3. lights (games, residences, traffic, security) Problems for my own property - 90-A conservation easement for habitat (Humane Society Wildlife Land Trust): 1. 1-3 above 2. pesticides 3. clearing- removal of natural vegetation 4. changes in drainage 5. perceived need to eradicate "pests" 6. introduction of invasive species 7. trespassing 8. reduction of surroundingbird and animal habitat will lead to pressure on populations on my property.., eventual degradation of the property's value for conservation. Drawbacks for Fayetteville: 1. destruction of potential greenbelt and wildlife corridor 2.sprawl - violates city's stated intent to avoid sprawl 3. less money and effort available for smaller parks favored by majority 4.there is no established need for this housing 5. tax money will be channeled into infrastructure for this Thanks for your attention to my comments. Barbara Moorman 3450/3444 Finger Road Fayetteville <html><head><style type="text/css"><I__ DIV {margin:opx;} —></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>Dear Mr. Garner.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Here is an abbreviated list of topics in objection to the proposed Community Park, Southpass and other developments for Kessler Mountain on today's Planning agenda.&nbsp; I would appreciate your passing this message along to Planning Commission members.</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Problems for Finger Road neighborhood:</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp; </DIV> <DIV>1. noise amplified from games, entertainment</DIV> <DIV>2. increased traffic via as yet unknown access</DIV> <DIV>3.&nbsp; lights (games, residences, traffic, security)</DIV> <DIV>&nbsp;</DIV> <DIV>Problems for my own property - 90-A conservation easement for habitat (Humane Society Wildlife Land Trust):</DIV> <DIV>1.&nbsp; 1-3 above</DIV> <DIV>2. pesticides</DIV> RECEIVED <DIV>3. clearing- removal of natural vegetation </DIV> JUL29 9 2008 CITY OF FAYEHEVILLE PLANNING DIVISION Re Southpass/Sports park and Southpass city 9/8/08 Planning SEP 0 8 2008 To say I'm dismayed by the prospect of this enterprise coming to pass would be an understatement. It's really big and it's going to disrupt the environment and what you call quality of life. It's going to affect - irreversibly -- so many people and so much of our bit of the natural world that if any federal money were involved you'd have to do an . environmental impact statement. In fact, I wonder why you are approving such a big project without first having the need for it established by a formal needs study. And I wonder why you don't have a complete economic analysis done before approval. I also wonder that there's not even a local informal environmental impact study. I live near this project. Over the years I've kept a running list of over 300 species and I haven't tried to include them all. Also this is the type of land that is underlaid with springs and aquifers. Documents on the landfill say so and I can show you 19th and "' early 20century wells, cisterns and tapped springs on the north end of the Kessler ridge. Groundwater will be affected no matter how much "mitigation" you call for.. This project is huge and sinisterand it won't impact just south Kessler but all the land from Pear Lane to Highway 62 and that is a whole lot more than the 800 acres sponsors keep talking about. Some of you have told me that of course you plan to "impact" it all with access to this project. The specifics don't matter much because the impact will destroy much of the habitat that's there now. To say nothing of the way of life of the people there. And why is the landfill going to be fixed only AFTER\this thing is approved? In 1996 . the company that reported on the landfill for the landowner reported that: "A limited water quality survey has shown that the quality of surface and ground waters have been locally impacted as a result of ... landfill operations" and that "Exposed trash in contact with surface water run off appears to have contributed to chemical impact on surface water quality potentially as far east as the Cato Springs Branch." But this situation's been disregarded for 32 years by everyone who was responsible and should have been doing something about it. I wonder too why exceptions to regulations have been introduced to satisfy proponents of the project: (1) A law was passed in the state legislature that exempts owners -- present owner and City -- from financial responsibility for the landfill. (The developers themselves were wary enough to evade ownership.) (2) In the hillside overlay district ordinance the words "should," "may," and "encouraged" replace "shall", "must", and "required", as here, for instance: "Property owners of lands located within the Hillside Overlay District are strongly encouraged to have a geotechnical analysis of their property prior to any development." (Moor.,,an l of 2, H. ,. '(3)':No't even this ordinance's windowdressing applies to the proposed sports park and new town because that will be a PZD and PZDs remain a law unto themselves, especially with Southpass on the agenda. According to the NWAT, 3/4/06: [City Attorney Kit] "Williams told aldermen that at their request, he would draft language that would give the council the `power to approve a PZD even if it does not strictly meet the Hillside District's requirements.' He referred to the almost 800 -acre Southpass project, which was the subject of concern by developer John Nock at an earlier council meeting ..... `No one suggests that development rules or the tree ordinance be disregarded, but minimum percentages might be lessened in light of the project scope,' Williams said." And indeed we read in the ordinance with regard to land disturbance: "Planned Zoning Districts shall show undisturbed areas, but maybe approved by the City Council with lesser percentages of undisturbed area than shown on the above table." I should think that "in light of the project's scope", restrictions should'have been tightened, not loosened. The grander the scale, the greater the potential harm to the environment and to everyone's well being. To reiterate: you don't have the studies and the details in place to justify this thing and actions taken by the City and the State show a bias.in favor of the proposal that has nothing to do with its merits or with the need for it. Reject it outright or keep it tabled until you can genuinely justify it . Barbara Moorman 3450 Finger Road Fayetteville 72701 (Moorw%A . Z of 2) Supplementary Materials R-PZD 08-2898 (SouthPass) Contents: Engineering Memo re: Traffic Study, Sept 04 2008 SouthPass Traffic Generation by Phase/Year Traffic Study Addendum Dated 22 August 2008 Traffic Study Dated 16 July 2008 Resolution No. 138-04, Contract Resolution No. 138-04: Staff memo, RFP, RFP Response Comparison, Southpass RFP Response City Council minutes: August 17 & Sept 07, 2004 FAYETTEVILLE THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: 479-575-8206 ENGINEERING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Glenn E. Newman, Jr., P.E., Staff Engineer DATE: September 4, 2008 SUBJECT: South Pass — Traffic Study Appian Centre for Design has presented a Traffic Study prepared by Peters and Associates for the proposed South Pass Development located southwest of the I-540/Hwy 71 interchange. Based on the traffic study presented for full build -out, each of the six new traffic signalized intersections proposed will provide an acceptable level of service of "C" or better during the peak hour traffic. The supplemental traffic study indicates Shiloh Drive will not be required until after Phase 14 assuming all other proposed improvements are in -place and the phasing sequence is followed. As expected, the left turn movements out of the proposed development will have the lowest level of service, specifically at the non -signalized intersections. It is not practicable or efficient to place a signal at each intersection given the layout proposed, alternate routes are available for the vehicles to access Cato Springs Road at a signalized intersection during peak hour operation. The proposed phasing schedule indicates the development will take place over the next 20 years adding incremental impact to the roadway infrastructure. The significant impact will be Phases 15 through 18 which would begin at 2028 or later. The Engineering Division recommends accepting the recommendations contained in the Traffic Study dated July 16`" and the Supplement provided August 22nd for the Conceptual PZD presented for Southpass with the requirement that a supplemental traffic study will be required to be presented with each phase of development identifying the required infrastructure necessary to support the proposed traffic. The actual offsite improvements and/or assessments would them be determined at the preliminary approval stage for each phase of the Southpass project. W x a 0 m z 0 W a W Cl C, 'S. LL Q G 0 m en a O O N J Cl n m n O m m m P N N '1) Yf O U) m P m e m In m n N m m ~ Q - 0 N N e o m N N m 0 0) O N N n N m P Y1 n Cl 0) N CD CI N m )p n 0) N N N N N N N N N m c) m N x N_ O¢ a d x a J 3¢ N m 0) N N m 0 m m = > > Y ¢fa pqr m N S O D d I� 0 Oml N U G 0>00 0>_ m O m N e m e m Q 2 6 m y ry Q ≥ ¢ N mo m o m C) m N N N In P C) m m m m F C) m n m m o N 04 N N N e N 0 N m N N 0) N N N N N Q y Y Q > Y 5o�a Z n m o O N N CD n P m m U) m U) N ' 10 m n P am O WOOD p y m a m m m ^ C) N e m n ^ o P m n P o m N O m Q a m $. 0(y4 N N N Cl [7 C) P P P N m m ¢ &a Ut In ? 'a 2 W 0 4 0 m n 0) m m N m N N n m O Cl N N N N m N V, J a m m N m N m P N m N y CJ N N m N m m N N O P m N m C) m N P N O (O ¢Q t, Z >QW rc F n Q g 0 N m m m fl N m m Q J x N 0, ' V IC)N CD n , N N C) N f0 n N P N I(1 (0 a OZ�C a O Uaa 2H cu. - 0Z4° N m n - m ,- m m P m o N m o n M Z J J H m o a o m N n m yO Cl )n m o N m u '°000n. m N m m m m m n m m P m o m Q a 0 N 01 N N N N OF Y Z mz0 ¢OZOWN n m t O m/ )n n m m m n m n 0 m N m n C) Y) In O in N m N N P m O O Q 6 2 o N N m ` t0 m {� ' f U) N V In P P N O a0a ¢ t W r N 0, O m n m P O ,- Cl CO (0 n 0) 0 N Cl 0 N N Cl N N N N N N C) W o 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a¢ Cl N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I" W - N m Q b a N 0 a a a a a x L L L L 4 0. 0. 0. 0. n m OI O Cl C) e m I0 n m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L L a W a W 0 a 0 0 a W W W W 0 W W W 0 a 0, 0. 0. 6 0 6 a 6 0. 1 0. ADDENDUM SouthPass Traffic Study Prepared by Peters & Associates Dated 22 August 2008 nY: •dY �f August 22, 2008 Mr. Todd Jacobs Appian Centre for Design 217 E. Dickson St. Suite 104 Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 Re: P1250 Addendum to Traffic Study (Dated July 16, 2008) South Pass Development Cato Springs Road Fayetteville, Arkansas Dear Mr. Jacobs: As requested, Peters and Associates Engineers, Inc. has prepared this Addendum to our traffic study report dated July 16, 2008 for the proposed South Pass Development located on the northwest side Cato Springs Road, just southwest of 1-540 in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The traffic study analyzed traffic operating conditions for full build -out of the South Pass development, as proposed, and identified specific roadway network infrastructure improvements that were determined to be needed to support the development. The South Pass site is proposed to be developed in 18 phases. This Addendum identifies at which phase of the South Pass development the Shiloh Road connection will be needed. Level of service calculations were performed for projected traffic conditions without the Shiloh Road connection for different stages of development for the AM and PM peak hours and included the same study intersections as the traffic study report dated July 16, 2008. These projected traffic conditions were analyzed with the recommended lane geometry and traffic control as shown on Figure 9, "Recommended Schematic Lane Geometry and Traffic Control," in the traffic study report. Components of development for Phases I thru 14 (of 18 total phases) were provided by Appian Center for Design and are attached with this Addendum. The Trip Generation, an Informational Report (7th Edition), 2004, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and The Trip Generation Software (Version 5 by Microtrans), were utilized in calculating the magnitude of traffic volumes expected to be generated by the mixed -use land uses of the phases of this development. These are reliable sources for this information and are universally used in the traffic engineering profession. Traffic operational analysis calculations were performed as a part of this Addendum for projected traffic at different phases of development. This analysis was performed using Synchro Version 6, 2003. This computer program has been proven to be reliable when used to analyze capacity and levels of traffic service under various operating conditions. The adjacent street AM and PM peak traffic periods were used for these calculations. Detailed capacity calculations are included with this Addendum for projected traffic condition to include existing traffic plus site -generated traffic through Phase 14. Traffic volumes used for this analysis 5507 RANCH DRIVE - SUITE 205 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72223 (501) 868-3999 FAX: (501) 866-9710 Mr. Todd Jacobs August 22, 2008 Page 2 are shown on Figure A -1, "Without Shiloh Road Connection — Phases 1-14 Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes AM Peak Hour," and Figure A-2, "Without Shiloh Road Connection — Phases 1- 14 Site -Generated Traffic Plus Existing Traffic Volumes PM Peak Hour." For this analysis condition, it was found that all vehicle movements at the proposed traffic signal controlled intersections are projected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "D" or better for the worst - case AM and PM peak hours. The only vehicle movements with capacity and LOS results expected to demonstrate very long traffic delays are the eastbound left -turn vehicle movements from Drive A at Cato Springs Road and from Drive C at Cato Springs Road with "Stop" sign control. These vehicle movements have alternate proposed traffic signal control intersections, which would be available. These results are the same as the full build -out results described in the traffic study report. Findings and recommendations of this Addendum are summarized as follows: o It was found that the Shiloh Road connection will not be needed until at some level of development after the completion of Phase 14. o Findings and recommendations in the traffic study dated July 16, 2008 are still appropriate for full build -out conditions. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Ernest J. Peters, P.E. President mI. n II fl •J sCl ' a C t s C C Y C .. n a o s J ? O A • a _ e e 2 e K 3 a 4 ; m .^ ; P n $ 3 3 o a r • - P +� P e u Q m ^ Q Y n • 3 ^ d i m m • i •1 y W Ii 0 e ^ 4' 8 a �{ • I, • A c p m m y - • [ `c yy V L Z u m a a a i o m N A a N L 6 a w o : c c P V Z C ; q N m o P A L0. j No P • • a E - • p N c a i K _t E ♦ S c c II K ` u • v _ i e r s a I. u O i 0 R • 9 C A i U e w 0 O a gU a e tf 0 O U CO yid _ c IHL �..Tt . 1 .J''t h +l•DeY tv i' 7N Av m_a,pe4 r .11�1�-wRxr f .fi' rr yit1r„' O r w'i Y t r .-.. U r1vt,r7g P'.Y` r"f+n a iLf"v ,.VV v. fi,i'+.'�^Se.'y 9rrrvnJ'i.s,. F.' U y h290 y��Q�O„ l?�i '..�Y q-. i`�y` 283. p, Q�J%'' Q W Ud ii f Q i XJ O O J F F ti/ U) x 4!IImr .� 'O 0.t Fri Y i(, f'tr`e��t i A{ } � R'�� r� a.. i 1n . I/s .�'h M IBS t .. •. � N f o, O '� t t- P`Cs, w vi off:. ii *i. rr .... nC{N� I, r r '���'1. rvr fl " M, j LY.1N /� Q Q - ,.G.e M♦M �.. 2 0LL W PA 0 w�ao� u e r v 0a O O (0-.-. o O N L W O N •I N .2 C o0 > w O= o c" oIn ZN...OOsNJ C R H U) Is) F a a U)u U] � Q U � Z 4d U,- 0 v)a r N 4 C (x7 � do Cs) ov ZN 1 um U W .. 0W ao S. I Z U N i W 7) z ULLO c I Lii 3Q z o QY Z O > W 0w0a U f- LL ogQ'La <wI Oz~ _ U`y Z OiF U X D I N O -J Ewa Q I a 9 J 1 Z 9r W N Ny69 d >. z . atc �'t•YRrA�.�� X Qi rCVPuJQ �,L�`s w �. g U .� C, ti oh ��Jt 0 > yr. .O }.. Y F— i- t:..,Fii' �� 2 •~ 4 i4 OL ,. 6I J q. Qx2 i, `d ti O I- C C —.--'- or- 00 o n n p IN cN O W in C 00 ` H O(0 So c Z(11-OO..oi j E NORTH VN i U OW U a U u 2 V o (nom W F Q o W U ON � z. Z N Um W .. 1W O,- ao SouthPass Traffic Study Prepared by Peters & Associates Dated 16 July 2008 S ►0 �1IJ�.� f { fi. ♦y ,MI♦'i a�\. Vff1+.1.Y,n♦„Ll�lrn♦ a� /: k JUte rn S S S Al S. S S S MS S S S S S Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc., has conducted a traffic engineering study relating to a proposed mixed -use develop- ment (South Pass) located on the northwest side of Cato Springs Road (also Highway 265), just southwest of 1-540 and northwest of Kessler Mountain Road in Fayetteville, Ar- kansas. The mixed -use development is proposed to consist of a variety of commercial, office and residential uses plus a park, school, police and fire station as indicated on the pro- ject site plan (a reduced copy of the plan is included in the Appendix for reference). Existing 24 -hour traffic counts were made in the vicinity of the site at the following locations: • Cato Springs Road, just south of 1-540 • Approaches to the intersection of Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps • Approaches to the intersection of Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp • Approaches to the intersection of Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp / Highway 71 northbound ramps. Existing AM and PM peak hours vehicle turning movement counts were made for the following intersections along Cato Springs Road in the vicinity of the site: • Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp /High- • way 71 northbound ramps • Cato Springs Road and Highway 71 southbound on - ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps. rerEKs x ASSOCIATES CMCIN6'6P.A INC. There are no planned Arkansas State Highway, and Trans- portation Department (AHTD) or City of Fayetteville roadway improvement projects in the immediate vicinity of the site. Projected traffic volumes for full build -out of the proposed development were calculated. These projected site- Page I generated trips were added to the existing traffic volumes, which resulted in total projected traffic volumes at full build - out of the South Pass development. Recommendations of this study are summarized as follows: • It is recommended that fully actuated traffic signals be installed at the following intersections along Cato Springs Road before completion of full build-0out of the develop- ment as proposed: o Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp / • Highway 71 northbound ramps o Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp o Cato Springs.Road and 1-540 southbound ramps o Cato Springs Road and Drive B o Cato Springs Road and Drive D o Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road. These recommended traffic signals should.have provi- sions to be coordinated as a part of a closed -loop coordi- nated traffic signal system. • It is recommended that the lane geometry at the study • intersections be constructed as shown on Figure 9; "Recommended Schematic Lane Geometry and Traffic Signal Control." • Traffic signal designs, roadway improvements and curb cuts along Cato Springs Road must conform to design standards of the City, of Fayetteville and AHTD. • If development is phased, needed roadway improvements and traffic signal improvements could. be staged, consis- tent with traffic demands of development phases and with the concurrence of the City and AHTD. I PFTERS & ASSOCIATES P"ERSs, ulA. Page 2 • ' • Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc., has conducted a traffic engineering study relating to a proposed mixed -use development (South Pass) located on the northwest side of Cato Springs Road (also Highway 265), just southwest e of 1-540 and northwest of Kessler Mountain Road in Fa- yetteville, Arkansas. The mixed -use development is pro- s posed to consist of a variety of commercial, office and residential uses plus a park, school, police and fire station as indicated on the project site plan (a reduced copy of the plan is included in the Appendix for reference). • Projected traffic volumes for full build -out of the proposed development were calculated. These projected site - generated trips were added to the existing traffic volumes, which resulted in total projected traffic volumes at full build -out of the South Pass development. This is a report of methodology and findings relating to a traffic engineering study undertaken to: o Evaluate existing traffic conditions at the site. o Ascertain projected traffic operating conditions at ad- jacent study intersections and the major access drive intersections proposed to serve the development. o Identify the effects on traffic operations resulting from existing traffic in combination with site -generated traf- fic associated with full build -out of the development. ' o Evaluate proposed access to the site and make rec- ommendations for mitigative improvements which may be necessary and appropriate to ensure mini- mum impact and acceptable traffic operations. In the following sections of this report there are presented traffic data, study methods, findings and recommenda- tions of this traffic engineering investigation. The traffic engineering study is technical in nature. Analysis tech- niques employed are those most commonly used in the PETERS & ASSOCIATES I�' wcwece 'mc. traffic engineering profession for traffic impact analysis. Certain data and calculations relative to traffic operational analysis are referenced in the report. Complete calcula- tions and data are included in the Appendix of the report. The location of the development is within the City of Fa- yetteville in Washington County, Arkansas. The site is located on the northwest side of Cato Springs Road, just southwest of 1-540 and northwest of Kessler Mountain Road. The proposed development site location and vicin- ity are shown on Figures 1 and 2, which follow. PETERS & ASSOCIATES PETERS5. WC. Page 4 Access to the site, as shown on the site plan, is from six points of access along Cato Springs Road. These are as follows: • Drive A • Drive B • Drive C • Drive D • Drive E • Cummings Landfill Road • Kessler Mountain Road. Additionally, as a part of this development, Shiloh Drive will be extended to access the site from the north. The locations of the access drives and distances between them are shown on Figure 4, "Directional Distribution - Site Traffic." The approximate 800 acre site development plan calls for the construction of the following land -uses plus associ- ated parking, landscaping, new streets and access drives: • 816 residential single-family lots • Approximately 630 residential condominiums • Approximately 2;875 multi -family residential units • Approximately 180,000 square -feet of retail Approximately 64,000 square feet of office • An approximate 400 student elementary school • An approximate 16,000 square -foot church • A fire station • A'police station • Approximately 240 acres of park use plus park offices. The site plan shows the various proposed land uses and. the approximate location of the streets or drives proposed to serve the site. The site currently is mostly undevel- oped. (A PETERS h ASSOCIATES II /€UE A Page6. STREET SYSTEM C y� si...4 t _A iYH [/♦p.G89' ` T�-4 1 a` 1 r4 3 . 3 4i i iiy.t.5 � airy y` rt �^� S P� �' � ♦ Yi [[[[[ e ` a3- a za, r ? ry s{ \qti `� ( 8 Q � Oy% y t a r1 C• � .. w7j wr F!p i ..f a ,'`f \ ♦ HIV t•Lxv ? .l <r r itta. p 1 L a x_ L,{y ♦ a� ♦.c5 AEI ♦tee u 1 f.a�i��. A Hourly, 24 -hour traffic counts were compiled for the follow- • I I ing locations in the vicinity of the development as a part of this study:. n�i wyN�' � �^�y...KG��W YSe �3`�.[ >�^�.j�y � .y -G�• raC¢�� .+✓. _�9 _ �' ♦�a(taY fi 44S{.j�}`+F�ay Yt�•+i /l�£ iZs �/l.ry � N I IL. � 1 �hTJ'4^� yY�{. 4MAi'\ t�.L�p b.^.(i"y TNani£ Th .l}y. :.�r~.f��GiY fls � •..}.T4A Y IW F.,y�.�?y ) � i�,�,i 3'i� YF}�. •a�af�j>I� � � � .- .. b, .�.aJ � • �� • �#�a-rl`��yS��"'�5��"'��'� Y.�.%.�..a.: F ve Aim �+. p F'. �y .�. y .��3 n / y %Y� ♦-tom 4 t , x ]C $i � �� ��`12� ) i �•.. . . w'. ) nom..{ \.lG`�'@ �• I�Z'! •D�.¢ Nh Ku { 4 a. O Y • 1 :.: It !gILWft*. Hourly 24 -hour traffic count data are summarized on the following Tables and Charts 1, 2, 3.and 4. Other traffic count data collected as a part of this study in- clude AM and PM peak hour vehicle turning movement counts at the following intersections: • . Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp / Highway 71 northbound ramps • Cato Springs Road and Highway 71 southbound on - ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps. The AM and PM peak hours turning movement count data at these intersections are summarized in the following peak hour turning movement charts. These AM and the PM peak hour turning movement counts are presented in detail in the Appendix of this report. The AM. and PM peak hour vehicle turning movement counts made as a part of this study are shown on Figure 3- A, "Existing Traffic Volumes - AM Peak Hour," and Figure 3-B, "Existing Traffic Volumes - PM Peak Hour." PETERS & .I ,�ssocurss �,"ttA Page 10 .! The Trip Generation, an Informational Report (7th Edi- • (ion), 2004, published by the Institute of Transportation " " • • Engineers (ITE) and The Trip Generation Software (Version 5 by Microtrans), were utilized in calculating the magnitude of traffic volumes expected to be generated by of build -out of the site for the various proposed land uses of this development. These are reliable sources for this information and are universally used in the traffic engi- neering profession. Using the selected trip -generation rates, calculations were made as a part of this study to provide a reliable es- timate of traffic volumes that can be expected to be asso- ciated with the development as proposed. Applying the appropriate trip -generation rates to the land -uses pro- posed for the development makes these calculations. Results of this calculation are summarized on Table 5, "Summary of Trip Generation," below. Residential5hgle-Family 816 Lots Residential Condommams 210 7,809 155 457 522 302 630 Units 230 3,692 44 233 Residential Muth -Family 2,875 Units 221 107 Retal* 220 19,320 288 1179 1150 633 180,000 Sq. Ft 820 GeneralOftce* 6,183 90 58 259 •281 64,000 Sq. Ft 710 564 70 Elementary Schoof' 10 13 63 400 Students 520 413 74 61 0 Ihurch* 16,000 Sq. Ft 560 0 Fie Station 117 5 4 4 4 7,000 Sq.Ft 730 483 35 7 Police station 3,000 Sq. Ft. 730 3 6 207 3 1 2 Parks Ofi5ce 15 20,000 Sq. Ft 715 231 32 4 5 29 Regional Parks 240 Aaes Varies** 1,489 6 6 — _ 153 81 ".'.`°"•"�".,""'..,...`-'...`-^.d- ,s„.�..,:,,TUTALS. 40,508 814. 2022 - _ __ 2331 1508 raaaTOTAL EN1ERIpG + EXITING •These volumes adjusted to reJl¢d 20% internal capture "Land -use jot the Parks includes ITE uses for number ojsoccer/multi-purpose fields and regional park uses. Tables —Trip Generation Summary - Site Full Build -Out PETERS & Assocures wcortrpy, INC. ' Page 17 These calculations indicate that approximately 40,508 vehicle trips (combined in and out) per average weekday are projected to be generated'by the proposed full build - out of this site. Of this total, approximately 2,839 vehicle trips are estimated during the traffic conditions of the ad- jacent street AM peak hour and approximately 3,839 vehi- cle trips are estimated during the traffic conditions of the adjacent street PM peak hour. The data for several of the land uses have been adjusted for "internal trip capture" (i.e. multi -purpose trips within the site as opposed to new trips for each site land use). These data have not been adjusted for "pass -by" trips (i.e. that portion of the site -destined traffic that could come from the existing adjacent street traffic stream) due to the location of the site and the fairly low existing traffic volume on the adjacent street. Residential and office traffic, as will be the majority of traf- fic associated with this site, ordinarily does contribute to the adjacent street traffic conditions during the on -street AM peak traffic.hour and the PM peak traffic hour. Ac- cordingly, both the AM and PM peak traffic periods of the adjacent streets in the immediate vicinity of the site are the traffic operating conditions which have warranted pri- mary traffic analysis as a part of this study. PETERS h ASSOCIATES uxwcexs, wc. Page 18 v, ^^'"3orrel. vGm'a 1 fCf Jr CAPACITY ANALYSIS Existing Traffic Conditions Capacity and level of service analysis was performed for existing traffic conditions for the adjacent street AM and PM peak hours for the following intersections: • Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp / Highway 71 northbound ramps • •Cato Springs Road and Highway 71 southbound on -ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps. As indicated in Table 6, "Level of Service Summary — Existing Traffic Conditions," for the intersections stud- ied, all existing vehicle movements for existing traffic conditions presently operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and PM peak hours. Traffic volumes used for this analysis are shown on Figures 3-A and 3-8. PETERS A ASSOCIATES YNCWFF.RS, I"G . k r Projected Traffic, Conditions Level of service analysis was performed for the full build - out projected traffic conditions for the AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions. This analysis was performed for the following intersections: • Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp / Highway 71 northbound ramps • Cato Springs Road and Highway 71 southbound on - ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp • Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps • Cato Springs Road and Drive A • Cato Springs Road and Drive B • Cato Springs Road and Drive C • Cato Springs Road and Driven • Cato Springs Road and Drive E • Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road • Cato Springs Road and Kessler Mountain Road. Traffic volumes used for these projected traffic conditions are shown on Figure 8-A, "Site -Generated Plus Existing Traffic Volumes - AM Peak Hour," and Figure 8-B, "Site - Generated Plus Existing Traffic Volumes - PM Peak Hour." .The operating conditions projected to exist at these intersections are summarized in Table 7, "Level of Service Summary - Projected Traffic Conditions." As indicated in Table 7, for the intersections studied, vehi- cle movements with capacity and LOS results expected to demonstrate extreme traffic delays (LOS "F") during the worst -case PM peak hour for these projected traffic condi- tions are the following: • The eastbound left -turn vehicle movement on Drive A at Cato Springs Road with the' "Stop" sign control dur- ing the AM and PM peak hours. This volume is low (only 40 vehicles during the AM peak hour and 30 ve- hicles during the PM peak hour) and the delay should only occur for short. times during these AM and PM pererss &AssoCures peak hours. Page 23 • . The eastbound left -turn vehicle movement on Drive C at Cato Springs Road with the "Stop" sign control during . the PM peak hour. This volume is low (only 60 vehicles during the PM peak hour (approximately one vehicle a minute) and the delay should only occur fora short time during the PM peak hour. Vehicle movements with delay projected to be excessive have alternate traffic signal control intersections proposed, which would be available: All other vehicle movements are projected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "D" or better for the worst -case AM and PM peak hours. Additionally, during the worst -case. AM and PM peak hours, overall intersection LOS is projected to operate at LOS ".Co or better for each of the signalized intersections analyzed as a part of this study. Projected traffic conditions were analyzed with the recom- mended lane geometry and traffic signal control as shown on Figure 9, "Recommended Schematic Lane.Geometry and Traffic Control." PETERS Ac .ASSOCIATES e"caevs 4C. Page 24 PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS INTERSECTION PEAK HR LEVEL In evaluating the need for a traffic signal, certain estab- lished warrants must be examined by a comprehensive investigation of traffic conditions and physical characteris- tics of the location. The decision to install a traffic signal at a particular location must be evaluated quantitatively relative to these warrants. Satisfaction of conditions for only one of the warrants, as specked, is required for sig- nalization. These warrants, as specified in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), are described in detail in the appendix of this report. They are summa- rized as follows: 4 S 0 S NClttFJ & ASSN TF lllI J PETERS M. PETKRSU • Warrant One: Eight -Roue Vehicular Volume •, Warrant Two:.Four-Hour Vehicular Volume. • Warrant Three: Reak Hour • Warrant Four-.: Pedestrian, Volume ♦ Warrant Five: School Crossing • Warrant Six: Coordinated Signal System ♦ Warrant Seven: Crash:Experience. • Warrant Eight: RoadwayNetwork Traffic signal warrants analysis was made for projected traffic conditions for full build -out of the development for the following intersections: • Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp / Highway 71 northbound ramps • Cato. Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp • Cato Springs. Road and 1-540 southbound ramps • Cato Springs Road and Drive B • Cato Springs Road and Drive D • Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road. Signal Wan -ants Results It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp /Highway 71 northbound ramp at full development of the proposed site. Volumes are pro- jected to be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy War- n II rants 16, 2 and 3 with the development as proposed. The traffic signal warrants analysis results for this intersection are summarized in Table 8, "Traffic Signal Warrants Re- sults - Cato Spring Road and 1-540 Northbound On -Ramp / Highway 71 Northbound Ramp - Projected Traffic Condi- tions." It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off -ramp at full development of the proposed site. Volumes are projected to be sufficient at this intersec- tion to satisfy Warrants 1A, 1 B, 1AB, 2 and 3 with the de- velopment as proposed. The traffic signal warrants analy- sis results for this intersection are summarized in Table 9, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Cato Springs Road and I- 540 Northbound Off -Ramp - Projected Traffic Conditions." It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps at full development of the proposed site. Volumes are projected to be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy Warrants 2 and 3 with the development as pro- posed. The traffic signal warrants analysis results for this intersection are summarized in Table 10, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Cato Springs Road and 1-540 Southbound Ramps - Projected Traffic Conditions." It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Cato Springs Road and Drive B at full development of the proposed site. Volumes are pro- jected to be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy Warrants 1A, 18, 1AB, 2 and 3 with the development as proposed. • The traffic signal warrants analysis results for this intersec- tion are summarized in Table 11, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Cato Springs Road and Drive B - Projected Traffic Conditions." It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of Cato Springs Road and Drive D at full development of the proposed site. -Volumes are pro - PETERS k ASSOCIATES LVGINEEIq, ,NL Page 27 jetted to be sufficient at this intersection to satisfy Warrants 1A, 18, 1AB, 2 and 3 with the development as proposed. The traffic signal warrants analysis re- sults for this intersection are summarized in Table 12, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Cato Springs Road and Drive D - Projected Traffic Conditions." It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the intersection of.Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road at full development of the proposed site. Volumes are projected to be suffi- cient at this intersection to satisfy Warrants 2 and 3 with the development as proposed and only one hour from satisfying Warrant 1AB. The traffic signal war- rants analysis results for this intersection are summa- rized in Table 13, "Traffic Signal Warrants Results - Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road - Projected Traffic Conditions." PETERS [c ♦SSOCGTES 11/�Illl rxc0.[os. oc 'Findings of this study are summarized as follows: • Traffic volumes projected to be generated by the site at full development are approximately 40,5089 vehicle trips (combined in and out) per average weekday. • • The AM and PM peak hours of the adjacent street have been determined to be the worst -case traffic conditions in the vicinity. It is estimated that approxi- mately 2,836 additional vehicle trips will seek ingress and egress at the site during this adjacent street AM peak hour and approximately 3,839 additional vehicle trips will seek ingress and egress at the site at full build -out during this adjacent street PM peak hour. • Capacity and LOS analysis was conducted for exist- ing traffic conditions for the AM and PM peak hours. Currently all vehicle movements operate at what cal- culates as an acceptable LOS "C" or better for the AM and PM peak hours at the study intersections. fijPEr CE R"WCEX e. essoASSOCIATESss 5 INC. • Capacity and LOS analysis was performed for the full build -out of this development projected traffic condi- • tions for the AM and PM peak hours. For the inter- sections studied, vehicle movements with capacity and LOS results expected to demonstrate extreme traffic delays (LOS "F) during the worst -case PM peak hour for these projected traffic conditions are the following: o The eastbound left -turn vehicle movement on• Drive A at Cato Springs Road with the "Stop" sign control during the AM and PM peak • hours. This volume is low (only 40 vehicles • during the AM peak hour and 30 vehicles dur- ing the PM peak hour) and the delay should only occur for short times during these AM and • PM peak hours. o The eastbound left -turn vehicle movement on Drive C at Cato Springs Road with the "Stop" Page 32 sign control during the PM peak hour. This volume is low (only 60 vehicles during the PM peak hour (approximately one vesicle a min- ute) and the delay should only occur for a short time during the PM peak hour. (Vehicle movements with delay projected to be excessive have alternate traffic signal control in- tersections proposed, which would be available). All other vehicle movements are projected to operate at what calculates as an acceptable LOS "D" or better for the worst -case' AM and PM peak hours. Addition- ally, during the worst -case AM and PM peak hours, overall intersection LOS is projected to operate at LOS "C" or better for each of the signalized intersec- tions analyzed as a part of this study. It was found that traffic signal warrants are projected to be met for the following intersections at full build - out of the site: o Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on - ramp / Highway 71 northbound ramps o Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off - ramp o Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps o Cato Springs Road and Drive B o . Cato Springs Road and Drive D o Cato Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road. The recommended signal control at these intersec- tions would allow acceptable traffic operations and add safety and convenience for these intersections, as well as help accommodate growth in the vicinity of the site. PETERS & ASSOCIATES crvcwEs¢, INC Page in rererss a �ssocures crcumevs, we .�.-����� gip:--� -.."..-�.�.__--ENV-i- ---.- w�M'T..�. Recommendations of this study are summarized as follows: • It is recommended that fully actuated traffic signals be installed at the following intersections along Cato Springs Road before completion of full build -Gout of the development as proposed: o Cato Spring Road and 1-540 northbound on -ramp I Highway 71 northbound ramps o Cato Springs Road and 1-540 northbound off - ramp o Cato Springs Road and 1-540 southbound ramps o Cato Springs Road and Drive 8 o Cato Springs Road and Drive D o Cato.Springs Road and Cummings Landfill Road. • These recommended traffic signals should have provi- sions to be coordinated as a part of a closed -loop. coordi- nated traffic signal system. • It is recommended that the lane geometry at the study intersections be constructed as shown on Figure 9, "Recommended Schematic Lane Geometry and Traffic Signal Control." • Traffic signal designs, roadway improvements and curb cuts along Cato Springs Road must conform to design standards of the City of Fayetteville and AHTD. • If development is phased, needed roadway improve- ments and traffic signal improvements could be staged consistent with traffic demands of development phases and with the concurrence of the City and AHTD. PauP.IS Z U off° p 1 NQ 0 iQy mJ ~ F H tip If' o z O m e N 15% ti U m w Z W d } H O p a St cn w o w� W V) W �J r I— x F- U L J O Lu Y V� 3 NORTH WWD Q D 0.__ wO .582.0 �:0 932ro QJ� w Q6jg 2= 0. 22a FLLLL g U a' 0 N � 425 Co 63 22ro v o 23,?; . ^, d U - 23s m C, ±a,3 7 .Q..p2. l . !bo z t o gp2 Lil ?s2ro o b .,.d QQ�QO a8js. QPJQ- LJ (n • °' 2 23 . Co ha oeo ec cn • 26S.ro•,� J2 I. see r; Fo = dasaz `5g> •L' D •• w O U U. N az, k o mow'. W w F ao w 0 6N Q Z w Zo� 1W O:Q DWG 7 W a�0 9 LL's W U 2 F IL 0< LLLL. LL wI' I — I -- z 1- w cn Ox O X w.. F — z ' w GI O ¢ 7 Y L jtJ N a Id J (flu. W ~• Q F- 0 O - - pT �� e Q o W Z • o Zo at- �a Zed act\ 3y off ti W } % W d 0; i ZWI ,.. 6. WZ W U 000 OWLL o4. S.• �QQ JF- O N�o ¢z N ow WI W U W Resolution No. 138-04 Approved Resolution Signed Contract RESOLUTION NO.138-04 SCANNED A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO ACCEPT 200 ACRES OF PARK LAND, A 10 ACRE WATER TANK S ITE, ONE MILLION DOLLARS FOR PARK LAND DEVELOPMENT AND OTHER CONSIDERATION FOR THE CITY'S ACCEPTANCE OF OWNERSHIP OF A 33 ACRE LANDFILL. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby accepts and approves the Contract with SouthPass Development Company (attached as Exhibit "A") to accept 200 acres of park land, a 10 acre water tank site, one million dollars for parkland development and other consideration for the City's acceptance of a 33 acre landfill and its agreement to spend the money currently identified in its Parks Capital Improvement Plan for the community park development. PASSED and APPROVED this 7'h day of September, 2004. ATTEST: By: S NDRA SMITH, fiyClerk APPROVED: By: DA COODY, Mayor • FAYETTEVIaE; •• AGREEMENT TO ACQUIRE AND DEVELOP THE COMMUNITY PARK FOR FAYETTEVILLE This contract and agreement is entered into by the City of Fayetteville and SouthPass Development Company, LLC (hereinafter "SouthPass"); Whereas, the City of Fayetteville desires to obtain a 200 acre Community Park for its citizens and tourists; and Whereas, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has carefully studied available sites and determined that the Cummings' property is the most desirable site for the Community Park; and Whereas, The City of Fayetteville does not have the current resources to both purchase the necessary acreage and develop such acreage into a functioning, attractive Community Park and so publicly requested proposals from developers for a public/private partnership to facilitate the acquisition and development of the Community Park; and Whereas, SouthPass Development Company, LLC submitted a workable, attractive proposal which was selected by the City's selection committee as the recommended proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the City's Request for Proposals and SouthPass Development Company, LLC's recommended Proposal, the City and SouthPass agree as follows: 1. Upon approval of this contract by the Fayetteville City Council and SouthPass Development Company, LLC and the accomplishment of all contingencies listed below, SouthPass shall tender to the trustee/ owners of the Eight Hundred Acre (more or less) Cummings property an unconditional offer to purchase all said property for the sum of Six Million Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars ($6,900,000.00). The obligation of SouthPass Development Company, LLC shall not become binding or enforceable until all the below contingencies have been fully accomplished: (A) A Master Plan for the development of the approximately 800 acre site has been prepared and approved by SouthPass Development Company LLC and the City of Fayetteville; (B) The City Council has annexed or committed itself to annex the entire 800 acre site; (C) The zoning of the portion of 'the 800 acre site to be owned by SouthPass has been accomplished or the City Council has committed itself to rezone that portion in conformance with the approved Master Plan; (D) The Greenland School District and Fayetteville School District have agreed that this entire site shall be within the Fayetteville School District; (E) The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality has agreed with the present owners of the Cummings landfill and assured the City of Fayetteville that the costs of the necessary corrective actions for the landfill shall not be borne by, recovered from, assessed to, or collected from the City of Fayetteville or SouthPass Development Company, LLC. 2. If this Offer is accepted by the Trustee and the Court, and all others necessary to accept the offer and legally deed the entire tract of 800 acres, more or less, SouthPass Development company, LLC shall pay the agreed price to the trustee/owners and the land shall be conveyed by warranty deed free from all encumbrances to the following parties: (A) SouthPass Development Company, LLC shall be deeded the entire Eight Hundred (800) acre tract, more or less, except the 33 acre landfill; (B) The City of Fayetteville shall be deeded (free and clear of any obligation to pay, repay, or otherwise fund the necessary corrective actions for the landfill: partial or full recapping of the landfill and restoration of the stream corridor) the Thirty -Three (33) acre abandoned and closed landfill located within the 800 acre property; (C) South Pass Development Company LLC shall convey by warranty deed to the City of Fayetteville a Two Hundred (200) acre parcel for the Community Park which location shall be determined by the City; (D) SouthPass Development Company LLC shall convey by warranty deed the Ten (10) acre City of Fayetteville water tank site to the City of Fayetteville. 3. To facilitate the preparation of the Master Plan, the City shall immediately, pay for the perimeter survey of the property and the 200 acre Community Park site. • . 4. SouthPass shall fund up to $10,000.00 and retain a mutually acceptable community master planning consultant for recommendations for a Master Plan for this entire 800 acre area (including the 200 acre Community Park area). 5. The City of Fayetteville shall assist in facilitating the planning, zoning and other development approval processes which are in accordance with the mutually acceptable master plan. 6. The City of Fayetteville shall recommend to the Fayetteville School Board and Greenland School Board that this property should be within the Fayetteville School District. 7. The City of Fayetteville and SouthPass shall cost share (50/50) all costs of extending sewer to the Community Park site and neither shall charge for the acquisition of necessary water or sewer easements across their property to serve their land within this 800 acre area. • 8. If all the contingencies listed in paragraph 1 have been accomplished and all the actions listed in paragraph 2 have been achieved, SouthPass Development Company LLC shall contribute One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) when the City is ready to award the first construction contract utilizing the 2004 and 2005 budgeted CIP allocation as shown in Exhibits A and B*. Signed this ' ' day of U • 2004. Signed this 1A day of September, 2004. SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT CO PANY LLC By: Jq1irt NOCK an ging Member CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; ARKANSAS By: 6 DAN'COODY Mayor Attest: t'vtd/t-a_ Sondra Smith, City Cl FAYETTEVILLE: *Attached as Exhibit A are copies of the current Capital Improvement Program adopted last December by the City Council showing 2004-2008 Parks Development Fund allocations for Community Park Development (total about $2.4 million) and Sales Tax CIP funds allocated to Community Park Development (total about $1.2 million). Attached as Exhibit B is the amount of funds that have been allocated by the City Council that will be available on January 1, 2005 for development of the Community Park (about $1.6 million). City of Fayetteville, Arkansas 2004 - 2008 Capital Improvements Program Recommended Ranking by Project Category by Year Year Division . Project . Parks Develo meet Fund: Parks & Amount ---_ Priority Recreation Im rovements 2004 Parks& Recreation Community Park Development 66� 466,000 2005 Parks & Recreation Community Path Development 4�pp0 1 .473,000 2006 Parks & Recreation Community Park Development ,0000 457,000 2007 Parks:& Recreation Community Park Development 489,000 2008 Parks & Recreation Community park Development 08WO00_p_ .. 0,000 • Denotes Continuing Project From Previous Year S7 1 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Community Park Development Capital Project - Funding 2004/2005 Budgeted 2004 Parks Development Fund: 2250.9255.5200.00 $ 256 $ 2250.9255.5301.00 45 2250.9255.5314.00 51;300 2250.9255.5806.00 .531,049 582,650. Sales Tax Capital Improvements 4470.9470.5314.00 8,150 4470.9470.5806.00 275,000 283,150 . - $ 865,800 $ Expenses Remaining 2004 2004 255 $ 1$ 45 - 51,300 (0) .2,000 529,049 53,600 529,050 8,150 275,000 283,150 53,600 $ 812,200 $ Budgeted Total 2005 Available $ 1 (0) 473,000 1,002,049 473,000 1,002,050 8,150 338,000 613,000 338,000 621,150 811,000 $ 1,623,200 Resolution No. 138-04 Agenda Memo Request for Proposals (RFP) 04-13 RFP Response Comparison' SouthPass RFP Response Documents yr-7 Agenda Item Number 3 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO b tut_ rbtaKtCby To: Mayor and City Council 42trIC IIIJ From: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations Date: August 19, 2004 Subject: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO ACCEPT 200 ACRES OF PARK LAND, A 10 ACRE WATER TANK SITE, ONE MILLION DOLLARS AND OTHER CONSIDERATION FOR THE CITY'S ACCEPTANCE OF OWNERSHIP OF A 33 ACRE LANDFILL RECOMMENDATION Approval of resolution authorizing the mayor to execute an agreement with SouthPass Development Company to accept 200 acres of park land, a 10 acre water tank site, one million dollars and other consideration for the city's acceptance of ownership of a 33 acre landfill. BACKGROUND In 2000 the community through a public participation process defined the need for a • Community Park. In December 2002 the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board requested the staff to pursue land for the future Community Park. From this search 18 potential sites were evaluated against numerous criteria. One site emerged as the best site, the property known as the Cummings Farm in Southwest Fayetteville along Cato Springs Road. The sole issue with the site, was the impact that an abandoned landfill on approximately 33 acres of the 800 acre site would have upon development of a Community Park and other surrounding land uses that may develop in proximity to the Community.Park. The City partially funded with the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality an initial study to determine any impacts that the landfill would have on the use of the landfill site and surrounding land. That study found that the landfill did not pose a significant environmental concern. Two corrective actions were proposed however: these were; the recapping of all or part of the landfill and the restoration of the stream corridor. The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality concurred with the study and agreed to fund the corrective actions necessary, at no cost to the City, by utilizing the State Landfill Post Closure Trust Fund. This State cost will range of $1.5 million to $3.3 million depending upon options and techniques developed by the State. There has been significant public debate concerning the need for a community park beginning prior to September 9, 2002 when this issue was discussed before the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meeting. The public discussion continued through January and February 2004 when the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board discussed options on funding the purchase and development. These options rangedfrom the use of sales tax to property tax to selling off a part of the property to pay for the land needed for the Community Park through a public -private partnership. Through the late winter and spring the concept of the public -private partnership evolved until May 23`d when a Agenda Item Number request for proposals was issued seeking a private partner. The general focus of the request is as follows: Request for Proposals RFP 04-13 For Public - Private Partnership to facilitate the Acquisition and Development of a Community Park The City of Fayetteville is interested in partnering with a private developer or developers to facilitate the acquisition and development of a community park in southwest Fayetteville. The City of Fayetteville has purchase options to approximately 800 acres (formerly known as the Cummingss Farm) in southwest Fayetteville. This property is for the most part outside of the City Limits of Fayetteville and within the jurisdiction of Washington County. The majority of the land lies within the Greenland School District. A properly closed landfill is located on the site. Currently water supply is available at an adjacent storage facility and sewer service is available near Cato Springs and 1-540. Other utilities, if available, are only available along the southern perimeter. The exact boundary of the community park will be determined through negotiation and in conjunction with a mutually agreed upon development designer. The City of Fayetteville has publicly expressed a desire for a park to serve the community in this area. The City of Fayetteville Parks and Recreation Advisory Board have determined this location as the preferred location to serve this community need: Each proposer is expected to avail themselves to any and all public information concerning the City's desire for a community park. Each proposal must include • method of transferring property from owner/City/proposer, • methods in which the proposer prefers to address landfill issues • address how the proposer wishes to address the ability to provide appropriate sewage disposal facilities to the site described above • amount of acreage to be provided to the City fora Community Park Agenda Item Number • address how the proposer prefers to provide appropriate transportation access to the site described above • any additional payment to the City • any other items to be required of the City, • any additional issues that the proposer wishes to include within the proposal On June 9, 2004 two responses were opened. One was determined non -responsive by the Purchasing Agent and City Attorney. The second was evaluated and selected for negotiation. For the Council's information the non -responsive proposal was evaluated and compared to the responsive proposal. That comparison is attached. Since June 10th the staff has been in negotiation with SouthPass Development Company, L.L.C. in order to develop a contract which could be considered by the City Council. That contract is now ready for City Council consideration. DISCUSSION The following are the action steps contained within the contract which will result in the City obtaining 243 acres for a Community Park and an existing water tank storage site at no cost, $1,000,000 in cash, impact fees, and an approximate 560 acre development and resulting sales and property taxes. The Company's participation in this project is contingent upon the City obtaining all necessary permits, approvals, or other assurances demonstrating that the abandoned C & L Landfill area is not an environmental hazard. The following sets forth the obligations of the Company and the City: The Company will: a. Agree to purchase the entire approximate 800 acre property at a price not to .exceed $8,500 per acre (approximately $6,900,000) and b. contemporaneously with said acquisition in a manner acceptable to current property owner, the City and the Company, will deed to the City, without monetary consideration and free and clear of all liens or encumbrances, approximately 233 acres that the City shall use in connection with the development of a community park inclusive of baseball and soccer fields, related amenities and other park uses and c. contribute $1,000,000 in cash to the City in furtherance of the development of this community park contemporaneously with the City's contractual expenditure of funds within the Parks Development Fund and Parks Capital Improvement Program committed to Community Park Development initiating construction of the community park, and d. retain and fund to a maximum of$ 10,000, a mutually acceptable community master planning consultant that will identify and outline the usable land amounts and the highest and best uses of the property in harmony with a 233 acre community park. The City will subject to City Council approval: Agenda Item Number a. assist in facilitating the planning, zoning and other approval processes in accordance with a mutually acceptable master plan and b. annex the property into the City's boundaries and c. assist to the fullest extent possible with the Greenland School District and the Fayetteville School District to extend the Fayetteville School District boundary .to encompass the property and d. work with ADEQ to resolve all landfill issues using the State's landfill closure trust fund at no additional cost to the City or the Company and e. cost share all costs of extending sewer to the park in accordance with normal City of Fayetteville off -site cost share policies and practices and f. provide all other City utilities and services to the park in accordance with the City's normal off -site utility extension policies. BUDGET IMPACT The City of Fayetteville financial obligation is to participate in all normal off -site improvements required to service the community park and private development. The participation in the off -site improvement for sewer extension is specifically listed as this service is necessary to serve the community park. This cost share for sewer is 50% for both SouthPass and the City. Additional financial requirements are: 1. funding the perimeter survey of the property and the survey of the area to become the community park; estimated cost $50,000. 2. committing to fund the first phase of the park development in order to receive the $1,000,000 donation toward park improvements. 3. long term operation and maintenance of the community. park; the current operation and maintenance budget for Lewis Soccer Complex will be transferred to the Community Park as the Lewis Complex reverts back to University use. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Community Park Development Capital Project - Funding 2004/2005 Budgeted 2004 Parks Development Fund: 2250.9255.5200.00 $ 256 $ 2250.9255.5301.00 45 2250.9255.5314.00 51,300 .2250.9255.5806.00 531,049 582,650 Sales Tax Capital Improvements 4470.9470.5314.00 8150 4470.9470.5806.00 275,000 283,150 $ 865,800 $ Expenses Remaining 2004 2004 255$ 1$ 45 - 51,300 (0) 2,000 529,049 53,600 529,050 - 8,150 275,000 - 283,150 53,600 $ 812,200 $ Budgeted Total 2005 Available $ 1 (0) 473,000 1,002,049 473,000 1,002,050 8,150 338,000 613,000 338,000 621,150 811,000 $ 1,623,200 Proposed Community Park RFP 04-13 Comparisons of Developers "SouthPass" Project • Developer Purchases 800 Acres, and donates 233 acres to the City of Fayetteville • Developer invests $10,000 towards a Master Plan for the 800 acres • Developers Contribute $1,000,000 to the City of Fayetteville towards the Development of the Community Park • The City of Fayetteville must annex the property into the City limits and.the Fayetteville School District, zone the property to the specific needs as indicated by the Master Plan • The City of Fayetteville must resolve the Landfill and Environmental Issues • The City of Fayetteville and the Developers will cost -share the costs of providing sewer lines to the property. • Xhe City of Fayetteville must invest in the costs oSF ngineering, 4stallation of (9hfrastructure and utilities, project marketing, and building other necessary improvements. Tower Enterprise, LTD • The City of Fayetteville purchases the 800 acres • The City of Fayetteville retains the old land -fill, which is 33 acres • The City of Fayetteville would retain 00 acres for a community park, the acres of the city's choice. .. • Developers provides $3,500,000 to the City of Fayetteville towards the development • The City of Fayetteville sells 50 -acre parcels at a time to the Developer • The Development would be all residential houses, no commercial property • The 50 -acre parcels lots bought by the Developer would be pre -sold, and ready for title -transfer once final plat is approved - • The City of Fayetteville receives a proportionate share of the closing costs to each lot sold • Only 50 -acres of land are developed at a time, when land is pre -sold; once all 50 acres is developed, the developer would purchase another 50 -acres of land tjn the City of Fayetteville. If more than 50 acres of the land were pre -sold by the developer, than more than 50 -acres could be developed at a time • Developers responsible for all street improvements within area to be developed • City of Fayetteville invests in sewer lines to the land site • City of Fayetteville responsible for streets and roadways to the proposed property • City of Fayetteville would provide all utilities to site, but waive impact fees on each lot; all supplies to be purchased through the City of Fayetteville with no .sales tax • The City of Fayetteville gains 1,500 owner occupied affordable housing units Proposed Community Park REP 04-13 Proposal SouthPass Project Tower Enterprises, LTD Purchaser of Cummings Property Developer City of Fayetteville Initial City Expenditures $0.00 $3.5 million ($3.5 mil included) Donation to City for Comm. Park 233 Acres City Retains 300 Acres Money towards Development Master Plan $10,000 $0.00 Proposal SouthPass Project Tower Enterprises, LTD Cash for Community Park Devel. $1,000,000.00 $0.00 Landfill Responsibilty City of Fayetteville City of Fayetteville Cost Share Sewer Lines/City Infrastructure to Site Provides All Other Utilities City Pays All Cost of Utilities Length of City Involvement 1-2 Years (Planning Process) Market Dependent Proposal South Pass Project Tower Enterprises, LTD Timing for Land Acquisition Immediate Immediate Potential Profit for City (Lot Sales) $0.00 $0.00 (Break Even) Impact Fees Developer will Pay Waive Risk to City on Development Low High CD (1) ,. < Cl) v) D (f) 0 CD < 0 v C7 CD (D S v O (D (D CD Q) O o N 0 fn 0Co `� (n 0 O cn Q) (<D O CD n • O� 0 CD CD 0 N N U. W b9 N 3 W ~ O O W O 0 p O O O Q) O - O O nO N O O O o O O (D O o o° O n O O W O O (I ■ o0 0o w W m oo O ( o o .1 o Cn O o0 v•o 0 O + o O C o -' o U) cn O U) o CO O CCD l) m c 0 "SOUTHPASS" PRolE T COMMUNITY PARK & MASTER PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL SOLITHPASS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC (THE "DEVELOPER") COMPRISED OF A TEAM OF LOCAL DEVELOPERS AND PROFESSIONALS PROPOSES TO ENTER INTO A PRIVATE/PUBLIC VENTURE WITH THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE TO DESIGN A MASTER PLAN, ACQUIRE NECESSARY ACREAGE, PRESERVE APPROPRIATE NATURAL TERRAIN, PROVIDE CERTAIN FUNDS FOR A COMMUNITY PARK ALL ON APPROXIMATELY 800 ACRES HELD UNDER OPTION BY THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE (ON LAND FORMERLY KNOWN AS THE CUMMINGS FARM) IN SOUTHWEST FAYETTEVILLE. THIS RESPONSE TO RIP 04-13 SETS FORTH IN GENERAL TERMS THOSE CONDITIONS FOR THE ACQUISITIONAND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT. IT IS THE RESPONDENT'S INTENT UNDER. THIS PROPOSAL TO CREATE A MASTER - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WITH A COMMUNITY PARK AS THE CENTRAL FEATURE IN THE LAND PLANNING PROCESS. PRELIMINARY DESIGN IDEAS INCLUDE APPROXIMATELY 233 ACRES SET ASIDE FOR COMMUNITY PARK USE AND APPROXIMATELY 567 ACRES FOR MIXED USE NEIGHBORHOODS. AMENITIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT WILL INCLUDE THE COMMUNITY PARK, NATURE TRAILS, WATER FEATURES, MIXED USE LIVING WITH "LIGHT" RETAIL, AND A HARMONIOUS MIX OF THE BUILT AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENTS FROM THE INITIAL DEVELOPMENT STEPS, THE DEVELOPER WILL WORK IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY IN CREATING A LONG RANGE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MASTER PLAN. IT IS INITIALLY CONTEMPLATED THAT DESIGN WORKSHOP OZ ARCHITECTS WGM GROUP, INC. WILL BE RETAINED FOR THE LAND PLANNING AND DESIGN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES. THE COST FOR AN INITIAL LAND USE/CONCEPT MASTER PLAN WILL BE BOURNE BY THE DEVELOPER. THE FOLLOWING SETS FORTH THE DEVELOPER'S PROPOSED TERMS: John Nock Phone: 479-530-6799 One East Centa Sheet Suite #301 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Fax: 479-444-9775 johnnock(a�yahoo.com 1. DEVELOPER WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FUNDING $10,000 TOWARD AN INITIAL CONCEPT MASTER PLAN. THIS PLAN WOULD IDENTIFY AND OUTLINE USABLE LAND AMOUNTS AND THE HIGHEST AND BEST USES OF THE PROPERTY. THE DEVELOPER WOULD WORK DIRECTLY WITH THE PROJECT ARCHITECT AND CITY STAFF TO EFFECTIVELY DEVELOP. CONCEPT MASTER PLAN. 2. ASSUMING THAT AN APPROPRIATE MASTER PLAN CAN BE DEVELOPED, THE DEVELOPER WOULD. PROPOSE TO ACQUIRE THE LAND AT A PRICE /^ y NOT TO EXCEED $8,500 PER ACRE FOR ALL 800 ACRES (APPROXIMATELY $6,900,000). 3. CONTEMPORANEOUSLY WITH SAID ACQUISITION. THE DEVELOPER WOULD DEED TO THE CITY, WITHOUT CONSIDERATION AND FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL LIENS OR ENCUMBERANCES, APPROXIMATELY 213 ACRES THAT THE CITY MAY USE IN CONNECTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF A COMMUNITY PARK WITH RECREATIONAL FIELDS AND RELATED AMENITIES. 4. THE DEVELOPER WOULD PROPOSE TO CONTRIBUTE $1,000,000 IN ADDITIONAL CASH TO THE CITY IN FURTHERANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMMUNITY PARK ON THIS SITE. 5. IN EXCHANGE FOR THE FOREGOING, THE CITY WOULD ACTIVELY ASSIST IN FACILITATING THE PLANNING, ZONING AND OTHER APPROVAL. PROCESSES IN ACCORDANCE WITH A MUTUALLY ACCEPTABLE MASTER PLAN, ANNEX THE PROPERTY INTO THE CITY'S BOUNDARIES, ASSIST IN: - THE COORDINATION OF THE EXTENSION OF THE FAYETTEVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S BOUNDARIES TO ENCOMPASS THE PROPERTY, RESOLVE ALL' LANDFILL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPERTY, COST -SHARE THE EXTENSION OF SEWER LINES TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDE ALL OTHER CITY UTILITIES AND SERVICES TO THE DEVELOPMENT. 6. UPON COMPLETION OF THE FOREGOING THE DEVELOPER WOULD PURSUE A COURSE OF ACTION TO ACCOMPLISH THE DEVELOPMENT'S MASTER PLAN. ACTIONS WILL INCLUDE REQUIRED ENGINEERING, INSTALLATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE INCLUDING UTILITIES AND • ROADWAYS, PROJECT MARKETING AND THE BUILDING OF OTHER • NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS. IF THIS PROPOSAL MEETS WITH THE CITY'S INITIAL APPROVAL, THE DEVELOPER WILL IMMEDIATLEY ENGAGE THE SERVICES OF THE MASTER LAND PLANNER FOR THE CREATION OF A CONCEPT PLAN AND A LAND USAGE DETERMINATION. PrineipalConts ASSUMING ACCEPTABILITY, THE PROPOSAL AS OUTLINED HEREIN COULD BE IMPLEMENTED. DUE TO THE EXTENSIVE COORDINATION REQUIRED FROM John Nock UTILIZING A PUBLIC/PRIVATE "PARTNERSHIP" STRUCTURE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF Phone: 479-530-6799 ' THIS PROPOSAL ARE CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE ONLY AND SHOULD NOT SERVE TO Ones Center Street BIND THE CITY, THE DEVELOPER AR ANY OF ITS PRINCIPALS. Suite #301 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Fax: 479-444-9775 johnnockQyahoo.com "SOUTHPASS" PRowECT COMMUNITY PARK & MASTER PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD THIS PROPOSALS BMTTTED ON THE �H DAY OF vuE 2 dtF BY JOHN K, MANA ING MEMBER Sou PA LLC Principal Contact John Nock Phone: 479-530-6799 One East Center Street Suite #301 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Fax: 479-444-9775 1ohnnock@yahoo.com "SOUTHPASS" PKO_iECI COMMUNITY PARK & MASTER PLANNED NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT TEAM J • THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM INITIALLY SHALL CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING PERSONS: • JOHN NOCK RICHARD ALEXANDER ROB MERRY -SHIP KEITH ROBERTS • TIM COOPER • MITCHELL MASSEY • MORGAN HOOKER BRANDON BARBER HANK BROYLES HAL FORSYTHE Principal Contact: John Nock Phone: 479-530-6799 • One East Center Street •Suite #301 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Fax:479-444-9775 johnnock@yahoo.com City Council Minutes Regional/Community Park Discussion • August 17, 2004 September 07, 2004 City Council Meeting Minutes August 17, 2004 PRESENTATIONS: Regional/Community Park: Gary Dumas, Operations Director gave an overview of the proposed Regional/Community Park. Peggy Vice, Purchasing discussed the RFP process and the bids that were received on • the RFP. She stated two bids were received one. from SouthPass Development and one from Tower Enterprises. She reviewed the bids for compliance with the, proposal requirement. Tower's bid did not have a signature. She then spoke to the City Attorney Kit Williams about the Tower bid. I City Attorney Kit Williams: The Purchasing Officer, Peggy Vice, brought the bid over to my office and showed me the proposal which I had not seen before. The sixth content proposal requirement says signature of persons legally authorized to represent the proposal. There was no signature there, in fact the proposal was by Tower Enterprises, LTD and there was no indication that the individual that sent the proposal had any authority to act for that company. The other problem that was readily apparent in the proposal was the seventh content proposal requirement that says the successful proposer must post an irrevocable letter of credit or other comparable financial instrument that demonstrates the proposer has the funds on hand or funds available to close the land transaction. If you looked at the proposal the proposal was that the city buy the property and then he would be in partnership with the city. I think there were two major reasons why this proposal was not responsive to what the city had requested. I agreed with Peggy. She showed me the regulation in procurement, Regulation R719 -11-229B4, which stipulates, only signed sealed bids delivered prior to date and time of bid opening shall be accepted. I agreed with Peggy at that point in time that this proposal had not been responsive and could not be properly considered by the city. Alderman Rhoads: Have there been any other similar situations like that and if so how did we handle them? Peggy Vice: No, we have never accepted a proposal or an RFP without a signature. Kit Williams: There was a similar one when the Dickson Enhancement Project was being bid we had several bids from various construction companies. One of the construction companies, which would have had the lowest bid, had not signed a particular form required. There were federal funds involved, therefore we were told by our consultant and I agreed with him that we could not consider that bid. It would have been illegal for the city to do it; therefore we did not consider that bid and awarded the contract to the next lower bidder. Gary Dumas went through the two proposals and the differences in the proposals. Mayor Coody: This has been very informative. Thank you very much. Alderman Jordan: I am curious about the million dollar match. Do we have to come up with one million to get the million dollar match, is that correct? Gary Dumas: That is correct. Alderman Jordan: Where is that money coming from? Gary Dumas: Currently in the existing 2004 CIP there is about $800,000 already identified for community park development. Next year in the amount of $850,000 or $865,000 is also proposed for a community park. So in January there will be a little over $1.6 million already committed to the community park. Mayor Coody: Actually the match or our portion will be between $1.5 and $2 million dollars. We haven't finalized that. They have asked for $2 million dollars of our money to match their one million. We are in conservations about his right now, if we can cut a deal to where our part of the match is $1.5 million dollars and then they would put their million in, that means we could match it in January or early next year. If our match is $2 million it would just take a little bit longer but'we would come up with that over time. Alderman Jordan: You are saying this is coming out of capital improvements? Gary Dumas: No HMR, there are HMR funds committed currently in the CIP for the community park. Alderman Marr: When did that match become a condition because the bids that we received in our box, I don't remember a 2 to 1 or a I for I match in the document. Gary Dumas: In the development of the letter of intent the developers are interested; I think they want the park developed to assist in the sale of their property. Alderman Marr: Was that a requirement of their bid? Gary Dumas: In the development of the letter of intent they have requested that the match be there just so they can be assured that the million dollars that they provide will go to the community park instead of some other city activity. Alderman Marr: The bid that responded did not have that requirement in it? Gary Dumas: No. Peggy Vice: Normally on RFP's when you do a request for proposal you take proposals and then you take the best proposal that meets your requirements and then you negotiate a contract from there. You often do change what has been submitted. Alderman Jordan: In the other proposal, if I understand it correctly, the city would have to put up the money and basically become the banker. Gary Dumas: Yes, the city would have to buy the property out right on the front end. Alderman Jordan: What would happen if the developer could not deliver on what he said he was going to do? Mayor Coody: I don't know, Kit what do you think would happen? Kit Williams: I guess we would have a lot of property. Gary Dumas: Then we would have to seek another private developer,l'm sure. Mayor Coody: Thank you very much. City Council Meeting Minutes September 7, 2004. NEW BUSINESS: SouthPass Development Company Purchase Option Transfer: A resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with SouthPass Development Company to accept 200 acres of park land, a 10 acre water tank site, one million dollars for park land development and other consideration for the City's acceptance of ownership of a 33 acre landfill. Mayor Coody explained that this is only a resolution. There are some contingencies and the contract is not being signed tonight. Alderman Lucas asked if the City is going to spend money to survey the property before everything has been settled. Gary Dumas: The City will be responsible for surveying the 200 acre park once the developer has retained their master planning consultant, working with the City to define what the perimeter will be. The City will also be responsible at some point to cover the survey expenses for the 800 acre parcel. Alderman Lucas: That being the case, if the Greenland School District does not agree to allow the parcel to be transferred to the Fayetteville School District, would the developer not have to give the City the $1 million for the park and we wouldn't get the 200 acres? Gary Dumas: The City would want to wait to do the surveying until some of those earlier contingencies are resolved. Alderman Lucas said so we won't spend any money until those contingencies are resolved is that the game plan? She thinks this is a wonderful idea, Ward 4 needs a park and it would be good for the City, but she is concerned about the school district issue and that that issue may keep us from getting the property for the park. Gary Dumas: The school district issue is a major issue and the developers are well aware of that. The City won't go forward until that is resolved. Alderman Rhoads said he thought he was hearing two different things. He asked if the City will survey. Gary Dumas: The City will be responsible for the survey, which will cost something less that $50,000. Alderman Rhoads asked if the City can waive contingencies. Kit Williams: The City and the developer can mutually do that, but this is basically the developer's requirement not the City's so it would be up to the developer. Alderman Reynolds asked if the City is going to make any move on the project before we find out if we will be getting the $1.5 to $3.5 million cleanup fee from ADEQ. Gary Dumas: Staff has been in contact with ADEQ today and they indicated that funding is available and there would be no requirement for either the City or the property owner to refund the post closure trust fund. However they have indicated that they will not provide that assurance to us, as a third party, in writing. They explained that their legal counsel is the legal Counsel for ADEQ and not for the property owner or for the City. The City Attorney will be in contact with them and we may have more information later. Kit Williams said he plans to write to their legal counsel with his interpretation of what the statute means in the matter of whether or not the City or the owner would have to repay the $1.5 to $3.5. million. He said that his interpretation is that we would not have to repay the amount but he. wants to make sure that ADEQ's legal counsel agrees to that in writing before the City goes forward. He thinks they will respond. If they do not, he recommends that the City ask for an opinion from the Attorney General. Alderman Cook had several constituents ask him about the landfill. He asked for information about the current situation with the landfill, what the corrective actions will be and whether the City might be liable in the future if something comes up that we don't foresee at this time. Gary Dumas: ADEQ will be preparing a plan for what the remedial action will be for the landfill. The early indications in the Terracon report were that corrections would be made along the stream that runs through the landfill and a recapping. The magnitude of that recapping is something that ADEQ will have to determine. The remediation to the creek could be some type of channelization or a rerouting of the creek around the landfill: ADEQ's specialists will have to determine how they want to spend the money. Mayor Coody said that the running water is not so much a creek as it is wet weather drainage. Kit Williams: One of the things the City is bringing to the table in this agreement is potential future liability for this landfill. I hope the city will never face that though we may face it even without the agreement since it is City of Fayetteville trash in the landfill. At this point it looks like the Post Closure Trust Fund will be able to pay for the entire fix and not have to come back to the City to get money back. I want to make sure of that before I say more. The developers don't want to own the landfill. The proper owner for the landfill would be the government because we can do the best job of making sure it continues to not be a threat to the community. I believe this is one of the major things the City brings to the table with this agreement and it is why we are getting 200 acres for free and $1 million for the park. The landfill was only open a couple of years and was closed in 1976, for the last 28 years it has been silting there and -now needs remediation. I can't say that more remediation might not be necessary in another 30 years and I can't say who would be responsible for that remediation at that point. Alderman Cook: The Terracon report did not say anything negative; it sounded fairly good.' Gary Dumas: The only material in the landfill is normal municipal garbage and they found no indication of anything more there. Since it has been fairly stable this far and if the State does corrective actions at this time, there is a likelihood that there will be no other action required. But there is also the possibility that there could be some methane gas or other issues that would have to be dealt with just as with any landfill. Alderman Cook has also been asked what will happen to the rest of the parks system if this amount of money is used on this park. Gary Dumas: This will be a major addition to the parks system and with any major addition of any infrastructure element, whether it's new subdivisions and streets or police and fire there is going to be a cost. The initial revenue that has been identified would be the revenue that is currently spent for maintenance of the Lewis Soccer Complex. That money will be available for transition when the complex is returned to its current owner. There will be other funding issues that will have to be addressed as the park is developed through the various stages over the next 4 to 7 years. Mayor Coody: Where would the funds come from the Park Development Fund? Gary Dumas: Park Development funds will probably not be sufficient to develop the park completely in the 4-7 years timeframe. The operational and maintenance funds cannot come from Parks Development. Mayor Coody: But if we had a ten year time span, it would be easier to absorb over time. The other factor is this would be able to handle regional competition and would generate income. Alderman Cook asked if the City is still in a match situation if we get $1 million will we have to match that with $1 million. Gary Dumas: The contract as written says we will spend what is available in the Parks Development Fund through 2005. In the currently adopted CIP for 2004-2008 $1.62 million is in this fund right now. There will be some expenditure from that, probably around $50,000 for the survey. Alderman Cook: So we are dedicating $1.62 million dollars not just a million dollar match we are dedicating $1.62 million? Gary Dumas: It is money that is already in the adopted CIP. Mayor Coody opened the floor for public comment, asking that comments be kept brief so that all would be allowed to speak. He encouraged civility from all parties. Sharon Davidson stated that she is in favor of a community park and thinks that the Cummings property is a good piece of property for a lot of reasons. However, she asked the Council to not move forward with this particular SouthPass proposal. She does not believe this is the appropriate way to go with this developer. She does not want to use Wilson Springs money for roads and suggested using the money instead to purchase this property. She feels the whole process has been tainted and spoke of her concerns about the bid process and how she feels it has been handled. Spencer Scarborough a lifelong resident of Fayetteville and asked the Council to do what it takes to get a community park like this. He thinks this proposal is a win -win situation. Fie feels this will increase property value on the land, which will bring more taxes into the schools. The creation of the park itself will benefit the health of both youth and adults. Bill Ackerman encouraged the Council to afford this project due diligence but feels they should take advantage of this proposal. He said that the opportunity to get 200 acres in one tract located as well as this tract is located is almost impossible. He served several years on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board and they never had an opportunity to acquire this kind of tract of land. If 200 acres had become available, the cost would probably have been cost prohibitive. He. feels that partnering with someone under these favorable conditions is a win -win situation for the City, State and the community as a whole and it is important to take advantage of the opportunity. Kathy McGuire-Bouwman a citizen watchdog she feels that most citizens would not know what is going on from the way the resolution is worded. She feels the resolution should say "would we like a park in exchange for a south side school surrounded by 500 acres of new housing development as well as the infrastructure needs that go with that." She also questioned the legality of something she read in the paper that said the parks board had spent several hundred dollars in postage asking families of youth soccer players to attend this meeting tonight. She said there are people who don't think it is an advantage to have a million new cars coming into our quiet town for these mega -sports events. There are two sides to this and though she isn't sure whether she is for the park,or not, she feels both sides should be heard. Linda Ralston asked when it was decided that we needed a huge community park. Mayor Coody: In 2001 the City completed the Lose & Associates Parks Master Plan for the entire city. One of the top recommendations was a large multi -use park for consolidated sports fields, etc. This master plan came after many public meetings and a lot of public input. Linda Ralston said she is concerned about this park, particularly because she doesn't believe the public has been told enough about what is going on. She questioned whether a school will be included in the plan. She asked what the term "other consideration" in the resolution really means. Kit Williams: The term includes all the contingencies in the plan. He didn't want to put all the contingencies in the resolution because it would make the title too long. If the Council passes this resolution tonight, they will be authorizing the Mayor to sign the contract. However, the contract has at least five contingencies before it is really effective and can get under way. The first contingency is approval of a Master Plan for the entire 800 acres. This Master Plan must be approved not only by the developers but also by the City Council, at that point in time the Council and the public will know exactly how this land will be developed. Mayor Coody said he doesn't believe that the question of moving this property into the Fayetteville school district has the intent of building a school out there. He said he thinks the developers want the property in the Fayetteville school district because it is easier to - sell homes in that school district than it is in the Greenland school district. If the school system wants to build out there, that will be between them and the developers. Donna Williams indicated that she is for any kind of reasonable plan that will continue to grow the parks system in this area. Jerry Patton said this is a great idea and encouraged the Council to carry on with it. There has been tremendous growth in Fayetteville and the region and that growth will continue. We need a great community park. The planning and vision that have brought the City to this point are good. He encouraged the Council to pass the resolution and make this a reality. Phillip Watson, president of the local Ultimate Club said he feels good points have been made tonight. He particularly agrees with the point that 200 acres of parkland all together in one area is a huge bonus for the City. He and his organization are in support of this project. Barbara Moorman: Stated she has nothing to say against the idea of a park but feels it is wrong for the Parks Board to lobby for this particular arrangement. She disagreed with the term "gift" on a brochure sent out to members of the public; she said this is not a gift. The City will be taking on a huge liability and will make the taxpayers pay for it. She said the landfill study uses terms such as "not a significant environmental concern at this time" and "appears to be confined" and "evidence of potential impact is not definitive". When ADEQ talks of remediation, they are talking about recapping and channelizing the creek, not diverting it. She feels they are not doing what might be the best way to remediate and are trying to do it for somewhere between $1.5 million and $3.5 million. She says the City is doing the property owner and developer a huge unnecessary favor by relieving them of this liability. She questioned how much property would actually be annexed with this project. Mayor Coody: The total property is about 800 acres, some of that is already in the city. leaving about 500 acres to be annexed. This is just an estimate. !Barbara Moorman said the City is committing themselves to a large subdivision and all the cost of roads, sewer, etc. She feels that if this resolution is approved, the rest of the process will just be de -facto. She questioned if this developer has anything in his past that has been successfully completed. She discussed her perception of what the Council will be agreeing to with this resolution. She urged the Council to table this item until they have something to vote on that gets as much as it gives away. Mayor Coody clarified that the Post Closure Trust Fund is made up of a portion of the fees collected when cities or individuals take loads of waste to a landfill. This is the money that is earmarked to clean up the landfill. Fran Alexander asked if the public is going to receive an outline of hearings and discussions that will take place about this park. When can the public ask questions? She questioned whether 200 acres would really be enough land to incorporate all the ball fields and still be a true community park. She wondered if the City will have outgrown the park by the time it is developed. She again asked what the process is for the public. Mayor Coody: In the Lose and Associates study they stated that the City would need 110 to 150 acres. This is 200 acres so that should provide for some expansion. This will not be just ball fields but a multitude of uses, some passive and some active. Susan Porter asked how the quadrants are established and what the boundaries are on the southwest quadrant of the parks. Connie Edmonston, Director of Parks & Recreation said that several years ago the City was divided into four quadrants. Highway. 71 basically divides the east from the west and Highway 16 East and 16 West basically divide the north and the south quadrants. This was determined years ago while developing the Master Plan and working on impact fees. Susan Porter said she likes parks and voted for the HMR tax. She had several concerns including the sprawl being promoted by annexing land outside the City limits and questioned why such a large area is being discussed. She also questioned whether citizens in this quadrant would like to see the City annex 800 acres and build infrastructure for it for a park outside the city limits. She questioned whether the City really needs 200 more acres of parks, according to the Lose & Associates study; Fayetteville ranks high in acreage in the parks system. She reviewed some of the information from the Lose and Associates Master Plan and the needs outlined in that study. She reviewed the definitions used in the Lose & Associates study of the different types of parks as set forth by the National Recreation and Parks Association, which define a "community park" as 20 to 50 acres and a "regional park" as 50 to 250 acres. She stated that we are talking about a regional park here, not a community park. She said she has not seen anything that defines the operational costs of this proposed park and is concerned about how much that will be. She wondered why the acreage around the new wastewater treatment plant couldn't be used for the community park. She feels more public input and discussion is needed on this and she encouraged the Council to look again at the Master Plan that has already been approved. Mayor Coody apologized for calling this a community park instead of a regional park. Phil a resident from Ward 2 said he finds it painful to sit and listen for an extended period of time to public input and suggested the Council set a time limit for each speaker so the comments will be more focused. Wade Coldwell, Chair of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board said the Board has worked for the past two years looking at all these issues. He questioned why annexation of an undeveloped area has become an issue. He said the Parks Board was fully aware that there is a landfill on the property and they have been going after the funds to clean it up. The City needs the parks space to meet the growing needs of the community. He also sees this as a business deal, giving the City what it needs and wants. He feels the Mayor has been wise in the way he has handled it. Tom Howard said he has coached children for 30 years in soccer, baseball, etc. He said he appreciates everybody's comments. He said some children don't get the opportunity to play sports because their parents don't have the time to drive to separate fields for different children. He thinks it is important to have a central area for these sports so people can drive to one area for all sports. He thinks the City needs a community park and feels the opportunity to play sports is invaluable to the children and families. Melissa Terry: Stated the wet weather drainage, going through the Cummins property is Cato Springs Branch, which is at the headwaters of Town Branch watershed, which drains into the west fork of the White River. She works as a conservation organizer for Audubon Arkansas and asked that the City consider working with her group on this issue if the project gets to the place where channelizing or moving the creek is being considered. Dorothy; Neely because of her background as an environmental consultant and because this acreage was previously a City landfill, she asked if an in-depth environmental assessment is included in the contingencies for this property. Mayor Coody said Terracon did an environmental assessment and the report stated that the landfill was not a real environmental problem. He said a copy, of the study is available for anyone who wishes to see it. He asked Ms. Neely, considering her background, if she felt it was better to walk away from a landfill site such as this or to do remedial work. Dorothy Neely said she thought remediation and stabilization of the surface with vegetation would be best. She said she would prefer vegetation rather than pavement. She said concerns with the watershed need to be addressed. Connie Edmonston, Director of Parks & Recreation corrected something she said earlier: the division line for the east and west quadrants of the parks system are actually Highway 16 West to Old Wire Road when you cross Highway 71. She stated that her division has been workingon many of the projects outlined in the Parks Master Plan including opening playgrounds, establishment of new neighborhood parks, new trails and ADA compliance. The community park is just one of the items her division and the City believe is very important. They have looked at and evaluated 18 different sites for the park and this was chosen as the best site due to location and usable land. They will need 115 acres for current needs for active sports. The remaining acreage would be used for passive recreation. The soccer, baseball & softball programs are exploding with over 5000 participants in baseball/softball and 1300 kids playing soccer. The City believes that obtaining this property would help meet those needs as well as help us to be good environmental stewards of our land. It would reduce the traffic of families. traveling from park to park for different games and also the travel of maintenance crews between the different locations. Alderman Thiel said she thinks there has been some confusion regarding the term used to describe the park. In the Master Plan the term "multi -sports complex" was what people identified with and changing the verbage makes it more difficult to follow the support that was gathered during the creation of the Master Plan. This is not necessarily a community park; it will be a regional park if it is the size being discussed. She asked for clarification from Connie about the actual amount of parkland in the City, minus the lake and water areas. Connie Edmonston: We have 795 acres of water in the parks system. The total acreage is around 3,300 making about 2800. acres of actual parkland. Much of the land is nature preservation and not usable for active sports. Alderman Jordan asked how many acres are in Finger Park. Connie Edmonston: FingerPark is between 19 and 21 acres. Alderman Jordan: Is that the largest park in Ward 4? Connie Edmonston: Yes. That is by far the largest. Alderman Jordan: What else would be in this community/regional park besides soccer and baseball fields? Will there be picnic tables, playground equipment etc. that would allow a family to go and have a barbeque and family outing? Connie Edmonston: Parks has a map that outlines the active and passive usage of the Cummins property. They are looking at soccer, baseball, softball, ultimate Frisbee, tennis, disc golf, an amphitheater, trails, a pavilion and maybe some kind of water feature. All of this would be determined following many public meetings to determine the public's demands for the park, 115 acres of the 200 acres will be for active use, the remainder will be for passive use. i Mayor Coody: That doesn't include what the surrounding development will give up as far as trails, bluff areas, preserved areas, etc. outside the 200 acres that will be used by the public. Connie Edmonston said of the 18 sites her division evaluated during their search, three have already been sold. Large tracts of land are difficult to find within the City and they are going fast. She believes this is the premier spot for the park, the land is very usable; the hillside is being preserved, there are many pluses to this property. Jim Bemis said he is not proud of the City's parks system west•of 1-540. Between Highway 112 and the Cummins property there is nothing for the people living in that area. He is not against a park in this area but would rather see four community parks stretched between Highway 112 and this property rather than 200 acres in one park. Mayor Coody closed the discussion to public comment opened the floor to the Council. Alderman Thiel said she appreciated the comments being made. When she was on the Parks Board they had looked at this issue and hired Lose and Associates and she went to almost all the public meetings. One of the concerns of the parents during this process was that they wanted to have one place they could take their children of various ages participating in different sports without having to drive them all around town. That was one of the original motivations for the discussion of a multi -sports complex. The baseball fields in Walker Park are worn out; we'll have to do something about the soccer fields. Something will have to be done to accommodate the desires of the parents who have children who want to play in these activities. She likes the location and thinks Parks worked diligently to find a location that met all the criteria. It serves Ward 4,. which does not have a large park and it is very accessible. One of the advantages of the athletic or sports complex side of parks is that it helps pay for itself. The passive parks don't pay for themselves and are costly to keep maintained. This location also offers the opportunity for the City to do something about a landfill that really does need to be addressed. She says she supports this with the exception of the resolution of the landfill issue and the school district issue, those are big concerns. She understands that the City won't be expending any funds toward this until those two issues are a little bit more resolved. Alderman Cook spoke of his concerns that the park may take too much money and he is concerned about the remainder of the parks system. He is concerned about other financial needs of the City. He is nervous about the landfill issue and wants to make sure we know exactly which land we will get in the area. The positive side is that it is a great site with a great view of town'and 1-540 access. He struggles with comments about the park being on the edge of town. You can't find this much land in town so it would have to be on the edge of town: Economic development is also a positive; there is no question that we will draw events to a park like this. The City does need the facility. It will provide areas for sports we don't have room for now as well as passive activities. He thinks the positives outweigh the negatives on this but remains a little nervous. Alderman Jordan said his concern is that he hasn't received any information about what is going to go in to the old Lewis Soccer Complex over by the Asbell neighborhood. Hugh Earnest said he will be meeting with the U of A regarding this. The only thing he knows at this time is that several years ago a general comment was made that married student housing might go in there. He doesn't think anything has been designed as far as type of housing but he will check into it and get some information. Alderman Jordan stated he does have concerns about the western part of town not having any sort of park and he thinks this park would provide something desperately needed in that part of town. He doesn't really like the location and will have some strong concerns about the development that goes in there. Alderman Marr said during the process of campaigning and talking with citizens and questioning them about their concerns he has realized that no matter how much is done to make sure citizens understand what is happening, it is not enough. He spoke of how long this issue has been going on. He thinks many good questions have been asked tonight. He sees huge economic opportunities associated with this and feels it is an avenue to maintenance of livability and quality of life in the City of Fayetteville. His biggest concern is not having enough resources left over for neighborhood parks. He thinks both are needed and feels it is the job of the Council to make sure that both are made available. This discussion. is about whether to explore the possibility of a community park not that we are choosing that over neighborhood parks. He feels this is worth the investment, not at the expense of everything else, but it is worth pursuing. Mayor Coody said he feels this is a historic opportunity. If the City walks away from this opportunity to pick up this amount of acreage now, it could be walking away from it for a long time, a better opportunity may never come up. It may not be perfect but he feels it is good. This is not an "either/or" situation where a community park is being chosen over neighborhood parks. The neighborhood parks will come in. He feels if the City does not take advantage of this opportunity it will be shortchanging itself now and in future generations. Alderman Thiel moved to approve the resolution. Alderman Jordan seconded the motion: Upon roll call the resolution passed unanimously. Resolution 138-04 as Recorded in the Office of the City Clerk. Addt'1 Documents Boundary Survey Approval & Contract Landfill Warranty Deed Information Ron Petrie Submitted By City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form City Council Agenda Items or Contracts N/A City Council Meeting Date Engineering Division S:;ANNE®s ei1c.aI Pub` istt Operations .y , Department Action Required: Approval of a contract with Critical Path Design, Inc. for a boundary survey for the Southpass property. $19,950.00 Cost of this request 4470.9470.5315 Account Number 02002.10 Project Number 3udgeted Item I n l )epartment erector $ 1,622,936.00 Category/Project Budget Funds Used to Date Community Park Development Program Category / Project Name Parks & Recreation Improvements Program / Project Category Name $ 1,622,936.00 I I Sales Tax Capital Improvements Remaining Balance Fund Name Budget Adjustment Attached �J . Jo z/ -o3 '_._i Ordinance or Resolution # �4. 4 Date Original Contract Date: TI:) EI1) (c // Original Contract Number: ity Attorn� �d1Z y/3 Received in City Clerk's Office =inanc a e G r �� l Service Director Date �^"' Received in Mayor's Office E1ITEREU /( t raZ7O<° 2 I Aayo Date :omments: THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS To: Mayor Dan Coody Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operatioty� From: Ron Petrie, City Engineer Date: October 10, 2005 Subject: Southpass Surveying Contract RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of a contract with Critical Path Design, Inc. in the amount of $19,950.00 to provide a boundary survey for the Southpass Park. BACKGROUND On July 7, 2004 the City Council approved a resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute an agreement with Southpass Development Company to accept. 200 acres of park land, a 10 acre water tank site, one million dollars and other considerations for the City's acceptance of ownership of a 33 acre landfill. At this time a boundary survey is needed for the site. Critical Path Design, Inc. was selected for this project by an engineering selection committee on September 15, 2005. They have submitted a contract to the City that covers the items necessary for this survey project. BUDGET IMPACT Community Park (Project #02002.10) will be charged the $19,950.00 required for these services. 113 WEST MOUNTAIN 72701 479-521-7700 FAX 479-575-8257 REQUEST FOR VENDOR FILE MAINTENANCE (CHECK ALL AVAILABLE RESOURCES, VENDOR LIST, ACCESS SYSTEM PRIOR TO SUBMISSION OF THIS REQUEST) DATE OF REQUEST: 10/18/05 REQUESTED BY: Matt Casey, 21.19 DEPT./DIVISION: Operations/Engineering EFFECTIVE DATE: ASAP TELEPHONE EXTENSION: 429 NEW VENDOR: I / I VENDOR CHANGE: VENDOR #: VENDOR NAME: Critical Path Design, Inc. STREET OR P.O. BOX: 21 W. Mountain CITY: Fayetteville STATE: AR ATT : Clay Grote - E -Mail clay(a�cpcmi.com REMITTANCE ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE: NAME: ADDRESS: CITY, ST, ZIP: VENDOR RE-ENTRY: VENDOR #: ZIP CODE: 72701 PHONE: 527-0055 Fax # 527-2798 TYPE OF ORGANI2ATION 200902542 CORPORATION (100): FEDERAL ID PARTNERSHIP (2001: I OR INDIVIDUAL (3001: I SOCIAL EMPLOYEE (4001: l I PENSION (5001: I NON-PROFIT (6001:.1 PURCHASING OFFICE USE ONLY NEW VENDOR: ENTERED BY: VENDOR CHANGES: DATE: VENDOR RE-ENTRY: G. L. FILE: W-9 FORM MAILED: INVENTORY FILE: SHORT FORM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THIS IS AN AGREEMENT effective as of September 28, 2005 City of Fayetteville and Critical Path Design, Inc. ("Effective Date") between ("Owner") ("Engineer") Engineer agrees to provide the services described below to Owner for "Southpass" ("Project"). Description of Engineer's Services: Services include a boundary survey for approximately 800 acres located south of The City of Fayetteville. The subject property is also known as "Southpass". Owner and Engineer further agree as follows: 1.01 Basic Agreement A. Engineer shall provide, or cause to be provided, the services set forth in this Agreement, and Owner shall pay Engineer for such Services as set forth in Paragraph 9.01. 2.01 Payment Procedures • A. Preparation of Invoices. Engineer will prepare a monthly invoice m. accordance with Engineer's standard invoicing practices and submit the invoice to Owner. B. Payment of Invoices. Invoices are due and payable within 30 days of receipt. If Owner fails to make any payment due Engineer for services and expenses within 30 days after receipt of Engineer's invoice, the amounts due Engineer will be increased at the rate of 1.0% per month (or the maximum rate of interest permitted by law, if less) from said thirtieth day. In addition, Engineer may, without liability, after giving seven days written notice to Owner, suspend services under this Agreement until Engineer has been paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses, and other related charges. Payments will be credited first to interest and then to principal. 3.01 Additional Services A. If authorized by Owner, or if required because of changes in the Project, Engineer shall furnish services in addition to those set forth above. B. Owner shall pay Engineer for such additional services as follows: For additional services of Engineer's employees engaged directly on the Project an amount equal to the cumulative hours charged to the Project by each class of Engineer's employees times standard hourly rates for each applicable billing class; plus reimbursable expenses and Engineer's consultants' charges, if any. 4.01 Termination A. The obligation to provide further services under this Agreement may be terminated: I. For cause, a. By either party upon 30 days written notice in the event of substantial failure by the other party to perform in accordance with the Agreement's terms through no fault of the terminating party. b. By Engineer: 1) upon seven days written notice if Engineer believes that Engineer is being requested by Owner to furnish or perform services contrary to Engineer's responsibilities as a licensed professional; or 2) upon seven days written notice if the Engineer's services for the Project are delayed or suspended for more than 90 days for reasons beyond Engineer's control. 3) Engineer shall have no liability to Owner on account of such termination. l of4 EJCDC E-520 Short Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services Copyright 0 2002 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved. c. NotwithstandinL Je foregoing, this Agreement will not terminate as a result of a substantial failure under paragraph 4.01.A.1.a if the party receiving such notice begins, within seven days of receipt of such notice, to correct its failure and proceeds diligently to cure such failure within no more than 30 days of receipt of notice; provided, however, that if and to the extent such substantial failure cannot be reasonably cured within such 30 day period, and if such party has diligently attempted to cure the same and thereafter continues diligently to cure the same, then the cure period provided for herein shall extend up to, but in no case more than, 60 days after the date of receipt of the notice. 2. For convenience, by Owner effective upon the receipt of notice by Engineer. B. The terminating party under paragraphs 4.01.A.1 or 4.01.A.2 may set the effective date of termination at a time up to 30 days later than otherwise provided to allow Engineer to demobilize personnel and equipment from the Project site, to complete tasks whose value would otherwise be lost, to prepare notes as to the status of completed and uncompleted tasks, and to assemble Project materials in orderly files. 5.01 Controlling Law A. This Agreement is to be governed by the law of the state in which the Project is located. 6.01 Successors, Assigns, and Beneficiaries A. Owner and Engineer each is hereby bound and the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and legal representatives of Owner and Engineer (and to the extent permitted by paragraph 6.01.B the assigns of Owner and Engineer) are hereby bound to the other •party to this Agreement and to the partners, successors, executors, administrators, and legal•representatives (and said assigns) of such other party, in respect of all covenants, agreements, and obligations of this Agreement. B. Neither Owner nor Engineer may assign, sublet, or transfer any rights under or interest (including, but without limitation, moneys that are due or may become due) in this Agreement without the written consent of the other, except to the extent that any assignment, subletting, or transfer is mandated or restricted by law. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. 7.01 General Considerations A. The standard of care for all professional engineering and related services performed or furnished by Engineer under this Agreement will be the care and skill ordinarily used by members of the subject profession practicing under similar •circumstances at the same time and in the same locality. Engineer makes no warranties, express or implied, under this Agreement or otherwise, in connection with Engineer's services. Engineer and its consultants may use or rely upon the design services o. Aers, including, but not limited to, contractors, manufacturers, and suppliers. B. Engineer shall not at any time supervise, direct, or have control over any contractor's work, nor shall Engineer have authority over or responsibility for the means, methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected or used by any contractor, for safety precautions and programs incident to a contractor's work progress, nor for any failure of any contractor to comply with laws and regulations applicable to contractor's work. C. Engineer neither guarantees the performance of any contractor nor assumes responsibility for any contractor's failure to furnish and perform its work in accordance with the contract between Owner and such contractor. D. Engineer shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any contractor, subcontractor, or supplier, or of any contractor's agents or employees or any other persons (except Engineer's own employees) at the Project site or otherwise furnishing or performing any of construction work, or for any decision made on interpretations or clarifications of the construction contract given by Owner without consultation and advice of Engineer. E. The general conditions for any construction contract documents prepared hereunder are to be the "Standard General Conditions of the Construction Contract" as prepared by the Engineers Joint Contract Documents Committee (No. C-700, 2002 Edition). F. All design documents prepared or furnished by Engineer are instruments of service, and Engineer retains an ownership and property interest (including the, copyright and the right of reuse) in such documents, whether or not the Project is completed. G. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Owner and Engineer (1) waive against each other, and the other's employees, officers, directors, agents, insurers, partners, and consultants, any and all claims for or entitlement to special, incidental, indirect, or consequential damages arising out of, resulting from, or in any way related to the Project, and (2) agree that Engineer's total liability to Owner under this Agreement shall be limited to $50,000 or the total amount of compensation received by Engineer, whichever is greater. H. The parties acknowledge that Engineer's scope of services does not include any services related to a Hazardous Environmental Condition (the presence of asbestos,. PCBs, petroleum, hazardous substances or waste, and radioactive materials). If Engineer or any other party encounters a Hazardous Environmental Condition, Engineer may, at its option and without liability for consequential or any other damages, suspend performance of services on the portion of the Project affected thereby until Owner: (i) retains appropriate specialist consultants or contractors to.identify and, as appropriate, abate, remediate, or remove the Hazardous Environmental Condition; and (iii) warrants that the Site is in full compliance with applicable Laws and Regulations. 2 of4 1 EJCDC E-520 Short Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services Copyright a 2002 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. An rights reserved. 8.01 Total Agreement A. This Agreement (consisting of pages 1 to 4 inclusive together with any expressly incorporated appendix), constitutes the entire agreement between Owner and Engineer and supersedes all prior written or oral understandings. This Agreement may only be amended, supplemented, modified, or canceled by a duly executed written instrument. 3 of4 EJCDC E•520 Short Form of Agreement Between Owner and Engineer for Professional Services Copyright 0 2002 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved, 9.01 Payment (Lump Sum Basis) Using the procedures set forth in paragraph 2.01, Owner shall pay Engineer as.follows: 1. A Lump Sum amount of $ 19,950.00 • IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, the Effective Date of which is indicated on page 1. OWNER: City Fayetteville By: (&4 Title: C Date Signed: Address for giving notices: 13 W, M pu.n Ta 11`t rtAj04ft.v111,, AR 7cfl01 ENGINEER: Critical Path Design, Inc. By: Title: flr& .pa / Date Signed: T/"/0!6 License or Certificate No. and State 1154 AR Address for giving notices: 21 West Mountain, Ste 121 Fayetteville, AR 72701 r 4 of4 (Lump Sum NJCDC E-520 Short Form of Agreement Between Basis) Ownerand Engineer for Professional Services Copyright n 2002 National Society of Professional Engineers for EJCDC. All rights reserved. o v a 0 0 o m 0 N 3 0 J S J m n 10 m N N 0 C0 N m C, 0 C m O a. C m N N d J 0 m N J b } m 0 m 0 0 m C, O l O 0 c g m m u J m Co e -I - O) m J • m 0 0 -1 -1 (n o w C y^ x 0 0 U 4. M J a PCD CD N ma O O O O o O CO W V O) N a (J 0 (n 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 w 0 0' 0 w 0 (A 0 0 0 O 0 a 0 O 0 O 0 O o O c O o O 0 O m.,m m a 3 �.p r n ,..: N •O m 0 Y'! I. jf 'm o N � y SY <. C_ > m c " Ar O • a N %]'J • Co J K C 2 . T NiT:' a(fA( pCD O — l m .'.1 .mot mCif ^/ m m �1•` • N_ J ': r ', tyal m fill. l rt '{ X� O C• a m m x m= b n 0 m m a ., Z ° to . > D o 0 it O 0) m o z O < 0 0 J O mCD ' O N aT p n o m • n a m rn n Z tt �Iarice Pearman Critical Path Design - Pa e From: Clarice Pearman To:, Petrie, Ron Date: 10/31105 4:48PM Subject: Critical Path Design Ron, Attached is a copy of the agreement with Critical Path Design for the boundary survery. I will return to you two of three signed originals via interoffice mail. I will also forward your purchase requisition to the Internal Auditor. Thanks. Clarice CC: Bell, Peggy; Deaton, Vicki NAME OF FILE: Resolution No. 138-04 CROSS REFERENCE: Item # Date Document 1 08/19/04 memo to mayor & City Council 2 copy of Request for Proposal 04-13 3 draft resolution 4 RFP 04-13 Comparison 5 Community Park Development Capital Project 6 Staff Review Form 7 copy of newspaper article 8 memo to GaryDumas 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NOTES: STAFF REVIEW FORM - FINANCIAL OBLIGATION, XXX AGENDA REQUEST CONTRACT REVIEW GRANT REVIEW For the Fayetteville City Council Meeting of: FROM: Gary Dumas Name Division September 7, 2004 Operations Department Department ACTION REQUIRED: APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHPASS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY TO ACCEPT 200 ACRES OF PARK LAND, A 10 ACRE WATER TANK SITE, ONE MILLION DOLLARS AND OTHER CONSIDERATION FOR THE CITY'S ACCEPTANCE OF OWNERSHIP OF A 33 ACRE LANDFILL COST TO CITY: $50,000 est for survey Cost of this request 2250.9255.2806.00 4470.9470.5806.00 Account Number 02002 Project Number BUDGET REVIEW: Budget Manager S 1,676,150.00 Community Park Category/Project Budget Program- Category / Project Name Parks Development $ 53,600.00 Sales Tax Capital Funds Used to Date Program / Project Category Name $ 1,622,550.00 Sales Tax Capital/Parks Remaining Balance Development m x xxxx Budgeted Item Budget Adjustment Attached CONTRACT/GRANT/LEASE REVIEW: Date - Accounting Man er Date g/u/d City Arne Date STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution Division Head Date Depar tme t for Date Finance & Internal Services Dir. Date �- 5= Chief nistrative Officer Da e Ma or Da l:e I Internal Auditor Date Purchasing Manager Date Received in Mayor's Office /•�i 8� L/ai Date Cross Reference: Previous Ord/Res#: Orig. Contract Date: Orig. Contract Number: New Item: Yes No - - - .-._ - T Cit Officials Say Park Y Y Could Happen Next Year, .'.. D FUNDS •COULD.COVER . COST OF PROJECT By Dan Craft THE MORNING NEWS • OCRATT@NWAONUNENET 4YETTEVILLE — Fayetteville's art of the money needed to es- iblish a new community park taybe availableas soon as Jan- aryciy officials said Tuesday. ;The city's capital improvement [an calls for $850,000 to be set iide`for the project in 2005, latching an equal amount set tide under the plan for this year, fid Gary Dumas, the director of rations. If costs come in on iq lower side of estimates, the ?04 and 2005 funding would fiver the hill amount of the city's ?sts for the project, Dumas said. �'I'be city expects its portion of id cost to run between $1.6 mil- Sh and.$2 million, said Mayor an Coodv MATE BAKER• THE MORNING NEWS Pro Land Title 2713 SE I Street, Suite 7 Bentonville, AR 72712 479-271-6.003 or Fax 479-271-6075 City of Fayetteville Attn: Mayor Dan Coody 113 W. Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72703 9Qa &( u arrcv fy ' L ARCHIVED Please find enclosed the following documents: Original Special Warranty Deed Thank you for choosing Professional Land Title Company of Arkansas to Close your Loan. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Thank you for your business. Sincerely, J !&Bn11e6nsh&ip Final Policy Department Enc. • r � SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: IIYMMwW111 I.W �Y�IY'�Doe ID: WYwIWNY�4�IY WY YW�W 1y1 Recorded: 10 26/200 006 r 5 at 01:33:40 PM Fee Amt: $23.00 Paae I of 6 • Nashlnoton County. AR Bette Stamos Circuit Clerk Flle2005-00048123 111-p44 That C. & L. Land Co., Inc. a corporation organized under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arkansas, by its President and Secretary, duly authorized by proper resolution of its Board of Directors, in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS ($10) and other valuable considerations, paid by the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, sell and convey unto the City of Fayetteville, - Arkansas, its successors and assigns forever, the following described land situated in the County of Washington, State of Arkansas: Starting at the SW Comer of Section 30 Township 16N Range 30W. Thence: S87 -20-41.0268E 947.368, S4 -18-51.4876W 5.027, more or less, to the point of beginning, said point being further described in State Plane Coordinates at 658609.008 624159.812, Thence: N4 -18-51.4876E 99.355, N29 -53-33.6022E 205.311, N50 -54-22.1080W 30.881, S58 -27-31.1659W 353.169, N3 -45-3.3747W 69.105, N33 -10-44.9698E 101.575, N12 -14-10.0074W 147.076, N59 -18-19.1298W 137.058, N13 -29-43.1727E 140.965. N51 -54-24.7299E 126.318, N30 -22-44.8536E 85.532, N4 -29-49.7458W 113.577, N9 -9-33.3492E 124.227, N36 -40-57.8683E 75.51, N73 -4-20.9530E 91.758, N25 -18-22.9532E 252.506, N7 -1-42.2265W 144.432, N80 -47-20.3042W 147.209, N3 -46-38.3683E 43.824, N69 -0-4.6115E 134.909, N18 -26-54.4537E 151.344, N45 -34-43.4121E 137.47, N78 -45-57.4792E 107.89, S61 -48-52.3953E 123.395, S36 -42-18.1263E 135.18, $66 -13-53.0714E 130.631, S84 -30-33.4630E 127.845, S68 -47-26.7859E 91.431, N85 -14-45.1645E 117.452, S31 -9-21.6273E 142.592, S11 -12-21.4110W 104.712, $66 -48-5.0744W 51.659, SI 1-18-35.7569W 34.587, S43 -7-14.2372E 134.364; S4 -57-24.0658W 93.546, S59 -37-54.4190W 143.848, S0 -46-50.2966W 58.32, S78 -6-40.8311E 98.808, S52 -54-7.9019E 170.551, S3 -35-24.6717W 384.682, S74 -31-16.9026W 126.287, N89-22-34.4361 W 458.075, S9 -22-34.4779E 386.506, S88 -40-4.0085E 80.536, S44 -57-0.1837E 142.362, Thence N87 -23-13.6480W 802.329 to the P.O. B. Containing 39.6 Acres More or Less PROVIDED, however, this conveyance is subject to the following conditions and exceptions: 1. Matters that would be reflected on an accurate ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey of the land, including all additional survey requirements; 2. Matters that are disclosed by the Site Characterization Report, Former C&L Landfill, West Washington County Road #200, Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas; 2 3. Applicable zoning, building and land use laws, codes and ordinances; 4. Public or private roads, highways, streets and alleys, if any; 5. Easements and restrictions of record; and 6. All oil, gas, coal and other minerals and minerals rights are reserved by the Grantor. PROVIDED FURTHER the City of Fayetteville accepts title to the land subject to the conditions and exceptions stated herein and agrees that: (i) any park that is established on the land will be named in honor of Judge L. Maupin Cummings; and (ii) the said City will use and maintain the land in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the same unto the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, its successors and assigns forever, with all tenements, appurtenances and hereditaments thereunto belonging. And C. & L. Land Co.,Inc. hereby covenants with the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas that it will forever warrant and defend the title to said lands against all claims and encumbrances done or suffered by or through it, but against none other. - IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the name of the grantor is hereunto affixed by its President and its seal affixed by its Secretary, this 1 day of October, 2005. C. & L. Land Co., Inc. By Presi exit ATTEST: as - Secretary 3 • Conveyance of the land is accepted this!Mday of October, 2005. City of FMelteville, Arkansas Mayor \ I certify under penalty of false swearing that at least the tally c\rrect amount of documentary stamps has been placed on this instrument. c 1 City of Fayetteville, Arkansas By: ayor � , , .LA/. C1u© Grantee's Address 4 • 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF SEBASTIAN ) On this L'day of October, 2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified and acting, within and for said County and State, appeared in person the within named Robert E. Hornberger, being the person or persons authorized by said corporation to execute such instrument, stating his respective capacities in that behalf, to me personally well known, who stated that he was the President and Secretary of C.&L. Land Co., Inc., a corporation, and is duty authorized in his respective capacities to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said corporation, and further stated and acknowledged that he had so signed, executed and delivered said foregoing instrument for the consideration, uses and .purposes therein mentioned and set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal this ay of October, 2005. My Commission Expires: //- i-or- ,ti =r' $ OiA /� t c, : �'. ypLG N: ` DEEDF (' '2lCIAL. WAR ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS ) COUNTY OF On this day of `-"`-� u'-"� i 2005, before me, a Notary Public, duly commissioned, qualified and acting within the State and County aforesaid, appeared in person the within named "33QW C a o c `/ , to me personally well known, who stated that he is Mayor of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and as such was duly authorized in that capacity to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said city, and further stated and acknowledged that he had so signed, executed and delivered said foregoing instrument for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal on the date first mentioned above. c N:\DEEDFOR$\SPECIAL.WAR II .'/i.1 Washington County, AR I certify this instrument was filed on 10/26/2005.0133:40 PM and recorded in Real Estate File Number 2005-00048123 Bette Stamps - Circuit Cle by . 1 4 � G Y < O .� N e•f ? h �O N00 < 6 wA N N! e h �O 1� 00 O� •� an •� w+ v an v r Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y _rtt - L N Vl to M N H N to h N b b N M b N N N S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S uuuiulfllflhuUlUllll •• x04440.44444444444444 p � H: lea r II s AA`` I (C L L .. . n l lA 4 [Les ' s ) 'PH Ct b. H. 7 O D��C ■ W = — o � U Li � O 0 o O O O I I r . N , m B, CD CD a m I(ODa) m cn m O C CI) i �• + �•7 (I r O no I. i v .l f . 12.- -H Ol • n N W N O O ...4 O o y > n m o -c 0 Z m 0 c0 aro S CD m o��'9s iR Cl) O_ n r N M r v m a If W 1 r 1 1 O 99999 � 11111 r mono S a + 6 S^ p 9 8 - to + p V fl 7 _+W 8 }YY w 9 1 P A •Y M + + J Aya 0 V _ V _ a N _o.__o._t V O O S N a sQ g �A + J i Y d m qp y O y+ pq- Ya1 O Op N N��pppp Co - y oc O mp o - u �e • • • £ • • • • p N a bpY+ 1 S WOO \ O A a N + +J V y O E ` • O N O mot 4j0 -d O O y� pO O 'n I - 1 ;N a 8e88Pt 0Y $5 moon O- o 000.pt.-- ++OJN ON • O p1 coo + a O N ppp N O pp N r m - W O !R N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 4 9 yy y 99 9 9 9 • •'d R 0 0 0 N N N N N N w N d 6 •'P q• • O + + + r + -S +'+ +II II S II S 1 WigO Y P P + C_ O V O Y N+ N a n N C ? a o a 'IT "-U CD l2 v GC vv O •r �\ rCG �. 'II' 0) • v 2 G V ^V` 4 l i' Jcr SW „u,,,,,",,,,,,,,, �tl aa LLL LLRLi�^- =.iiFFFFiF.n. w.F..N: —!!-.!MlYY—�R If Mf YY—! Fn n � .R ' Ic m ------n (A V O .w (p S O coo N N N N C 3 N N= sl A = N VFI N - d D 0 0000cn 7 N Co Q 1 N 0) N NN N O 5555 3 m 9 a c m m 33S3 3 3 C a N N d N N N N 0000 0 O -0 CD 4A44 !A fA EA .A (A fA 1A D 0 C O) N + A N N J N J 0J 01 V A W O A N O N MO) Ut V W A N 001 m V V W CM OC O) N O N V V V 000 001 v 000 a OA A m U, 3 a) a n O -Ii I a0) CD W v a) an U) U rt Cl) ii C C M nri zr a g rn r h CD (Q r LU CD LU 0 D Q n 0 n CD En 0 \D In r7 on 0 0 mi co 0 n n CD CD d a W ) T rD Q. L 0) CD mu r 0) co CD t . U o0 Q Q° � o e e a • ' h a � (D C � O0Cfl C OO r=r r0 -r cn o N — CD D rt m o D Cf1 (D v C — N O rt (D a' rt a O C.J 1�4 a cc CT CD O O d } rcu 7(7 MMV a v 0 N kfl 0 a N • ca rn w v 0 0 O 0 I. Alt • S • • . y v r r CD LO < CD cn zr zr lE rt rr rt DCD 3 -, T. CD Q CD a r -r (D Ln CD 0 ni -1 U, CD CD 77 a `G (D a- r i- Q U) n nn o 6 o N mu B) CD CPA ED r.' N N N N N N l/ I _ 000000 W N N N r r (D cut O UO O' W W V 0) 00 o e 0 o 0 n N (L C• O . . A In Cl r r Ln D Vl N l 'O ^ / a 0 In 0 r In W W O O O a 4f O' O W 0 W Vl 0 O] 0 A N O �n W O0 0 . W V1 0 • rt m G° rr U) a a a a a TI Q Q (D CD n \V c 0 0 (.Q rt 0 a N a a w fl) a rt o m I. D a rt a.. Ln U) D - go � Sh OA W iilulllluullulluulll [ 6 [ [ 6 [ [ S [ [ [ S [ w S S [ S w w w w w w w w w w s w w w w w x - w w w p w n w w n w R w w w w w w w N r O a J O O • Y M r M 9 1 [ [ R w F SOUTHP SUPPORT.. _ 'r '""!' DOCUMENTATION ' i} } IANOSIAPI ARCHITTCIORE P[ANNINC CIVIL [NCIN[ERINC Transmittal To: City of Fayetteville Attention: City Council Member From: Appian Centre for Phone: 479-442-1444 From: Rick McGraw Pages: Date: 10/29/2008 Re: SouthPass website and postcard support CC: documentation booklet O Urgent ® For Review O Please Comment O Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle Enclosed you will find: • 10 copies: SouthPass Support Documentation Booklets for City Council members and Mayor Remarks: City of Fayetteville Council Members and Mayor, Community members have recently been asked whether they support the new Regional Park and SouthPass Development Project. Individuals who support the project indicated this support on postcards or website, SouthPassDevelopment.com. Their responses have been compiled and presented in a documentation booklet for you're review. To date, this booklet contains 177 supporting postcards and 116 support emails. If you have any questions, please feel free to call our office. UCW O VOW VO "Jo. ViX •aF= yfI" J= yY <<Ia '[:8 NFNS 6Nn 3[ n 3_n '�n < ¢ Hi ;W" K aF p. n 5 $ $y x F a s s s 6 lad d €� ti i €ag 2"3 g r pe gqe g a i° qq Iii vaFr L 9I xARa x �• 3 S �L14. 5 a 33 Fc'Y? E l< "f��3'y i ta_ = v • 3 F ii I$'7= $ 5 F 'vim ; S v Y a a E E - i 5 s { y €- F + S f 1 s ¢c l 8s$ �a E pit "8 80 � s €gy p =' ; uhI • ' 1 in k-i In UcZ Vn UcW VO v� «_W Vin «_W ye 6N Nn dN Pr 4N F Na Na C� �L Paz % 1 Go v RF F I g E € a E a t a as E [ II $ a g' z y r p1a a z F ga I E r ga II s s w. e 2 at as 1563 5₹ i4 F E5y, < t V� E j gg$ 5 YE E • t, 3 Y� Y• `1 z> a 881. <≤ 4 _f? ifig[[S4 831 $r S �e iFW VN � �- $���@ a€Ar#E a`E. a3 III/Wd�_�I Vo Wd C s fi J t'J Yp. «W_ NC ON coon & in NA Nn i 888 o = (S: { : oJafr₹ JWy ..S' al. F NNF { g $a p $ "c r E $ a Z §a $ aS� a;y i 'Y II 1113 :1 ifi Id 11 1 C a Bo �'y"4r gtlta E • Lya§r s•tl.i LTi$E0 ati _RI P C ya!y 3F a e _!' ? �' [g3 8FS E e Y CY dF- - E y a� y L a E y +yf a Y o } !! Y f p^ $V .£y i p Z FFS.A a u V �A 6a S nFig ^ r 3 EC E • Wyr F� ' a 3 b y ' s jt s$ EFF€E€ 5 ei s a f 'jj Q]p3 n F B EE[ I c gE p; Fix 1i b 3! V F' _Y• i5� a sLPt s - p _jj ! JC1 41}} sN�g t aayy9 LL ! Hi E us. -.. NF �. MF z • a� # F VSF M1 ♦ W a. V c •QQW in UG6' IVO T?4 W N iii 5 6� 41111 r d^ n F n F � x x B� E zz s lii � e= c $ 3 LUP yypp ipgg V = g§ p �yS y{ S J U i $ x 5■■ x 1 y{ }p y yi Egg ?33 f6 5 ill pi eh�,} a e°§ EL i=i t$ x oF3�ES3 ➢4Gs ais ELA_�.� - E�jyC� it $s3 ]� E ^$- F ZZ ^ftj �.L w u{ Y E • Zf l L o F 3 RF 6 fF nIV�� E SSL $5nF₹¢(§y7 E,.S5ivxS-EE,- imuuijn!$tj cd3]v3�i$$���₹Mtt3§g€ •1$ Sxffv 1Yt33 x'S¢ggff&& - �'u s. n z ip F x s i S E# F F x a i wE 3 - f 8€ E# b a v V �6' u0 VCK Vo V�6' �V Q M Q W aQ2 t.. ✓=o �r2 �jo �S I nN _Xa �Y {yYNn WN I.l ryn i WN EO N'n [i I Y=i C KMv b�• o n ry L� S R $ S 8x px€ p S 4fl \E € x n s ZJ ��� G V V _ x.. Ji �C a; fil g E x f =1 .= 1@n fill IJItJ1ILiiitfl aE�^�j 5€; $$LE2 V !y `: ua 002 a'� U�rc Wjg QQ_W ry j dN t!lra0 C N (�( W� v �ry QQW yy�n LC/ 4I1 F Z i b qD I" 3bE � �F:- �` e 3 2 � � ES t i . $ $ 7 Ek wd d Jri J L O l Q Wr .�LNi rSl'N= sj!]Y (Ca. 20$h!/Y�.YWWW� F p r Hr'i •r4 c F �. __ F _�'_ _ F V II E -. x I I "8 hdppEy g I�, d 8E IF R5 5 G3X �4 r 5 i ° c'ry fiu ii N% cj R o QQrr 85 9 Sr5 �p "` ! sin -E:lS"�i 5 I� ^'EX XK 133E " %� :} �I s Ei3 u ra ^ E 9 to y r $y�}[±Y E XF IY L s' = XF [ [1 .v Se ]° _ � y o"!! � E j y S 1 a ita 2 F� r"ru g. n wvC 1 -S<�52°a y!'[$y NrE. i (. i�pEp o.. nE [§_Fn @p i'¢ 4 E sfl fl kt Eam E i 8A6Y� `=E BxE G �'�5I S +cxi E°x pp8 p�pgy III a a'555 :x h� �x E Ys- ₹E LL, O(YZZ r5 i„ ��%� yC. 5 'fZ, OO S] t-tI rF%;$ Y�' �2 YS'_ Z % 3P� i;:! i 1,-- S E F �n�l u��; FoY£ E �Er ,`nE � 21S I uf�I ua Ii u��.. uo I WN J56 ]' 6N2 c4J$6 0 "+. � LNaX a L K• SE V W �W S irOJ rvW i 1 s E q8 s III t s gx i` •! s pL 1 xL �s `g •8 r 'k is I� a€ a .Is Id E a gaS $•z $ . 1 B a 'Hi yI a. fly " �x 31i ce.l li _u"c Xs .a 1 NI s' -fig [finj % o' v_l O�i�= jakk /;rJ I E!� a uF tW. ^= bFl•L �i] Y.: y XFJ c 4 c $ ti XX °Y n5 X XF.. :F E i 2 -S 3Y °"a cv vY lyl F i:� -S{ W \_F re. ScAap pxF €p. n_EE F 5 C�✓4'y bpso;fl`.FE r (�i n3c�Xp jG n IFr . E O X d a F 6 v X y } 5_ - g S I t x S a L F 12f1 �i .n yx r aY p's :%y X g� �F=Y3"ds�is 11.$E 3�'ay ��a5 �.. x., r qq NI .>x2a5 .. psi X=g s E� y 3 uE r' e X E iaF M� _ I QQW ( QW d= Cu3ry dNi I Ic.ao r.. yul rna __ F Jn n $Zi 36L6 8!{!t ₹"rY GeT ai aXs "4"• I iyS . e ` ��F///JJJ c " i cOu C S^y 1 M rv• V II I ; a 0iii o a is � X II a flaU. ..yy 33� ?ej L E% �$E•^ I. X' I � - jEXp.n Jilt R5: °� Ei 'Y y•s3$aa= to ISM '-t�"E X• 2aF.c gym' "� L�1Eag2a2�E__- Xyitt k? xannapp� E I2°="FE°mueNea°•y5"ujpV� E La '.. ° p% X50 au nNEE g �$ 5 �.ds ip 2F nn r I. & �rR' a ₹yg peg%]� ' is &gaa r!1 ¢' nil u;F S 11k. �szz rI€I oY Fry a_ xzz trsei x•"X` LV ri £y "n. cV . Y >I •� ZyC L Ili i W e] 9a W =dI Kl SYr- - r- f 4jL 6E 3En Mf 7 1 f uc uE 3P� Nr GW 0- W a- W1 ui *4jll SS 1 v 33jj+ u° [e z u t ' n c ff F ^Eg 2 Y 8 g:� 55 '�q p y YY zE fcg 11 5 XYn p � 3_'q Sl; I- 3 °II €b {{I Y �, £Ir JIJ E Jij _ p [¢ yyy pyyy 11 Y. ₹ s d L p S J yC DCO aSn ECEm a REej FiE S�Y��,'..S I Y . E 3} $s $Y3 . C s y p l „$$ 33Y .�tta E I u p�u • t V0 E 0:� .4 nc Iv E g U D$ "♦. S j Q n= nay FA E .Fi - p e: a 3 'd n n * n Y wo F 3 8'ca ii X $3E {$ SSSc-a?L. nni a C Sip' py n TQ a Z L X'L �il L➢ .' 3 c S uv 3 oO b• ✓I y S Ec:O oo •. �`y3� E5 �r 999 jq p�` 5 9 c y [b t lit;yn E. 0022 e$ la �•I� 4 V gv A5 Y3•+O02 Y5i� y y p3 y5 TCV 002 z2 `•IS 3 Mq GI tcc3V IX(-'[' E.. [n`\X �3V D,E u G-.�C^X≤i • �I. t� F 6E aad i 3 s ei € see Jh wa a iGL dE a FC° b- I. I# NY L. iIslc $ (/ n UGK O lI`W Viv QF -•L. QQW N �Y.. W I^!J o F S ,F(ryIYV((J J O Ian dN y ♦ IaX 1N .•ry Y rnry. 5•' S G`Y 4.f �'id l�S' a•n �r a X t ,fir§a 6 e Ee It ;_ I �fY DwY n n Ww y" rn I I F phi Y C I L ' $ ' I `}f� 2Z888 fl 855 $.. 5� ! Y 8 .l' S f 33 8 S Y aXE `T� it �' oYEX9L ys3m ci _t g Edxo a.e_� Z� }py6 sa§a O.3e ES 3$i Ss �q.c E 81a$'sYi py a ` ,[ as Qpu 4x90y o ..5 5 �X8�8:Y g4J(+.. i 9 f1. Fier E� N ?qa��d 618 ly E_ .rT..3 �LQ $p [3) i. SyJ i _ Y YI O ° !6S. I y O r a y D, 5YC L V YIy^'4 EI �JC YyT 9A} OZZ Cy a C V Y Y y` Y5 • dI Fi<SE �F I.ESF ul# ri£E SYF • • • IkF IFF5 '�I un Y99b YY.. •'ci Co I— E�i W cdW v i u I �jV HI I <oiIrZry ! �N I •� CNryry 6~2 !^� & !<e< J nd .{i c t j},. •}�" C X9y Id SC If6 'c I 4a L E E5 laA oyne Eye '�f {• B EEY gifY 'I Erna s� eYSY Er4Q = E t25•T OS tFO.m- ?I GVTa �`� SBEF2 cgflfl 3p.� -, Y₹gs;M 6912xC -t- V �Y y' . Yex� S g i E 5 E x� F !i l S E;� c �' 1 Z NF .- =6C n 1. d 1 ga W){a_ Vwis I �y3 y[ N g 3 ✓n Ii xB c5 g 9Y F F ^ r v e _ `11 s L x _liii B V i vx n a G 8 a a ]� ' 9 Y $Ep (1 r ,s g y g s xa 15 -\!,. x$�t i z nit N' EY a.. aza • I' ` � i -' , a y + P� a� _" 31 t F, Ellc= 3-5 €Eca $����N i {F c= _ 's FvCep,- 2! ^oY t['C$�HY 3F-` EE a D ?r 7y YV "- '' ;' C oY am ♦`g + �Y o a+m E Sfl n� �" !E nio F� B£�5v SE^FEZ Y: � c"+ 5 ps `S CE Ex EE .:g' ₹z "'333p'>8t p "I Hi _ 3 gg xx g •Rg ₹iu�'di SIB vS5`- aT b'a'?FS £I 9_S $ €g d ;P Y Y Y Y pOZZ i� - .aYm u' �aj �t� s "':`JC$°y 5i E n�}`is�o .. - rY-Ln'c aE SEA nr zu Fvs£5[SYF `-nn s o t r =E'L S E n �� wd ww w GG �:, aaw �r QN y{.. Z*Fp S.1n�� `>G ��:y�/(V(�. E�(YST {jY-•• v"�i F'r. '/1 ��] �' � �Yn r Yom' ef' ri1FY NIV „T F X EE S I� E66`-� ij ES"di 3sX;, EF E Y�I raA ca_ E g e g G y x 5 E xY EE : E y] c n1p ..S VC Y 1... }^[ FF- L La^y c p\Z W.5 UC tTh FLh6Ei_F N fdL _T u a � . I Yey a1� ! 44 19 fill Y L; Yza €66a E a E CCZ b- . �cJ PI 9 �pF nF'� js'ajpjy �E} 'U y t i n c :j �^i �i z _.r--00Zza 8 x� }+• tiu•• • NF ... LjJ.dry g Udw 6w` "C Er `3o maw fixes — 8 F3 Io S< �, zNa IFS✓ -.Y I5W- T- - qT 1! Y e E 3 QII I X11 Y �•\_ `^ EII aE .1 al li *' 1 d I U41 ic1 E O� UI ' 2 s Y ! 8 3E d u.' I E 8 g'e s +I U cue q!I E r c�c 'Sn ;fl 11 <jill y EYE aO an E I V L LYa i p=er t E qq I! .>T� Y+Y Ei • E d ii Ynx Y v^ E ITy c H; ZY gb!�x x EY�g ≥n Ee mil` li Y GSS> raS €€ \n qq I. JAI =fl 5E sE aE __ N __ J t5 4 _• t QQw �• C' �/1 n � � {fib i WNS (.�o` I 1 aFS ��♦1�35 r� � l^n 0 O � NY.t � C O - • v o ' 11r 1 n �N : b L5 W�(i g LL yat (y fi n IAr �c L�`rv� ^ 1 J YY F I r 3 ( I E 8E .ii�io ¢ lb IS III E E.qq. IBS I lb I ₹ Jh� m Fp vi (� L ° 'y'yA�i.l Y s 6 5: A :i�I I I d'� 5 a ' g E Y E u�Il � t YiY Ii Y S' Y E E as aP a�� • L Egg a2 a c 6565 - t 8- E 3 ]y < s'2 y 5'F n vv I S y„n pS _r =E JJ>� •EA a aF t - 'cIA 3Aa nd g€i nF iC e' 2 EuaEF nrii�� n rtS�a�Y Ci3 EYt fOO(nl g 'Vf^jA �' Y35 �.�[y•Y EEEE 2�5Y W� ? 5y y¢R �pg ♦LSEEC „ C}�'�.i �. 5�a + {,bit IS l's. C •[,^i� s L R g v'₹L Oetr ¢ �zlz'_in 4. EEp EE p i ≥ 3 yy is ₹ AO 99 Y g F r �d� z„ Y rif'lfl�$V go•.. 4 IR s syy 'flF� ii s. un..tyy VY�'ES i�a¢•�9 LY YNy t Z.. Y]Y�yY fC Vyy C91Y p-... t_.. wM O I W6w 0 W6 o I Qy ry I C, �•� J w_ 4NM(�Ill SY[Si¢ ♦!ca'iIll _ ,1ONy iiiiS%, a p• .. r g • j ICI 2 di ' a . A �w°`jM10 8 j3 ly.l gi.. S YL I5 g &sgEY g i� sE—! F yE{5 fj1 vS'Y gE jo 5 YA U ♦Y n ' tl r ' Y4 E 3r -Ip ! - nee pp a IE e 8'E "3�'f g n 34 a xs {p1 '`c E'SB % z:2 iYYY]]] iE� A. GY tYi ai .7y�a ��♦.��.� DEL si YO ♦Fit ��i •: ?e 3E dF3 `�it 'Erl ��' S 02 "c `tt '.�r g•- .i''. s._ E d •`c , , 3'J5 L o C / IE �, E • §Y o L c.S Y a 3E p t• E Yw F+_ 1 nn�E f 5 p = .E -�p¢ Z nnYfa r la 5� a[ '_ �� a9 � E � 3L I I -a 58 it nz, t�lgzz i ` y i' L` sS₹ z 23L b'�'zz z,� 1 i q, F F" ; i £I ¢sL Fq �2 21 a 's :?E ip� '" ;1 ( ¢Fw �$_ a�w ; ha Ira WN vV� c;� �N � JFj -.t tom%- t, ry1.f:Si_C d^ ♦)� Lr ♦ .•! 4r 3 i t ' (•�-7J�' ♦hit. . N Sy I J a L V a s ags I C L E zap I j I ; $j. i s §ca I I • ' t tis s ' -. IL i &xi v 1 5 a.. a "A 5 yqqg IAH! r c 9 a s s j�l >a E1-; F $_€ ea lit L ey `s 4 ��6 ! s ��' L eao so ss: 6666 J. 2 i E E•. z; zE 66: -I z �l Al i tt '[. yyyL 8F tt dr ``Ee 83 _8F2 t 9'`^igg ppE �kl FF um n ¢ era EwL Y Fla E� rLR Cam' �Y IEEE AI� c ¢^ �Y EE[ .• 9'v 8 EE r _j.�� )2 yy v gp g on sdbii � ! h I u EFz3 J $l ' V F 5- dti id i§QslY�d E a \ 3 u]]o E n L E V yi Yg �y E' �_ [x I + •a[ e '3) O •¢E cc• C A ZhI I Y� JC LZCY • 05 f IBS Nr f _¢F S [aF NF` Fic S[ 3a♦- ihF _ a 1 <4w 1 4<W wH I .. � �` I � WN ��Q 1 dN � •�n p!aa 1F, a�� '; �inJ LIfrJ IdO v ( YOIry 'Yi[n M ry ry 2 1 I r 11 x`� � I 1 ! R v YY i� I t•' 9 aY g. it X E e�' ` 2 Y`E55a 5 E %co it 2i EEY s n87 � � r n�o e e €jYTF i i i (�' y_ [ yy y £ 8 >xx x i .,kii %a 3 s J[ S p E jy{y{ ! i i� E gY E y ••y-- �RRY I_ IIUu111tiliLJ E1J1I11I1Inii; � E a��E ^„ Cp 3 Pa �ji.n w�"E plZ i-Iiii zz raj 13 3Y Y .YV a' [yy _c iC��a [�{ E.: �g=1 c3V 6 �i E't '-^:�2G.€a:E�sE I ( W 6 - Wi L �w I nos I r a Y 4J' -{I' p[ .C (Y N YYX @ tMC N M1}. YNInV .3 D'LrM ♦. ....�. jy S•I 11///F..���...---111 6 �. .. � YJ..- I��ry �u Z 19 Et u �J Y - E F E ES $] 1: 'EL dd 1. E p tl .Y Bp ii E Q } Iy i' EE 5 fl as 4 �Aa�, a 8 lii pp 11 _ g• Y5 P E6b`[ Mi J[sx fin. 4 e _v" }t om dth EJOyo dF`�9vpyyAy9nPggGjL 5^a Gvpp1 E i aa$r`oF$acr.KEtZyt^y.y}�c?E 2¢rY$L £3 ? I EdajEkFnn.E}1CISE Spr"E2755zO q5 Eg34A���7W�LYEE >1 S�`x3$&5�alJ•�� i]2j�•PP „ybL 0022 j o zz € s sa & z aE� �' � =S 'j 2 aI s[tT! •U �I I o sE sE iY `o z5 T'.• a` t� wuw 44 II(.www a wnw.. 1 - .- fi`3ERInJ F�'yj1 Fnn SGJ YrJ C< a £ q �SJ s o L d o E 6 I b3 11 22 - +[�' i h fl - 'I ii -4 '32 atc c Y I Qy E £E 2 cl s 5s xisxgp .i 2 C�g o. • IJIIEY.�jZ23 GIN - J..S dY .I Y.SCa OY S�EI C�� EE�o +�1 •vu c.`l 1 E �' SSi awn ��•{1=6[i6bE ogY �c) Yn69 t.Ii t 11 31;ipao jE IE nn vI p_3 °yyS L'-_ EEa3Fsfl;h2R ( S d`J caVY nGE i 1 il � " EE ^^� €IFi ; ".QT OV IZ = 1 [ t' ^4V "zz ; C � b_ .W .t _G ELI � j1 tE„EpF ... Z.� i W W .�IR$YY 33 UG6' 1 ' VGK Jry [d1.Ill O�N1�G i t�'§Y•1 '9 � I�F I N F X $ E,�• .. +� Wli' L 8 BE.. S I, �' lb 11 gg _ E xE Ys$ 110 ifif Id L ;I J >s EZb ti;l� S VIA\i YF i 1 E s f lit • a Y&a 49' I I�. • in Yav A. I.CRL B �Yav a i ..S u L __ ]�, C Y �r $ v ,. g c u a o c E ^ o v kc r9i % 3L� t IY1 t i-r�-o^ w G Lt 1 EI �EA r oRL LL I o ca] E J AEI I. �a �E ogi rca E ¢ FI ,> u: Y e u •9 E yl Y6 9Y £FEE f E no•'199qq ItuuIUJJ$Lir?t �dYa.3�BVpIY �'�A'�`RLV�EoEE� ;� °73 �4c' XT.VR34C4Q�YY� i;ly,>� G�j j $_y Ly,3 YOd'Yg>`p 1≥I ) J.gEe�V02'ZsY,}•l.•. EOY6n Y ^l • o. { Rsa LL 3elE flz^I'E:� °d£i�3PE .`^f- L"'I�d�i�3`n a3z1I tI i_W_ QQW dN2 {�o >•1 [JC $si V� W� Vo y6 IVO JQW Jy� QQW I Y� � 6N ♦. Y{�ry 6N {{o 19[1 r� C5L( ,u ufi W u Y1n n F ' F C a`ya' 5 $ 1 t¢ E rJ iT E,� It OZ J ≥$ gs E55� a i. y €p F5 L,- E boy �a d; �Y cY.. E p. Li '6a l p 1VV/r.- G YI ESSY dEE y LL• S�'a oozz rL A FT F i6G s I- NC f ¢6L Een a CQ ., J ••• OL.. 3a r m 1�,'• a a � EE COG 44�� 6WW NN [ - r • PS ` 8E .Erii ' C E5 LII I' m ;, I�1 I E '4 •,{ y jE fir; tilT'Y _' {p,fl 111 Y Fs' :4f ≥\A13� ° a E 3� i3 X Y0 3 a- : L .%i zj 8a l E a c a E ¢� V jY o V c L ] tl�§ }ECC r �� a ]�I n 9 IE Ii Q3SEY'EY E .t�3: c' CL�:f ca E Y pp yg ¢¢ E i1� 1F) i � {p ¢ I'1 fl Z a' 9 V � LG •� Z25 iYQ * E v • • Y F _ E VL' c 9Li' f i 5 r j( C $- NF �i FLL $ F J. O. S. [liii d N e Ill M��{w' ' I� INN Y ^Cp \ !?.I 5 $BB3 vR�. ' F o £ to m CPi 5 ; y 5 c Q ' ??{{ iT3 iYi oT ( Y JJFi€ ₹j E yi 8EYitEy L�va E k'''V^i u o'L o yS Sn S n E r }'"QS a l 2 F£nix a E Y. EYL LA }GG EE E a Yq�i,' ?'GO Y 'Y OO ) 3 y3 .. ..R y88zz s (��y�� 21 E 5 Y C; d y fl s L'� Vk, d'8z2 >:S K.! 6 YF4 rb Ll ut, y ZZ o L 3 E �l dC G y .. AEI Sil x R_ yY V , I W U t K n � 6H2 I ya, JCO }4 XNS Ir ..N Ol6 da• p$W Mry WlW LJ• cdc SFI ti Ito k ry I n EJ S I E ` I C zEa g t € E 3Eg �s e X s i p a=- �� '- j 4 -n� ! is yy "Et.LL[[ 9(arIl � " 5 65 Ir xJ 2u3 ES�Ell 's_JCs9v EY�S 3 S1 c 6 EM ai y§� EZ. �. 7n S� o�� tv_ L u^£ ov 1Fe �it yIJ ei 5 9dca 3o A'SS �ry E •• _°"a , E r-' E 'o S oRr ( Ea= w C u • ys• iE • 1 • C C$l T C3 [ '; 5Y EVYY :Y yL f• Xj �]y j}� 1 : .P]v5 ₹wo Q x 3v tS iipY Et I : L' xpl 1^I yyp` ', `¢E2z y (i z r W uFE Y5 :nr ooig z. 13 i£i ,e Y22 s .flu Gy$. z6 zfip =r — may. •#Fj �. Y r .. ._ u Yl e 4 .9 S? _ _z s J L Z W S i G •= Y Y � `W xx'' { • .. •, aF Nf f �iF o S�F NF F LsL G E r -- uCz I hr. ..V Gz I• i Ory 1 I unY1 ja,o 6N2 �}'� '5� nit -,, `p �Qw ❑�.. e+ N San HS {•'o y� '0 ld w II I bX rt 6 i' IX�s `L U/- r c .0 ,.�Z •OG ISF � I OD ^ gis s • I `F 3 SL44a • is i� X $E3 `Pn.s 113 $ES 6 i� • YQ 11•5 ii A •1 n c•. =Y e p 8.. Y w pp3 ,I sai I' 1� u:E5 Eza' s uy6 3It $� a �!i EX a5 atis €66�:-cads„ a� .bya gR: 9p T[. y�.g ESy Fy.F`x L IC I II ^s Sg Y£nyF�i X la w e•+n :E °(f Li E xA iT„�33^CO yy$$f x . � ,'s %� �{XXEJ a �j ey L %8 jE ' ` 5yi5'qq sX•PE YL Ei'-',� FRg�X E•, YTE•„5 =a pc e a E Il i 5 °- v LL $ p; 15 FF a JgYJ � 3 7 1 w 3Pa Ca my 1I.......I 5� CE Yr 0022 NFY ^-E Ye ^5 w n 5 i _ o 0 2 e X6_ L•V N Y w i 1-3 5 fl.co z r C 69 3- I aY ❑ Z 3 { f CY W C V�2 No K1 � VFW I�fi n NT.I• 4 '•-S 4.(w �O afZ ��El E<I +.. QC6 t }.• ^W Su1W I ( x ' alt E E gs Is s� ori8 = C 6�X :o� . 2 cam Ii V gg wgg 8 4e '-'� a y5 4 �i = g'3 ay `x1� s 4—Y E66a 15 £ L xL $x Y5 E_ , F{w-6Gi Y3XN uu�G V. E y� �OC �F{C ,{ $gJS �a oY �Ca� E 3". ! 2�-Mn 'uo �a E !� �� �Y YnB• t� � Niy�[i 3 s�j ELu EEi nna F IViI Y a YE }F [•:Z� w� f'VV 'f1S '�; C€'•'Y �•E[t' n v3 ' •'-Y Y.a $`"EE 55�jj j a eY w _ C FEE JI 31T i0 •uJ_ uC6 c S r 3a fn o 666066 Y QF� m •u DO022 Yn Ly. •Cu0 yOZ2 2`LTj Ii.' 3EN L₹{ c2 •aV 0O c o Y ••,,_n CCCCIXc ZSY y� !i« S �Yi"en iS •1$e '1 6.X ±w^�•.! a\ XV Y�•\a i le F-ut i��or YkY zfu'i .2 ¢�a^Y♦..{{-6F c IR YIGw .. .� I F .EL ZF S�F L U�R' ViiV CK' a ' WcdW S a Q W T N'CJ on t3gg 2$ 1 I ro. Cy€ C F $F ilo Y Y E 2 5 C,j F fi VEa ' s- $a i. " e: x: J'3�: # IW L. i n '3F$ s €.E3= s J es$ z -' § thy: ! t hill -aa Ehy5 : $ - :a zpi5 �_x; �h•: jiS °-tS E ��{' ₹€Yi .thh_ p , flu 8°$-zng' E 7?l��t{5 • as is i'Y n � E d . 38 Ex :•i �C S� I S u X an Ej 822c �'EE .� " ] I Ya. �w E" $j j qqYY j� RW�W11 A$d 3 i ,- S{ - 3.. qL( 9 S{yqu�OV₹i t�IC J� I Y gi.T3=wy��i 00°OilI _i^ .wF✓i 00ig �h Y� Ss'20 $ .3Y €i : �J 3 �S €•E;d0 r i' .: e€ # N� i5�'I.C9 Y- •a• `• i €I 1 u ... 3 E� E r i_... _.._J r^i€3 Nf = e_i i€3PF— in jl iSf5_ (1 QW44 fa JT •�fi ' yy ^WJWW .4 F ^ ^ 'n F v S F ? yERy 2 L� [ $ o j EEt Ixa `rte I. fS YXa 5 gp3e 5 ¢y c� gg _¢• E e jpyq S q Eg UI }�yy{{ JF�°., EY i t• Je^E§5 e?.• iF3 d I I I "E�-p Ey e�3 ;tAi 4 E 22 , E €xi tb6=. 50l "x < I9 ^ �j•� Yyy gP c t o $ °° �$ Y 2Y 5 t t I' C y EE -"l. d Uy _e F yysi t el W9 2'aE FFnuu E a £ duo �{�oa nad n •fLY9"3"€22ev�' e2 a3aSEE 8 �T£pp :I 2mSX3E�3.'�A°'EE S :'3 2a5S29gXxg " t� c � �u = 3FJ,;•I �I �' "dd'ZZ st a 5 �2_="g •'E=j gjp s.._z .L, y \/, y[♦Ifi F LiL 6€ N ...YYI °yiL Z '• -2• ° C O. yy yy y yy —� —d i•E T�F NF inF Ui III 111111 Vc (/I ifi � p I y Vry II( GW in •- __ c V •.•�t p�I^,ry i S• V6 cE ____ 'I.It ^o DoE tj L - WW a 5 .1, ` 5 3 5 2222P ` •9Cp $ �c E -u I 6• ` 6, y f �' E ' �7 p - C3� c .q5.°y e uiSV YY jut H eLa lx�. Ei n�a LL1. • lill Y 0 7 •£ Z x u g Efij o$ y§ ✓ig i � L Y o oy .�p/S E Q° asfi : p„ Y °€_ n 2 .^. Y g e o its a� E •' ' i .].3 °€ •_ w ! I 9, 6 _y ` 1 62• a :₹ {. {. a- - 1 E > y e u d$ n L L ,.�., oo ° I •• •: C > 6 Ga 0 •. X C }V' E1 °V• '€[eY 3 c.�fi °L �. ZO $ i {�=4 V S iy •. n... V u� Eli 'Yu O "-' •c. ltd Z. u13 Si".°. SC I� "�� Z€ F461 S€3°E VE ZI F L s C S€ S P N M1 O. w Y §_ S Y W S • • p 6 Vy • , <<(O1 i^„elJ{I UGQIC iry I Q'aW /(�VVQ'JJ. 4y[�'IV`I WN ,6 - i NJ �N_ I N1 Yo. ss8 '^F n nFi a E t» 3 I ₹ E ESE .. $ E d £ 8 Yz I` EE 4 3. E Fib a - € c P855C6� J[[ Y iS �yy�•dds1��'' +a{E Y^ {p { J •� 'E q{3y Sy 's3 EBB X23 3.�\ 1 s'S5 1' ! IE < n . .R 5[ as Yy8 ct I - ESC Ba a+E c6R' YS^ eE5' rw it 2 nip C¢ r S {S _9 a nE3' r �i` 22 ~•' X64Y Sr dn. EE g2�E d E Y C E ♦� .c 9•its dYa 4.] E C E 9 .c i3 gEf E -F-- 'a Y of S9R4ya d o�nF R .E •V•jL �Eu i i E gad§, EEjBY En•EE S � j•i •I Ec�•§ E-YC Y Eav`x nE•� 1{ 3 9. �L3 � S � 9-F FE F an HSI a i=c"i� 0 5r {F oozz 9r5"� y[ o con $[�s 1y' n n - •C - Li • j1 XSE : Y \ Est } Y, $CV •• •, ap E•. S t'E z 3 E°r C 151 zi wEI3 i�aP sa. E, {z.531 r=s'cL S�3$r NF �_._—� n.a<uE SEr aE I r°_aE aE 3•�r :IIF 1 �.-...c�.-.-♦ Ire_ e • UtK UGC i0 V<K {__________ yn 22 _ JYn 6N frgOn •C NY ofr I N� LU F Ii I? y gg H 8 El flIYI , 'iQ iFF 4 2u flu itTay� T b r o •+ Jy 11 ys CU ill! Vlt u sg E -• j�43 s' (y 8 UESSR _ 6S E yy "{� i e{ CI qG n -u 'J .• yy E tij1019E ES 2 r gL a3.S lEG 61 Y. :sE o dpc 2: 5 Y �L ;n4 ii %iS 3F EViV$£ C SEE..- E dG 'i a3X ey gg R EE j�S•�u35•i! a1 E u 9s 33_ nF3EX EJ i 9 � 5 Svc < nu E.F- 5 • Z 3 pSp BEY Et Ygg 6 [ c 8 83 E u ja% 5 •v+• ^ y 2� rty xKii is 4 P !'--,, 53 sat, �bl£ pS �; �12F 'J. Sny, Cdz rsi 9 -. �, LJ +a •'�yy51TFG •• ?--$[� a•^SP 2r S{' •• y Ey� ,�E 21 $}'O) •• E is E ≥PE .YFF € S� SPfa •..IF I$ =_:_ r �i� SE SEF E U�p1 VJ �i Hl QQW_ ±�— QQW ,,-j.. QQW_ ,(Ny0 oS NJ £NO NI G^pY .n i an F F F _ F I IIIr14r � s R � - I ti gg 9L E $ �G l5 g 1 1 § �y qoR F I 23A IF 1 €a 3 Y eES_ f � *: S E�L E9 ESP ER4! ~ � i EX E9 �S`•v •.b� s di ESE p$ 6F` a 'it •: LY +yay z$E n'c-4_ E a. •Sj'�E 5r •= F E IsY G Y i' 5' o: e! E i� I D =� bF+- 8:rj ai [E nFi+ 5 • Yee ' dP E -E nF $ E l� lv! j �5a -3 LE AN E rc E § E r 5 ., ? E Ef r 5 a n 5 '� �.5S= EEE R F J33, 9k 'R`0 i3c �yEy E[[E g� w3� 6S� 4.E �g X�E n z may, f^'+' 6L•{51b� pyYi -s]' 5 d�Gi� y�.q �J .d 21tl�� 8� R.. V ^d9n'y,OOZZ pY `.i IV U TFY YwL • ^ X� V �R 5c n�, Z2 r5 F •'�. � Y gu L �E �J '�XLZV [+i " ♦ ;�=ES �%� a • C 11 c Q<W yn I Q�K VO WGd' �VM1 -Ja J f/1 -sz aW min_ 1 QaW I j y �55C 1 1-1 •M /1 1I1I • �� VVOOiII V' W n n r ry n I 6 A 5 ( i tl 3 t � SxE ��di L 8 �� s . x�8 S E" xrP l g s" y�P 8 r • V tl S . tl n N u !O1 tH!!i ns1eE E a �, }E E 9 F_58xiag yqa i_'9yS _sr Filn'Ia_EIItn�9 ro-�.! E n ;^n BV FT1 !1111 6{ <Rgipp z a g a3�.L OOZz5'P v [2 "wzfi c�`^ c'n� t i0 qiu Y.1j s_Ifu eA-\� Y '�S' S �E I WdoW y Wcd a WCW Y Ufa i0 U`y. ISO VCd' �O jFS Je5 JQW I l� JQW •_ 6N & Ern 6�~/1 i ci�n dN I ♦ �O NM1 y�' i Nlr`I tjP'd^Cf `♦. iYz u6 � � In „ 5 n r n n 1 ry n _. F • 5 SA •I 1 II Y En IA 1 Y 9 C 333 p... Ee 1. 8. s s,�f F $p n t E $ b n • • L 5p [�( °�.Q ! lI/} a≥S L'Yp3� I_d �y".o° k'.n 3 g �'Ci lnl Eat is 3 ���x a Elj is 4d Yz t��t E ;'a y j e 3 S nv Ei S 1 '° Ax av_ a 1 E ¢ +SI T Q t x E g I. 8ry E ; 3 Cy TTT a 5q ^ F 'n{q{, Fp YE E r t;. b w n$ e E F n ry Y�jE' a e 3 JSzz a' ,i'� "' 2 0022 ate 41 g l 2 g `Sa � z iI `__.. =ic�. _ Y`flz C a S— Y "[ <W ' � <i u yNS6 DFS mIll WW �n �n 1♦ F n 66 ' .E �y iJ I. _ spay 3 •ys i 8.E 3e j� -s . gzF f S ES. -. • 5 3 S= L3ix li �j].`I 3t �To E%� `� ! F- .S� O>3 /E a t n- E•�g ss9 2a t65_ 2j.V] 5 gA �g 'a �55'F, E E'i ° t6b' .ay B� tF 3�FLl' o°aF3 "I ° iEv3 E L • S o cv_• E' k A '�_ 9R p_ E b�.£ EE rn 11S S j W ;6 E i r <<<(o Y 3i$ •P 8� O��IIg E }B u P $ uk gyy lEl a ♦- Y� £ o �1 % v($ F♦ CC 3 tl x `v9iA �E,qL� w 5.� . Q& 9 vNg "CaE A •+ YF 5C 'ay �ozz C5 2 }: o gF₹ Lz5 eni, zi, r5 B _ %F %a >sy o� Z r .. % s 9 pp yy ggqq q p z #_ 'F o'E 3a� Fl a Q'`.= = E§�• O F=6 NF _ F=c 6E#O N u F�\IIII LJ„ so uuiz "n pN I {"O ' 6N E'= 6fI • —O ran N Er'nry —� aia E„R EVVn < 6 Ibj< �ni i LNJ aNJ r gRE == iS .ipd O5 Anf.. I In xn -• I�I �q L i �� $� S I a.� 3 8Y 1: •iIx sR rya i � 'd aE € F F� L JI e �i'i`3 + `�P 01 E Ei e� ''jTJ�J� Fes `. Efl :a s5 {yy{ iC f� � C j JTa i3�{ S "0. v Yss Ei �i3 dsl d r�r� b EQ (1 In 'Eg ESn --t. 2`V� F$ag �9 sF 1665 - i€x aA %g tt Y ,. IS ( E iSVQ t t' YY e�bwl'Ek 9 E f s.f —e�x cwS E v u E au Y� i` F b V a t Yi• 9 n 5 pn F n.v br x E E q c� g i n ry a `e 0 n £ i $- b B F e � { i�xaxs d #I i₹3:�"zz s l}J- "%82 r5 e p .a xF5xl�u .. • � " a2� xF2� .. yyy_€g s+gig ..-_a'-2cY :O a Y9 a u=• cF �O • � y,yy O i � l UL r _d< S 3E� a r- .dY TEE rrF I__ -. �1-I SS .jro Lal. J!- I .c !/� Y=o L.!4!. IE• _�N< r jO N<�0 r\:=nJ y.P E:NJ nJ -5ui� : sw 55Wd i I 1I;I1 I 3 86.. 1a ., I I s y 55 Y �; pp I 111 1iJh.9 5 n Id 5 0 3 F �;�iJ_1 ! iii a`S i #E I 8. Y E' IF diiii1iilhIJ Is 9ni.. Hhldiltilhli it JtjJj'iiii≥i �Fi� r3.I Yi� yyL1$�•lx B¢V • y6 G •:F sad;;f! F_ .�f.; IS€ QQW • .i^ gQ W I J I �•.- 1-I {moo � aN Y[eo�y N YN CI. r F R'r•Y'� .u2 Wn £wu �n Maan F _ F — j E+ • 3 a i Iii 1 a •e d . 5y' 6 ag spr S Tfl g—' S' Iy ,� e, ! • �9 aF j�y ��•b°S, o-��^j{�I -aa s5 Ytc•v E! E gxF °uF tc� E 2I ;i,I x 3 £ +SEA 1 _aa' f=fli-iui gg -i o �z .. "aF x r3:YoEEQgn'�i V• E• YI NX €I o _Ccu S€'i3 :n z YEi1I ' W r=W Vc6 I VO :JJN QaW 6N2 {moo YNF ��J £ten Fi zzNt d�s r a SpZ 5 :yn 3 .6 E 8 pB J 9E 1 12 Pe6 E "318 yBtc j°FL L9eE Lv u F Yt 2 2 S fd L-€ 3a yrF J U�W. �V Qw' iiry UCK V� T} FF^ Q ::��ii Q Q W �J 6N 1 �O �dN I � 4� {.go YEp6N v�d 8t. �G5Oi �jWu CWW Nn -C Ii n iSn j..€EE tl i '' is i�..fi Y yy€ 9{ „x $ppj jppj d YT8 Eu aus"s`S Ea1iti t yl,� J8'ahS Ea ;ft s g9 43 yv^ 4�. I.S gc5 C E c9 oe aF Y E�oRI nrye� 8�i llQ"9a 'ay51 eC a1 €;'. 9n'@F+j `] yQ4E ; c ad d�. gu¢BF aFa 1 § E1 ],�g f x iQ13I Q 5. 1 2S�x € W 8 x ; V p +yu O �, 2S 2fzY i'�y 1� t.3�1 V ZF� i s^r gg OL 1 vT yF� SGr V!]LI Y I Y F ES[3?F �F i _IW I F26S M1C 3YF NY Z.I S. FGG Q�ZaF NF '- EW I�Fs `jR Qaw yFQ-2 �55'o aNi gL'Ei akn W ....Nn V.y% mo_._ E Y! E` I �3. $ <S � xye A sY� 4sos I G CW i IMa� y 3 i t .Q [ V I S x n in g yh 12 8 yy jy ¢y YT E.' -h1111 S.'ri; V E /3{T �Y 3C a 1S i X a3 " e654 I ff uI a i = a; a e65� =233i €ice a9 iYza L[•E8 s3F�y` pt is SY5 er $ �'-e cY 8f$Is SFr ad 'y to Fu4 p.'TT. E uY "u4 nE eb E�E" €�oyYy �y ,CIE LL MEy °'�2y v. 1 a ?'Jyr, 33 bS2v LFE6 '%. ' 'o f,4 yy z ; yBEEE p ggs: Y ao`'{{ts1T3`i + - €n O�ii q • F₹ rrs _3n OOI i' rl Y.5 T V E 5y = R, . xr EFL .. a. Fi yrice !.. $, 3PEr z'S B na€ s F 3? H i� z_W r =9 s'� 3PE U�y Ito QQW dNZ ry Y.. Fyn Sa Nga �^r F _2 g s ¢ E EE Ffl 'iji EY8 Jill ad E €- E1 fl; l.y5 �S��a�o'� dF z jd p E?V8 cv•! ea �E' E 5 y•t-.. FSFd5 S XPEu W 6 IulW ciC dN Y cCo �IapY VVVVJJJJ L I�N J V liW D VLY v �N aNxs xd n f ). � I � 3 •YI ! o k ' 1 i 5 u o EE 1 5 E a � QSkw \ u e aI . C i ya pp s; I S,Y, 9gY C. L tul cw WwW < VCK iN I V`p Vry f =I 1EO4� V OIi Yyy C< OA�,. c nLL ry N 4 s $ f911 3 efl laaOE; "' byre E�•5n i EP;}E$YE vx ELLa3oyyyyy y�En1=13§AEE E,�5 A'SEEi DEaEE€RAi ~'L p 3JJ 4H_y a Ga OYYY $ ^oT n `flfl flfl bb v CY o an e$IJ0i`. fl L jQ F St 6L NF l� i $ $ YY wwW• �NLL ki e 15 J � G a a' • y1 V�¢ f in dN= {TYIO 55< WLL uQ^ wu 1 �VVn11I y R 6NI{ i lY$i r• sal F' xD- SYE �Q T WLL wd Vey ( Vn = 6y1 � {=o F •r .a FYE �oLL z $C - r F x E � $ a I i iI 5 At .N 5 Y 5A F ,Y) 6Y nLI j2 * 3 <B3 E6 EQ, £ ; 01- V 1\ 5 Ms's k= aH 66Fs b' 8se 9 -a E 5= ya! Is LI. . 9 E •01 W G a E y E n q F Fm E .�. E S i :� y�- LL 4` ' l F♦` 9 3≤$ iPA Eb Vy EE - 11�1X E �c' `' $� y Y 1F�I � y� i »� x Y a F 8 1 n ^I I S n� 3 - 3- ' 6• � J. $ I s�z by 'ar ZSxi£i VI: „� u o i3 'n 666 1461 �}I YG. •u:=..CCZ� SZul i.rn '•cU •. it 9ppi 3 Euc> f _iF S� Z E ul� _ 14 =iF uE iae F uFz ya ¢¢w dNS {AEI „A 3�6 sr 50• �ryLL W 0 [j pN2 {f o J FN1 WLL •1 4 c • o { I1 i 3 n 1 P1 +' 6� S. xCxg t F B d 4 Nv 5 5 x�fiEIj 3 3333e yy iE S: C Y ; ii e 3a Jilt 99$ iyy[[ lij 'aE u $ a y54r{p :{ 1'1 E� $ ga pC <Y^E 33 i _ [sSi E— ti3 d yF .E Exi zsa EE�s EF % Cps°. E66! ELY ^ F? .L�L11 LEY"-�FE _ E xii ELS 2. roMq „r E' GV.m. E•� i aE pr E3 Fp Ifx @ iE T�V a 2 a C RF .x .��j F♦_ E x a, v `8 = LIFE �' • : »'-S3 ¢s'Ee� B X s ,y ; E 32 3; CYy -ai icy '3� 9x ₹ Y RjY_y { x ₹ $ j S EFL 4j � YPv Yar VV z Ti i`Y �.AII 3 F� „i. ^fi 1�ozg'$� ^ ns uz6 cX$ {�x 5 e u x §Y 22 `� .. S �• O I � .' n . `J_2 }}E 6s �]] .. {S - ][� '� i C t ._ 2 $$5 & S • yly.R _' .11''fr._' fd 5 NF 1 F=FC 6C 21! NF _ iW;� i FSE YE „ aFin VFW 11111�ij.ca sI QQin �u� r 61n I N J[gato ISNa �_ ii 4?' ld�i. 6o_L . E A h E _c ,Y jig.. iIL t d " EE s li 8� S E PEs I E E s s 1 �.. s . FF yz r Iy �1 ' S.C¢ '-II c 'i a i •rg fU s J C�gU$ fl J0 [S y jY aav R. g ESQ ai Ei c555 1 re I 'es• a3 yaa t55a E:y s dFE Ea_a 2 • $aY , m :7 4...• o3 8- airF0 Ig �F E!c (xs _ 333yy a �•FCY E n ayp jY aSSF&tR" ¢ I icry aE nn Si ;.. I c•�4F ._$ 83'5`2 `YE nnpps F.i'��I ya Cy 2$ �EFEy gYs8[{:'ifi no d z- l SES 252 $ SI u d"yyY'3 �S (i Yi +:5 y iG •?z41/.� y Y' Sa L. 00z Ta `vim F$f Fip %�}_tYi Y�i .___E "i> $` 3ss66r� uy� i.�ii'.. F �dL SF# F NF F_dL S�3�F NF � Z!11EF __ 1 • WL W Y UQQW �� 1 Uc6' jry � \ U<6• VO JN Rn r 6y~j2 �. 2i0 1 dy~_ ♦ F a �y` T. Nry Wr. � LO? G• 1 F fi E a5' 4f +@ 3 xE" U 8 t Iii !..1 oEb. `s aYyyegdEE" {y gt = 2 = " iyp gy y. h' V $ y - y yp yy ' e € lii d Y • 8 EyP L i d' 9 i';6 FYI ii'fl tl [y- gVg pp&�, j y E%aag g"�a55laimni 55= .ia.i&Yf=$o�$3 dEyY%x°y{Y't '-a'°9'�'o"$i$ E°vim E .°.<y+o fr �9; o'°,5v € $ eF $ S �a5;e° •"ly Qqom�,,;j B � E aR,3i�C^'-'g P3 Sq:,g $LG B d S j°{y g dP.. I: }• 0222-->>i! E�� pN . am Ecp • F•$F 2�v .. PY 1_ S_ °=ID≥�5,.5t i. �.. � • a tiF . _ m.0. a U<w Yva lid,♦".tmyfF �I IJry F WCUW.. Y Q W ry C`Intr . <<141 t<w IFS Vl • E.5 QN L Y d 1, � ?t x4. ,.., •FYI o'"� V) Tj W'�" VV JJ W•� n Y 3^ 4N !J sad da a y§ i1 a¢ .yY Ep agge �P 3., � d xE yis . yI 'Cgsps I! pp _d t`al Jr� p�� gS$: S�•F�� :g ) �! _E y SE 5Y5 L `9Ea m t555 'SE.Y`F'b#a4•��3�f I I i'b. III �i uxssaE5 QgpmOea t65 3%�dy ayyj� ppYm E�V¢$GY I[ iF y CI Y• I."d_ F fE s $Y� OOZZ IYj y �e•%s$N $I{. F ED 2 .. c ' cYq 1 yYl• 2 YN I- y c aE�3 6W via �yo ufp I UQa JQW 411 -Q WLJ I N Fa '" EoaELL 18 bW r.WW F E, IE EY g E 3 a X .. EE L u L EEs ` 'I E XE t 3 3K8888882 ? Y xe£ i 4 s@ s- YY N d 09 �= ?p S+,l u u 5Lr iip [a Fa �P4 ISM,�; j €s E a pp t'• •(� E E E9'y Bey 6bba 'OC.j3� �X: a�E•L� :-�v.I $d+"bv'tRR: re ;?E s ii- £ �§ r ELF s _d . iu... c;.fl _iI oE2 -__� y•¢ 2 r[ o' Y £ d G n r • L E j 2 , V £ L GGG o2¢36 2q{ Cyy•♦� w rc c% r c ^E f.F'� 7 <' 2s o%�• ''E ¢ E b v E ..K Y E e`o 9 5 y`s3 X388 2 g��a �X 88 K Ic �'ZI3. a*s $p ES' E"EE s X31 Y 1gsnt .. , 13� SEE R¢�2Si zs4�'. gFs b� Zd�Ei TT 23 2 O i^.t ,I XT<, V .. V IL E= ) X� S' u ufa �a �g' y -o fL.:. ♦I o c= so$ WW F «w �a LJ l♦♦~jI♦ C •' 33C< a _�i 1$D (1) `<W' .............. U�y VJo Q W_ J • � �b4 ♦ •� L ry p X E 22s i� � E E2.. i • •�8 E S�X( 8 YE :5 ` E E3 It P;$EC�i= •Ei sfb g ���� �¢t66 YLq fl! 655 Eby x$ ai'3$F .. Qpc.EE•Q. y SS LL ib r-- u �Yg 62 im EE J. '. yJyPR S.F n 722 yo'%Yc LEVv E_¢�y. L � 33�.`e• y• b]L E$0 d i C• 5 3o E82 ^ry FJ S,`�;jj�Ej-a% EF9£nn $v 6 s�sX 2 FGi, pRs �3 ��P;, n5 ii ,%Ex3 od" '�'"&� `a' ']• 8"3sgg sF�•y .. r GSY e♦Sur z22�4. b{�Y�YV E` • }}$$^e �J, 2fJJ JPR'i �V•£>=I X_ESV -=CC LG3 MF ❑ Z F pC 0- - 3.F F V iZ�WG> j�'f Y• W C W I O j W n O W C QUQw iiry 1 UQW I �n ( U�a Via _V <<"i M1N CJS G.~= cNQQ I 0^ J 32Q 'f �j¢ ♦ yK St asz I sea: gos p r , ( WW G F F E r, E L , it b v� 3 > U. E L y 8 ygg 2 . I .� . I % .¢ " GL 'R 4 2 o p o i 8.53 y<%i, .! �� s �s ��% c .o - - c2¢•. }� t '3y`,P tl` is rJ Sa�5 'Jfl IS 9iz' 8G� J. t Yo r ¢ ' s �' E �y j9 �cE �Eyt VY I:8_ dE 'y �cf� ci''-.i €."( YEY ., E c♦/I$I. yy G¢ g9 dE i �I • e: ' L fi QY� Ems$ x9 dgc 6R�5 `ly 11 � 4 0 ;sa 3� ^. EYE � nn'0 2 of �.^ eb�rc 3 REF FGG 7 � Tlc.� ppynE "3 b Ldp io Qg- r • L 6 g X be Y'E' 'tv �a - 3 X3£ -'c B E�' q £y X31 V py[ S z !y 1V�ET 4�^§ZC . Li _^ YIL � Vy S�jV { y[tVT OO Z 1� O - .I 1 V SE L �„. prL •iC V C 1�•JL LJS{vY <-YV •• V! A[ a L• LC'V 1 ���F ZWT".; Fd•G SE > N ��1 j ufs -a oFZ -. tWifa I W� I $ " Q �n � gf2 2sYo {-6 IFS JJ•p ♦{ ^ E � ]TtV JNY T p�= • SN$J[ :rA I X•YY Any U] SryLL �n$ �,5 Y ^2 I m₹ i 1_ 1 li-P E t d YC.Ill , _E XHP € �s 3 .I os 2j{ JAS ark 2ji T I! i N- Y V Y L Z ! F I y a'; F. £3 E •'r'SEfic c� E Vc vm E i.f�Fe o„a F=t v! E 3 IE to -d 'F Eve E E ^ vdq 9 FEE r yao nrIEE .- • 3 I = ^" 3o p pC 9 E s `3x 8'� x FY € ' .g " �^ III fi L E[O ECb j ; �{. 5¢li Ivy t OOZZ is d ! g�3 Y5nV 002Y Lc gg�� .yip ➢$. „'U OOY i p V F #FE " .!k:_I°' 2 '•F " r Yse 7e➢�.... �9. I`el %Ij °¢ic i[30�• `�z.3,I o�e.c se 3PF {Y��J .� • • • - J • „ TE• l: E• F N ,(j�/tj�f •Y3 dN� XR₹ xR₹ FN �. a`S`W: 2: F r`v F .4 F 4.... Cl F F F' E g `� E [ s c 2 Y $ ` E " C�= F Be !F j g gy s p YC azi xgg}A"}A as spa e5 _ pH5 11 1 4 frfr Ixa E654 ! yy f[ z yy ay 1664 p' e e.�$�'bF�cv°? E uTexs$il oP72ca3 E YyS+°� v•! E n 3$ca.a E c 5 X3 2 nnLQ a 2�' S4 ' L$Q�\'vs asj ag�yg[gf �� �_ � sF : y'$ x8zz ( X I %FZ @[^£ T•n ro l +'- ql P F; s • n [Y IG 3��}} P U.L LL ->i., •'� p�J 4k V{{ Yn • • C Y �l . • _ € _ E 3 � NF�. 3'. F Y6 1te u MF _ f �L �� JIL .zl_ <WW t/o u�W o I�i ap "a pn �E-S xo '�VQ-2 {zo •M1�„^Tj JF{$1 €�C 1 dN 4 gnn dN v Y.ln gI LA pa s32 •yk ¢ 7�'s �, :�v lWW inn F t _ ii 353 �y 7 6 i 5 7 6 R I 0 E e s x$ 'm !Fr _'•G t fiY • \ r �il $ yC Lv --- is n I L 6id C>oR [ R" Iiii J YMi5 E i JJ •FF3 u S 4.: gY a3 *ym5 �.x� I� Li mayY- LJ 3 SSSIII W1 e} 6 {2� E y ('a 3- ,•_ 'Y4u y' �¢ E65.^• YF F N 1 1 C94 CO 8FS b y LY an V O'y[Ii tL Om E 6 pNN� �� Y�X u±!an� 20� = Y¢ CY_� gR� E nun) J1. Y 1{ cam E E c v E II YLE S u^ o nn 9 n ii TfnpF ^ Y➢ f Ob %�xoO CZ;i M�`R i�$£II2EE C ^FE? '^ 5 y'a"71�z£ � �� _'YS.Tt ₹^:S c2€E Y a * n Y z 2 O F Y + 2 iE 'x .r Y: ' 3i₹�3L,OOZZ :$ o V4v₹ $Yna 222- Et^9s GYG EOF_7 EFL .. -.YZ\x?k�i _des₹3$ H.`.1s€sF 3P a`E 'z15' W F '4 • LL 1a~j1 2 FY —o C 5a. ag F + v�rc I uo i JrQ-' ti I 6N 1 3n Nn dot s�Wd 1n ' 1Y'•tlyil f g � YI �rY I. S. •�s Yz^ I I x I Y E8 5 5 3 m a6: p a$: yLI{ c o m Ygg y��I� `( 3i: q-2 `E ti.. y p`'`a y gg .pb, E;t 5:� d_ J' •1 y3'f3'$5 E = 511! _' %1 I E -o_ E a si � EYg ci 3- •G�t1>�.Y. �I is E �i nLa i p._ T� `C E% ESy pY 3gs nr+�✓I E� g?_3F t i3 u E3 'Lg� S p o y " m uyy ti = "3^c ']Z �nr`v$ b mir oliS� Y icy, a''. ' �! uY≤_33 _°EI tE�^ 5Le T.n'yY E ~ 5 Y'I Ea - "rvEE fr is B 9dc'• E8 nry x IY po �j q Y 4 t 3 - Fi •�] Y 3 y 1 #~# r •3 T^ wily u≥ O L i s � _e jA n b_ z pw O o£ •: qo OOZZ .5 o Q) Ia5 o OOgz i.- g ' i5 •nO w1 Y' Z2p b,p "; x3_ 2� , Ic) = g; x= 2u • •S 3 Y V • tl { Y • • Yqq • Yyy\ �!" F =dr i�?� NF i,_' Z!W 3. 3E • E =�F W &C W 111 Y: WdW6 WW 1 50A ! Ww n �IY n n mry F Ys ' I • I 8 m 9 � Y nYd ii cCS C 0 y nT� 1 ✓ S 1 8 j yyC X� IN I Y 5 tp jp lj y{ F U $ 1 Y GME Ex ph �Jb Qw14 S �Y{' Ei L3 R# 1� .^(. Fr sEp c��, �: dpi ..11 p = E tlj sY g c' E X r$ X I 3SN .Y b9y Cf CIY Y S E L y; W �32X Yta+ I I.. c1 2'x 8a bFjl vm E b ud$ vxgF f.F r,. ��j '� 09 3 €ftrv�� Y °[ 3d5 4 E Fn •ri ;I Q f y y ga FC o ) py g�-$'y. •9.��i$9 EgL �•I 'c aid�.�Y4 Jea EEEE ~'5�y..S ey¢cX.R Eui R ��(I.. piF�5� aRya z666 15�\ a di $w VtlOiz'e�1 C%yI ; R�I iC TFt `p xx _£ 3�L�p f �dc aE 3EF �G��_i YEi ��I o�d Gc ii S�r `_F._S_i.'3�l r=��SE 3.eE NE YI MF jQW In LJcrt , •��• 'a k idoE •.' Id�'Y. W W F I r n ry ry z d iii Eat .L Y � ,a 1� li raft � 1 >$= Ea=' jilt V.�i EE.F s Asxa ' e4E E : s :d5 33� 4u1- 4 n S� RC ��y • • �N 3 �dE m€33E � z�#1 I IS S. I$S o f: F F. IS 6] I zn Y£ s' Mau a�i31 _ I j y p s E W F 'e. ₹ {y 99 tFF yy _j[[j t �{y e•' Ey,H =iii 1,X ��=Z}i E EdiL da Y'Y �•`^ IRE VIV 1fl. iii ��RE"93-m EA'63 L gaV YaX Et t;i°Y' wIE i•e`5`'w. at;: �^vm EI Yi b 8 1. n `tr[. YY f • nid Y39e sGEE r•Yi �� 3 0oo- iEY aiy �l gg YY • _ r, 5 $'Q _ `33 gxE s i �vv x sJp�. ;R.s xgzz i Sg Y2L •• 2S II ��t3O tZ S Ya •LZ yy IY •. _p Y n--, a R �JG `V i E� i. VS { Y Y[ X F gdC E'33` NF 4.W3 u≥ tlYA YSY wnw I lain- Q Qiin_ � �ry I G�w I �o r FA`Ir N J7 t}4L f yN4NJ G. s r 2`L y?y? y • Go WLLWV n n ry ry G n'l ry Q w l �ry L=_J >y i�o N I. Ii lle nC_ rt/ jij A^u 2-u ry i 4 p E E 5 E 4h g 1111 pj3 c _ j3pjyq s aE o at t65- Se l Q��I r Efl y $2 t66a I& ^9�y.. W a • a 'a ` S 3 •Lf� c6� E¢ t cy — E G EF 17I 3da.VFflIi F.roE a_�I[ V gysa $a lea gry e ay• p Z F =ems •� 3_� �E ,_. ___..._....._ tsiEs s1s!sIlJ!suiM4 flJ'dsZ dLAiss'•a�&11!; a1J7j•, jno � ew] I NOJSNZM J34.lp :aweN I0LZL 8V'alllnallaAed issed41noS pue Wed leua2aa a4; laoddns I O 40Z a1!ns laaJlS uos4Dl0 ,3 LIZ Dll';uawdol0A8Q sss(edd%noS h'N'V Yw pf) TLP weay ssed4{nos a4 i 'AlaJaDuiS (2'4' Hw4) „18L JagwaA0N a (auueaH a.f) Hit JagwanoN (auueaH oZ) 15LZ .agopO (gvueaH A KL jagol0O a :sMollol se aie salep 8uilaayl Ipunoj A)iD 04-L vacs aq yoddns moA lal pue awoaseald sMollol se palnpaWs s2u!laaw o!Ignd to iagwnu e aneq a/vt •sn opie D s1418ulllew .• pue Molaq xoq aq l guaq) Aq poddns moA Moos aseald ••'. '}t t,,".1..--. `S.` Z 4JT 'lL-);ed 6&9Pssed4lnos•MMM//:d114 I $11.. F1r ^••s•'i 'C r :!sun asea!d •ssed4lnos PUP Wed L* 3zf5�i$141 x ` a 9 eal 01 a114 PInoM noA ll... I �fl wCf 'T �_ '3L3d18 I;rd(ilova Sli 13 3� • 'allmagaled;o suazl11D a43 0L. To the Citizens of Fayetteville, If you would like to learn more about the new Regional Park and SouthPass, please visit: http://www.southpassdevelopment.com/ Please show your support by checking the box below and mailing this card back to us. We have a number of public meetings scheduled as follows please come and let your support be seen. The City Council Meeting dates are as follows: • October 7TM (P' Hearing) • October21'T (z'°Hearing) • November 4Th (3Hearing) • November 18m (4'a Hearing) Sincerely, The SouthPass Team N I support the Regional Park and SouthPass! Name: (..4%lcr/4tT L__ _ Email_(ti)/L(SQo1{_, NET L. Writeyour Ward here: PLACE STAMP HERE SouthPass Qss SouthPass Development, LLC 217 E. Dickson Street. Suite 204 Fayetteville, AR 72701 Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 2, 2008 3:08 PM From: ehowerton@nowcreative.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by . (ehowerton@nowcreative.com) on Thursday, October 02, 2008 at 16:08:52 Name: Eric Howerton support: ISupport SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Sunday, October 5, 2008 6:09 PM From: alex@blu-designs.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (alex@blu-designs.com) on Sunday, October 05, 2008 at 19:09:59 Name: Alexandria Ferguson support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 B:30 AM From: krystal.bradley@tyson.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (krystal.bradley@tyson.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 09:30:56 Name: Krystal Bradley support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 10:00 AM From: drewmheim@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (drewmheim@gmail.com) on Friday, October 03, 2008 at 11:00:59 Name: Andrew Michael Heim support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 10:54 AM From: jennifer.grondin@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [ennifer.grondin@yahoo.com) on Friday, October 03, 2008 at 11:54:19 Name: Jennifer Grondin support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 8:22 AM From: graddix@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (graddix@hotmail.com) on Friday, October 03, 2008 at 09:22:08 Name: Michael Heck support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 9:03 AM From: schoggin@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (schoggin@gmail.com) on Friday. October 03, 2008 at 10:03:36 Name: Nick Schogin support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 1:09 PM From: stuart.baber@afbic.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (stuart.baber@afbic.com) on Friday, October 03, 2008 at 14:09:18 Name: Stuart Baber support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 2 Submit: Submit 'Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 2:59 PM From: jrbarnet@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jrbarnet@uark.eduj on Friday, October 03, 2008 at 15:59:43 Name: Jenah Criss support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 9:04 AM From: jkrusse@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jkrusse@gmail.com) on Friday, October 03, 2008 at 10:04:41 Name: Julie Russell support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 3, 2008 9:35 AM From: jerrybilly@aol.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jerrybilly@aol.comj on Friday. October03, 2008 at 10:35:18 Name: Jerry B. Pendergist, Jr. support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 2 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 4:49 PM From: jt_ferguson@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jt_ferguson@hotmail.com) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 17:49:30 Name: Joe Ferguson support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 4:27 PM From: kwfowle@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [kwfowle@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 17:27:23 Name: Kevin Fowler support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 4:26 PM From: qschratz@ceieng.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (qschratz@ceieng.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 17:26:13 Name: Quinn Schratz support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6.20084:14 PM From: justind6975@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (justind6975@hotmail.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 17:14:12 Name: Justin Williams support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 4:02 PM From: aaron_blaney@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (aaron_blaney@yahoo.comf on Monday. October06, 2008 at 17:02:53 Name: Aaron Blaney support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:57 PM From: gmon2008@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [gmon2008@cox.net) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 16:57:24 Name: T. Garen White support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday. October 6, 2008 3:55 PM From: nstreett@ozarkcivil.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (nstreett@ozarkcivil.comj on Monday.October06, 2008 at 16:55:35 Name: Nathan Streett support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 3 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:56 PM From: mwhitequeenbee1 @aol.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (mwhitequeenbeel@aol.com) on Monday. October 06. 2008 at 16:56:04 Name: C. Michele White support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:53 PM From: coryziehe@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (coryziehe@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:53:30 Name: cory ziehe support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 200B 3:52 PM From: bradgrounds@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by . (bradgrounds@gmail.com) on Monday, October 06.2008 at 16:52:17 Name: Brad Grounds support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:54 PM From: doughtys@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (doughtys@hotmail.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:54:18 Name: sheri doughty support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Farm Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:49 PM From: sdhardin@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (sdhardin©cox.net] on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:49:46 Name: Dave Hardin support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:40 PM From: kentrina@booneritterinsurance.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (kentrina@booneritterinsurance.com) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 16:40:42 Name: Kentrina Wages support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:39 PM From: cjmiles07@hotmail.com To: forni@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by jcimiles07@hotmail.comj on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:39:40 Name: Cody Miles support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:27 PM From: girdnerk@gmaiI.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (girdnerk@gmail.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:27:44 Name: Krystal Girdner support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:25 PM From: kimberlym@ruizfoods.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (kimberlym@ruizfoods.com) on Monday, October 06.2008 at 16:25:21 Name: kimberly myers support I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:20 PM From: ronbrown@nwarjr.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (ronbrown@nwarjr.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:20:40 Name: Ron Brown support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:21 PM From: fred.mcgraw@linde.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (fred.mcgraw@linde.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:21:12 Name: Fred McGraw III support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit i Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:04 PM From: ryanbrown@nwarjr.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (ryanbrown@nwarjr.com] on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:04:05 Name: Ryan Brown support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 3:02 PM From: jessikaja@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [essikaja@gmail.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 16:02:21 Name: Jessika James support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 200B 2:47 PM From: karakinyon@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (karakinyon@gmail.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 15:47:01 Name: Kara Kinyon support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 2:37 PM From: jamesgeurtz@sbcglobal.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jamesgeurtz@sbcglobal.netJ on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 15:37:33 Name: James Geurtz support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 8:30 AM From: krystal.bradley@tyson.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [krystal.bradley@tyson.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 09:30:56 Name: Krystal Bradley support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 5:46 PM From: brown2247@sbcglobal.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (brown2247@sbcglobal.net) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 18:46:13 Name: Stephanie Brown support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 6:43 PM From: karen_camille@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [karen_camille@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 19:43:30 Name: Karen Wright support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 7:37 PM From: sarahgeurtz@sbcglobal.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (sarahgeurtz@sbcglobal.net) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 20:37:53 Name: Sarah Geurtz support ISupport SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 7:40 PM From: princesskimberly67@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (princesskimberly67@yahoo.com) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 20:40:46 Name: Kimberly Dawn Kiser support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form , Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 8:00 PM From: nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by flon Monday, October @6.2006 at 21:00:21 Name: Amy support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 8:53 PM From: terry.bryan@cox.net, To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by iterry.bryan@cox.net) on Monday. October 06, 2008 at 21:53:19 Name: terry bryan support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 9:02 PM From: nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (Jabbour) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 22:02:44 Name: Gaby support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 9:08 PM From: skrobin66@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [skrobin66@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 22:08:25 Name: Scott Robinson support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 10:32 PM From: dweaver004@centurytel.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (dweaver004@centurytel.net) on Monday, October 06, 2008 at 23:32:56 Name: Dawn Weaver support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 6, 2008 11:25 PM From: Idbrown 1958@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (Idbrown1958@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 00:25:51 Name: Larry Brown Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 6:37 AM From: maddogsranch@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (maddogsranch@cox.net) on Tuesday. October 07, 2008 at 07:37:12 Name: Donna Potter support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 7:15 AM From: jason_d_prudden@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jason_d_prudden@yahoo.comj on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 08:15:45 Name: jason prudden support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 9:04 AM From: hahnk11 @yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (hahnkl 1 Cyahoo.comj on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:04:17 Name: Kyle R. Hahn support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit J Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7,, 2008 9:08 AM From: gjhahn@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (gjhahn@cox.net) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:08:38 Name: Janey Hahn support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 9:09 AM From: gjhahn@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [gjhahn@cox.net] on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:09:01 Name: Kurtis Hahn support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 9:OB AM From: gjhahn@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (gjhahn@cox.net) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:08:51 Name: Gary Hahn support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 9:13 AM From: rylo13@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (rylol3@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:13:56 Name: Ryann Lockhart support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 9:14 AM From: gjhahn@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (gjhahn@cox.net] on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:14:13 Name: Dusty Rhodes support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October'7, 2008 9:16 AM From: randee2221 @yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (randee2221 @yahoo.comi on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 10:16:06 Name: Miranda R Helmbeck support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 9:40 AM From: mds6l 981 @hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [mds61981@hotmail.comj on Tuesday. October07, 2008 at 10:40:00 Name: Melissa Siemens support ISupport SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:02 AM From: woodruffkelly@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (woodruffkelly@yahoo.com] on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:02:37 Name: Kelly Woodruff support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:05 AM From: donpughiii@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by idonpughiii@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:05:19 Name: Don Pugh support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:05 AM From: robash83@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (robash83@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:05:34 Name: tabatha taylor support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:06 AM From: jstumbaugh@westfork.kl2.ar.us To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jstumbaugh@westfork.k12.ar.us) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:06:29 Name: jennifer stumbaugh . support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 3 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:08 AM From: nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by fan Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:08:11 Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday. October 7, 2008 10:19 AM From: eakyle 197152@aol.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (eakylel97152@aol.cornj on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:19:55 Name: Ann Kyle support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 10:23 AM From: djtreat@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (djtreat@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 11:23:10 Name: Doris J.Treat support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 1 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 11:19 AM From: Elizabeth,Nash@att.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (Elizabeth.Nash@attnet) on Tuesday, October 07. 2008 at 12:19:34 Name: Elizabeth Nash support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 12:21 PM From: mistymistylynn@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [mistymistylynn@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 13:21:34 Name: Misty Erickson support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 12:27 PM From: brewer33@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (brewer33@cox.net) on Tuesday. October 07, 2008 at 13:27:10 Name: Clint Brewer support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7.2008 3:16 PM From: nateb121@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [nateb121@yahoo.com) on Tuesday. October 07, 2008 at 16:16:17 Name: Nathan Bell support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 8:44 PM From: sarahgeurtz@sbcglobal.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [sarahgeurtz@sbcglobal.net) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 21:44:37 Name: Sarah Geurtz support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 8:21 AM From: dacoker@excite.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (dacoker@excite.com) on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 at 09:21:11 Name: darrell coker support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 12:26 PM From: justinfaucette@coldwellbanker.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by Austin.faucette@coldwellbanker.comj on Tuesday, October 07.2008 at 13:26:11 Name: Justin Faucette support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 12:21 PM From: mistymistylynn@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (mistymistylynn@yahoo.com) on Tuesday. October 07, 2008 at 13:21:34 Name: Misty Erickson support•I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 7:15 PM From: tbryan@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (tbryan@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 20:15:17 Name: Tammy Y. Bryan support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 200B 7:14 PM From: cjb@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (cjb@uark.edu) on Tuesday, October 07.2008 at 20:14:08 Name: Cory J. Bryan support I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 1:49 PM From: jac17@uark.edu . To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [lad7@uark.edul on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 14:49:11 Name: Jeremy Cobb support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 7:28 PM From: trbeglin@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (trbeglin@hotmail.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 20:28:52 Name: Thomas R. Beglinger support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 7:13 PM From: nbryan72@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (nbryan72@gmail.com) on Tuesday. October 07.2008 at 20:13:20 Name: Nicholas D. Bryan support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October B, 20083:37 AM From: jwconley@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by fjwconley@uark.eduj on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 at 04:37:07 Name: Johnathan William Conley support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 2 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October B, 2008 12:26 PM From: courtney.ralston@dorel.usa.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (courtney.ralston@dorel.usa.com) on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 at 13:26:52 Name: Courtney Ralston support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7.20087:14 PM From: bryant@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (bryant@gmail.com) on Tuesday, October 07, 2008 at 20:14:45 Name: Terry D. Bryan support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 11:45 AM From: drearlsmith@hotmail.co.uk To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [drearlsmith@hotmail.co.uki on Wednesday.October08, 2008 at 12:45:08 Name: Dr Carl A Smith support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 5:56 PM From: joshuaclarion@windstream.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by Qoshuaclarion@windstream.net) on Tuesday. October 07, 2008 at 18:56:43 Name: Joshua Horn support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 11:04 AM From: cdogden@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (cdogden@uark.edu) on Wednesday. October 08, 2008 at 12:04:48 Name: Clarissa Ogden support: ISupport SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2008 6:41 PM From: nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [j on Tuesday. October 07, 2008 at 19:41:49 support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 1:47 PM From: atableandchairs@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (atableandchairs@hotmail.com) on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 at 14:47:46 Name: christopher clark support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 2:50 PM From: ndallen7l @hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [ndallen71@hotmail.com) on Wednesday, October 08, 2008 at 15:50:00 Name: Nickie Allen support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Wednesday, October 8, 2008 11:03 PM From: thewizard166@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (thewizard166@yahoo.com) on Thursday. October 09, 2008 at 00:03:19 Name: Matthew J McNelley support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 200B 10:54 AM From: courtney.ralston@dorelusa.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (courtney.ralston@dorelusa.com) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 11:54:34 Name: Courtney Ralston support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 12:42 PM From: caseyboy24@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com, Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (caseyboy24@gmail.com] on Thursday. October 09, 2008 at 13:42:43 Name: Casey Hooper support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 1:01 PM From: bown.stevie@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [bown.stevie@gmail.com) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 14:01:52 Name: Stephanie Bown support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 3:04 PM From: fora rowser@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (loramwser@hotmail.com) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 16:04:31 Name: Lora Rowser support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 1 Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 4:14 PM From: drcrissy@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (drerissy@gmail.com) oh Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 17:14:10 Name: Christine Bobbitt support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit I Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 4:58 PM From: kingof5k@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (kingof5k@yahoo.com) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 17:58:58 I Name: Kyle Yarbrough support: I Suppoit SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit I Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 6:37 PM From: redheadsmith@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (redheadsmith@hotmail.com) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 19:37:41 Name: Jesse Smith support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 8:41 PM From: pennybi976@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form., It was submitted by [pennyb1976@yahoo.com) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 21:41:46 Name: Penny Belt support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008 9:57 PM From: jturk@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jturk@uark.edu) on Thursday, October 09, 2008 at 22:57:43 Name: Jessica Turk support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 10, 2008 12:26 PM From: lukedockery@gmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment,com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (lukedockery@gmail.com) on Friday, October 10. 2008 at 13:26:36 Name: Luke Dockery .support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 10, 2008 2:25 PM From: doegman@cox.net To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [doegman@cox.net) on Friday, October 10, 2008 at 15:25:42 Name: Eric W. Doege support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Friday, October 10, 2008 2:55 PM From: amberh640@aol.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [amberh640@aol.com) on Friday, October 10, 2008 at 15:55:07 Name: Rachel Harrison support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Sunday, October 12, 2008 12:08 AM From: nathanmcdonald69@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [nathanmcdonald69 iyahoo.com) on Sunday. October 12, 2008 at 01:08:55 Name: nathaniel scott mcdonald support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Sunday, October 12, 2008 B:44 PM From: joncarl@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by [joncarl@uark.eduj on Sunday. October 12.2008 at 21:44:25 Name: Jonathan C. Carlsmith support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Sunday, October 12, 2008 9:38 PM From: aboecker06@hotmail.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (aboecker06@hotmail.com) on Sunday, October 12, 2008 at 22:38:29 Name: Andrew Boecker Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 13, 2008 1:17 AM From: mcoltrai@uark.edu To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (mcoltrai@uark.edu) on Monday, October 13, 2008 at 02:17:03 Name: Michael Edward Coltrain II support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit Subject: Feedback Form Date: Monday, October 13, 2008 1.1:44 AM From: AmandaDonGraham@yahoo.com To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Conversation: Feedback Form Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (AmandaDonGraham@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 13, 2008 at 12:44:04 Name: Amanda Graham support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit Feedback Form http://mai i.south passdeve lopment.com/eg i-bin/v ie wm a i l .exe?id... From: corywhorton@cox.net <corywhorton@cox.net> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 01:12 pm Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (corywhorton@cox.net) on Tuesday, October 14, 2008 at 13:12:33 Name: Cory WHORTON support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 3 Submit: Submit I of 3 10/28/08 8:37 AM Feedback Form htip://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmail.exe?id... From: nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com <nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Wednesday, October 15, 2008 01:41 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (p) on Wednesday, October 15, 2008 at 01:41:40 Name: Charles p Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit I of I 10/28/08 8:37 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmail.cxc?id... From: dwdavidwright@yahoo.com <dwdavidwright@yahoo.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Thursday, October 16, 2008 09:43 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (dwdavidwright@yahoo.com) on Thursday, October 16, 2008 at 09:43:20 Name: David Wright Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit I of I . 10/28/08 8:36 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmai l.cxc?id... From: Hipjmb03@yahoo.com <Hipjmb03@yahoo.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Monday, October 20, 2008 12:14 pm Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (Hipjmb03@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 20, 2008 at 12:14:22 Name: Joel Michael Berry Ward: Ward 1 Submit: Submit I of 1 10/28/08 8:35 AM Feedback Form http: //mail .southpassdevelopmcnt.com/cgi-bin/viewmail .ex e? id... From: Hipjmb03@yahoo.com <Hipjmb03@yahoo.com> • To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: . Date: Monday, October 20, 2008 12:14 pm Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (Hipjmb03@yahoo.com) on Monday, October 20, 2008 at 12:14:36 Name: Joel Michael Berry support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 1 Submit: Submit I of I 10/28/08 8:36 AM Feedback Form http://mailsouthpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmail.exe?id... From: joshuaestes@hotmail.com <joshuaestes@hotmail.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 01:08 pm Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (joshuaestes@hotmail.com) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 at 13:08:17 Name: Josh Estes support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit 1 of 1 10/28/08 8:34 AM Feedback Form http://mai i.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmai i.exc?id... From: ruthiejn@yahoo.com cruthiejn@yahoo.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 11:53 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (ruthiejn@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 at 11:53:53 Name: Ruth Niehues support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 1 Submit: Submit I of! 10/28/08 8:34 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cg i-bin/v iewma i l .exe?i d... From: abeamireh@yahoo.com <abeamireh@yahoo.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 03:47 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (abeamireh@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 at 03:47:29 Name: Abe Amireh support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 2 Submit: Submit r I of 1 10/28/08 8:34 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmail.exe?id... From: shcniehues@yahoo.com <shcniehues@yahoo.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 12:02 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (shcniehues@yahoo.com) on Tuesday, October 21, 2008 at 00:02:10 Name: Sharon Niehues support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 2 Submit: Submit I of 1 10/28/08 8:35 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmail.exe?id... From: dlsstewart@yahoo.com <dlsstewart@yahoo.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 09:07 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (dlsstewart@yahoo.com) on Wednesday, October 22, 2008 at 09:07:23 Name: Deborah Stewart support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit I of 1 10/28/08 8:33 AM Feedback Form http://mail.south passdevel opmc nt.com/cg i-bin/v i ewma i l .ex c?id... r Ion From: jwillgoesfast@gmail.com <jwillgoesfast@gmail.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008 01:07 pm Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (jwillgoesfast@gmail.com) on Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 13:07:22 Name: Jeremy Williams support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 4 Submit: Submit 10/28/08 8:32 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewniail .exe'?id... From: cwalbe@gmail.com <cwalbe@gmail.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008 09:50 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (cwalbe@gmail.com) on Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 09:50:21 Name: Courtney Walbe support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit i I of 1 - 1O/28/O8 8:32 AM Feedback Form http://ma i l .southpassdevelopment.com/cgi-bin/viewmail.exe?id... From: Rbbilli@uark.edu <Rbbilli@uark.edu> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008 08:20 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (Rbbilli@uark.edu) on Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 08:20:21 Name: Ryan Billingsley support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Ward 3 Submit: Submit I of 1 10/28/08 8:32 AM Feedback Form http://mail.southpassde ve lopment.com/cgi-bin/vi ewmai l.exe? id... From: nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com <nobody@vux.bos.netsolhost.com> To: form@southpassdevelopment.com Cc: Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008 01:09 am Subject: Feedback Form Attachments: Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by () on Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 01:09:17 Name: Jonathan Perry support: I Support SouthPass Ward: Not Sure Submit: Submit N I of! 10/28/08 8:33 AM in N A. d.' C TM U,r U . �q o' no e n o E N ,; C O w G� 0 V 0 g O N t V �O m C 7 C Y T q tio a, V V q a, a dF L V O C rOLL o L N T Y U O• u T 3 (d v 0 c E v o x o o I o d d LL r o N � '? F V aJt vC O q d C L t i u Q d 4-'o E yL 3 u 3 I m Q m� N N ' I a z O t o m = 3 ° a a n � Y E J ' d oa o E 4 O C. sY r r ,' A A. .......... ........................I a 8 00 .9 4 I. r O /Al l z c z Ct 9 vTi v S 7t1 W N y (� Vp n °--I ..• H m n d e 3 mm ea: °° a mmm w9����a�mm' o sat T1° 9 y T CD. D 0 m o S e A ° 7 y ''> 'p' '3 >y n id _ C v� o m oa a m v o m • d o o'i 3 e • e a m a° �5' m 0 no a p ,fl C A y 1r LL y • : 00th: a W N N N r cc n Si 7d Wy p y g. n 0t Cd, V/ y a•o ' m m Cl, d vfla O `G 0-t y .s Cl, W N r Z o 9 m VJ c n n � 9 a ° B a R N R U G m n 0 Ct U •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Is •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• t( m CD rt H CD E. d '' •<. O y d w �. p p G' G 2 a N d m it o w -- ¼J Cy�Aw is °.wNoo CDt v p- o, w yCfl V w 'n d' 3 — O N 00 'OO-co C z J N N A d p 8 S A N + O n N o• w y - d o n n < N (an . <c 5_ O '< p N w 2 (a m a '^ ❑ 00. w m " n a d o v w o o F w w o O c w O N p o y I D A cro O O N' 8 -. - d O O a n' p O -a. W O J G d O S c "sa A p R S N F. 3 mm ., d p d N p 3 m a ' tla R Q _ p y rt n p F�3� -• 0. •fir a 3 o m A 5' m o -S•N 3•a m c •i 9 < rt. O �a 3 rt T .. (� S O 9 � p H /tea rara CD O C oa,�v o r El ft C ! t r . Oq A N . ttl 22 O• r R G G UCl �Q y n; ao c Cl u s= E E o o o x L yU o,gs° o dr E a. oO4) C «« c3 a 3 O Z >ai 0I_. ai o « y a fA y O O R 'O N N N y N N N Oq •+ o o c aCi i° o c y o S Y ' 0.. > o ro,'2 E E « •J o > cuyT E 00 y v No c DEoNBggdmS_3>�°�ov 3 oq ._ ._ 2 P •o L` o `O S « o a00 '> aui ai EC W W v T� E� a� w v G o °' :? � c K •o �' p �, con 3 N •« m a a .C S I I v E aVi° `' c x G7 5° ti bbo o •E m O o ^�U _ �• c u S E c c A 3 N �� $' o O � •a 0 O - A' ' O O Ln T T N U• .l 0€ �. . Ct ti >` 00 O L 0 >` N .p Q O O N F Cl •e u a v •O aui •� e0 : w a F v °' v d E E E '� u A o m Q Cp $ ¢ J. Q b [� L a� 0 3 u • 'u ni j y d c".Fa m t A v r.. C •' Cl.5 E z .4 ccl It 5 a axi c I_x a O :: o ,d. 3 E v b $ v v li°2 v t o v© o ra Ll OOO rl u7 '� �F�•N °� 5a•o I-. C u O y° S• �Ya a (d C y Q U) A G u a o O •� O K°� 6 tyC P. N E� N o c p s O •= y }p Ns C..'. VaJ >� N� b a N 0« ° °E o Leo a y ecio E o° d m o o`b $° $R b o> v d y ti v `o •5 z U _ E '� d tC U .� �U. _• 5CaE�°'eo32a aco S°°y>°��> [. >. E O U c+a 3— N o ` 0� a N t L 5 A c 3 o �yy •a v �" 11.c.. v En o • •° c n, a Y V D u r y> u N N c a R p^ T p W o Ok. p N 'O L N 7 R p p V7 5- V G €' O •••••••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••• NO Npoo O N O 0 ,an to w' R N to m m 4 2.w c T - m ' toO 'o° aro E v w ≤. nm Zo ^ n O o Ln 8 A m J o^ m J w o rn H . a m x p o c. o QCDCD' l7 < - CD COw s? p' s? CD 0 CDo v - R7 4 ao_ .. -, -n O En N S. (nm °� < 500 » r°° o o _- 4 `° •� J y O S w `G J " I -= -� J C J ' ° o- 3 m m n a a c -t d y o. ° d c -Q afl- CD a CD o o o .-.C, 3, • C ? I °o to o m ° a 2 °° 5' o 3 3 a. aJ° m - ,y .9to Crl A z 2o z o J D -' J Z o to p_ � z i o n m j 3 Y'U o0 -1 9 • ct pD a v 0 r- i I I S C rf —• °o m CD C'• N I N o M O I rn O 0 III'SCt a,° H °C O n7 G ; rLy o w nl� J LT » 9 CO CO .................................. J C l. CI $ `J I 4 2 11 9 6 �. yi 3� 9 a S C SE a G=°' pi C Y k ic8 V � ¢ C qg I c bb c c :o<oen a_ GAFg „'S u� pp A y4L _. yd B fi_2F 4 Epa EE 0 ^ " pp E .� v uaIEEla.Yda• ' I E .ti. B Ce siG }25 �IJ�F 2g�9 e e Y E " a x 2 I, uw vCiuu S°;° go g 5 ib EE E N -.b 5 — �z T •— hPJ-N 2 2 -2 222c2 appe - fr cc J J J JJJJJ PY ap• ° V V '6aG• a ',J i 6 o g" s CCC �2 ^ 33E m -,Y m3 s .22 a a E— 'i _^ = c s re "J `—l•iL43 fI s rcS E pS 21126 cb G �^ X30 O a' 6 y, a� mj12a —pAL _aC a c555 'ccfrmn �i 9J r2ar a'E p8 ¢ LLa$to.2 `3u 2 a 5Eavoo ¢ m ¢ zLLdd2$�E2E3 u a_4-2ym5 °t "� 8s $ m �" Ii s id V�a�uu -13$ gg VFFdF VQwZSc�2 $€Y n2. y€ E s r==Nn °e aA yyy�m U'2a EE 2222"a 2 2 2 .2222.2.2 S 25 a"t „� NN o a 23� ER JJJJJ JJJJJ) FLo ZFJ F- Na LL` ', KY= FF iYgQ2. CC 6 r m j e @ o a E E S g ry v - @o 22 6• ¢ _ mT;owoenE lG0� b0 bVfr �' floe E - a'v T 2� LLm E E SE 3u s uv LL ry 32 " y�gsss E a _ LL $ m a m a -m •N T P - "2 'e R y 22 2 2'"2 ''2'"2 2 a C C JJ J J J )JJJ T N N r LL N KK- C. c ,m, �m . " Sy N G b'fr R as yy25 K LLJBigG3 S m ^L` a y e$ !R G m^J 00 9Q I—rt y BGese6amE2�6ar Y .S6y 5 _ R _ s 55 cYR Y b EE • Q §^e U3 O= •J 6Y"J Y".J 1-GxxF EEC {.1541ZN6N 2 E a oe0 y p¢ i6 �' N k HE Y _T a rSry N -_ rvv 5 F 0 o R E tlA '^2 2n^E EE 22 2 2 cat 22 2 2'2 '222 0 ? o°e J❑_ JJ J JJJJJ) J JJ JJJ Z / ZBF m. LL5 NNNZ Nm a g s c '$ s¢c 5cRI 6 ecc AAA g co i m 2 C C 2 5 E _J - 0 U U Fix m aytlkojfiym$20� 9=7'bsi `3 ��ii 11.11 55�65� B «9 0 Ee 4'2 uY yfi°£ 3 b- LLFgp o_12 o uY o ai cyfra �x a $ y� �`3 .° 1 u3 WSZjIi2J Ld o0v�'. 2 $811 b {a f =E N_e_oa .na —a.n rvn aN n NT 2 b E mm `o oA J nli x 'eb 5<m• a 2E F _ 2222222222222 2 222 o o eo° mm fr vvao ac J J J JJJ Z Z Z t Nn LL Nm Z Y a 5sm a c 2 0 " g 2 u 3oG 5 iii b y 3 S' a B J 1fr9ah.i4 $ mi I. ,, m <U 2 `d@ `Q $ 5E CL 99552 (J8°wS• Qz o'CC E G�' - ciR 63 u w Egm _ �-: °° E nee ueaa (ov a.noS -a+- - nei nn n nTv F F P 2$ F a "a '22'E2 E2z"211-112 2 222 P ° a "° ON—Yq ooa� �„ J JJJJJ JJJJJJJ J JJJ Z Z ZF LL 5 NNNm n.n Z 5 fr 2 'mLL s5m`o �a a ro$ X i a 5 BLs g$-3 fi EeE afr mfia Ec fifie lC �J '9g .amSa32 c¢ ¢ eta nreAn LL e rn U- - -n'Qeye -- - - - -33 - - Q GC GG 82 J J J ry Cl- 4NOZ �Z Z I5 tp 2 3 6 k om I. i i I. 0 `3595{11 a °° 255 L 6 = L ry N 9 22 ri 5 5 5 c fry •� yy 8 S JJ m6 N N N N ILNY Z 2 S J J 8E J 2 92 gas.40 5 y� m �� m I••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1 U rn VI fN z LeC �g Et �& i - _0 3> 3E2 �e_2g C F w n 3 n Y Y 9 C9 G r. N z _cc ccc c c 2 22 222 2 2 c>≥≥≥ a 9 ekkEo aC 3�Y E �a .a NVN V N P.. 3 z;g; C 3g Rn n3 9 �^:TG.�Q> 37t@ 3 7$gv iwOca ��'s 22 C§ T``22 Q9'e TF N a n i1•' b C .$$E .a .� a -. g-4 n 3 a �-F'nE �sxx w E E E 9 99a .-j n '^ GA� "' ^ N CC CCCC C C C CG 22 CC 2.ONY Oy,` NNN --°U a PN�QQNW 2 w 33 En 25 Gn F� � bC a N 8 6 66 �� RiRRR 99'' sC a' 'a o 3 T ^ 7e N Y a a•5 C R 04 SY pF p C $ w E n_ €aAg gg� Eye S ate' `� I 3 9 c Sq� qq E = g N 9'§ J u n�R wT §§ S a 2 E p N CC C C C 2- --� __ EEEE a -2 - i 2 • G T E LN ♦ • R - �MVCOpi • T .A ^ w� aaag�� 0 € £�_P p e p it. E a '<0 9 I1 ? a R p0¼flx 00 Cccccc C CC 1. . . . 2 CCCC 3434 j. s 9 a,. --L v yN ^ R 1R vg 2.3 3 5 k �Qv$ '- AE S�g3�aQ65 'cQee.�R w E 9 1 lh 8E Q^ J J C i P 'J • U n .- - V 2 3 g J�1C gL0N F G x x E T 6 C2 399a % R p- O ff e € 2 - _ . S 3 ; 2 - °3 99 3 1 3 } -n �Js C >a9 y t _ F _ d n 9 „ z . . C c cc J uw L- X � a ^n a Ii aa N C i nti d �.a uMo � L ttt�i�iiiiffff mmP Asa z W 2 2 Y Z C C- C a• - Ell Cagn°j o a Et�k E � A C a Cn 9P A w NNp S D aaP d •.•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 41= 00 ,> c = p_ 3 3 °N' .� •d' 'v °' '� > " ' - aNi y oe ='° 5 —u 3 En N t'a al 4 L 0 G S 'L' �„ O a) 5 5 a u u N° 5 e $ m _ �T E V o & $ o o p� T°m o E$u o• a e °Jd u $ .O5 c v o $ di O ..r1 '�Ln G LO L oce U '3 0p '� .. Y -O •� d lO ,. ,re_"u O o F G, 3 - 'C •� �' « m o E E S aN' u 6..0x0 `o oe m3gu =o it... E o ¢ 00 u i n a y" •� 6 b •« o .� K F ,, C a v u ecb u= ate, y o= Z o u 50 " •c $ °' l-- v LG• y a>i `'� '%n aci T — v ad. > 'ra' .� — o Y o` z7 7 V u E F «; 'O o9 .O L •� 0 9 .� O W �m v 9 ail m Urn 5 y u .u.;= e o.5 _ o E �Oc O R i Urn — .y 3 Y v $ c v v `� a E $ d f-• u L E N �e Y.. .u. wv> w.a y u u o .'> ° « pp 3 •° � ` m V vC G> ° C o c 5 " E ^a 0 0 m al U 3 w N C a) m On d .� u o o N Cm'Ob H V E EC4.. o_ £1. m y a p +'_ u o C s 5 o N u °000 lOO .. w g 7 s u F : aE E a) u oC ; >. O Syo 5 Y c N u oa) a a 3 t c c o.F �.= w ppu ydY my uy„ u.5 c Z w N 3 o0 u U y w CGo yaT'°,o'°avouu>5��ami aci n y � 'o c� a d o a u itC00, o� = d u �' =. > •° u E u E vE U 5g•v a c Q v r ° c5 my o y9S o°, nuwo w e �-•�QU o u n >'0 = v a 5 m .S dr `n3 ° o° $ s° '; Cn m mu u V E u u U o` p u u e m spa 0, 0, E N 3 c N> ,o p uoa S y o E b a W, u is 0 N Jo 3 3 a 0 o a s a .o ff≥ c E y o E O `u m_ >: u2 N •�_ Q °Y' V u '� ^FF G N «0..oy N vi u c w u = u N o « Noy '° E m •�` ami o° w� $ E E w a 3 .5 E o. �' 3 o ,$ .5 4 O cm u o '� o" o o> °' u p d p= c a c 5v'o•« 6bt c o m E t y 0 E .a .CU._O• d u c E y ca c c u N " m u u u = •° T'y o d a�i ' 'o CUU Uc iY ai a`' m `>° d Q .C) '. a`w' y y^ b '� > 't a'`d c i o w u v m Y as ° y .d. lC LY n' aN' lC •5 v o u a o '>ocn p ra m F m= c b U o o n. y u a3i c a N= E u Q.u. s a 0 T T ._ Cl) o w o c m a' = g S°° v o y o z auo=�o5o °oo'aoAd O•E$ ca E9° O pp ai o u y .G N' 5 pdV .C ,� C pN ,$ 'C ,�Cj• 7 fl U v ;J ai E .uye. U aE $ 3= y c a E _}.1 N^ .�0. •C a N° A r 0 N V G N .5 $ c ? 0C/)T o .? '5 v .v E — 5 ° ¢ Y . a Y m o o 'o u c d •u' E v v .. Yo C7 F= v° H G o d Q= F° S o y ? i. m aW Fc E 2 E o= s° n 5 •.•••••0••••••••••0••••!••••••0••• a _ _ >1 111 N y 8 r 00 F O a I � � I r I I I C I 9 c rM I z m w3 `°»° -v o o < 5• n -. Oz OR S Ea •' £ Se' g B O O0Q n a '° 'm ' •° �,' w B > > 9 OgrD :7 c, o = d m m N ,— T °o o �o ao .o"'. a o w e m O °c > >' o• a£ o ww< rt o [Cn m 3 0 o m �• a °9. p w _1 c c o f7 y n s v C X n _ o -O'< r y£ - -] s-° a c ro o- a 4 n z w w h z w° u3 0 rt a m _°, z ° o, ' c . O °' o a F. c V0 O, O n O' 00 S 6 ry o w v w o c 3 O a a o c A z o w° v c n •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Ws ba so Ochs a Wv$ aa)) 00 . Q t a 3 0 S C ct 0.Lu £ fit''-` d r N « T v p v W ≥ > Cm • O aci - t LU W O YtA �-•)d' > w G v v 0 LL 5 c e s E> uu as • bus x 00_c 'S, G Q•.4 t .'7. In v c o £ w r- 0 z z U y 00.0; ¢ v ai . c - }0 N 3G w s. 0. N 0 - • N M O v G o Co V V 7 7 U C F p& vi N H be CT O t t ai ) a) v •� G .3 t0• N"'UO •y t0 N tCO 9 L. 0 o u e •- =� a E c •° y v aG °� 'op m u A v :a 3 v A Y N 0D C a N tN y'e 0 .C_0 ° v 3 a U •e .5 � avi t v `� c% c �° c a - o y o Y A 3 pHCt C w 7 u 8- y 'y Y N .� i1 „ F •� l<I 5 r ld 'TOri•S asitF a °o� � � ° � � p''v 3 c v U L. v O 5 m X G p t a) N N E 0 O t V p p v .�O .E C L = y d d Y e N E° fp V d v 5 a y c° a.) a n• Y v v 0.aabC)4°Toa>icaoi0.5o�cgo0 .kN is •ar>i .^ ', h' a y ttl N 'en ^m t 00 04) 3) v € A r E c t ss_ •' E v00 o 0 = En — N U d y W« U C C •'mil F .. L m e3 t a d )tl N ' L' au$5 8 n yid .i°. 'y o a. E•'�- g vak To. t� 2 -a ag o eaio a) •o= .°� 3 o a •5 ��.. ?,` urn a o :J_ 3 $ C. v .y O L .cC EEEn A •G C tl C G > C u u E v N = p Y1 'j .� N F Gat 2 E En - y oa' 1-C a0°��> v ovo F 0 b a U$ A a) ;c 0 0 o o d u z o 3 0.0 E 0 0 0 0$ E tit m op H a m t= C] w d �_° v U° A «O v) v 'X U u N «. O y dv •o E> •o �vc EE y oa v= a) 0 as e o v t•s v p m= N B ............... .....I...........•.� 1w o m n ry R �, N = n a }.y 7. 4' o H ,� .wi• vnNi U. �• N 3 5 C 3 n rt a �' 'O 'C1O ��>oa (' E »; O G. �rJ' G tCn N)T E c• n >: ,m", °= ^' o �' w S D 3^ D 5 S 7' ^� .��. y y `�' E rn o m $ '0 n m O C n £ 6 w 6 H y -] m ≤. �' " a n C£ S a rt •� ,� —n '-I5 o n H n �. N n w a 3 ^ ljJ O^ 5 •O. n F -f y y �• �' ry�p �, 0. o-°' ^ of m o Nk.e Sv 3 '3 A m m w s° a w S' m ≤ p m c w eD E `• ?� �' n m o< c. y. n m@ n 3' g 5 v' 0 5' 'O �'' L'• Yi `° w n n N a m w nn 5 4 0 0 Fr o g 3 y E o y o a a 0 6 o° _£ n N' N S 3 m 5 m -• m o v n N c � 05 5 n m y c•rt m,e, o ao N w ^ n o^ ° a s g °> 5 S o m 5^ 5. .N �. ° v0 N y O R LJ r* '.a 0a00 0 N N p m x 5 n N 9 n a w S N £ -. a p1 • a w �' '. B m ,°.,� 5'• a �• m O q ° s c iNGf° m N - m 5'Uo00 n^ A ao N^ •mac, o lN5;^,�, °'-.- flQ 00 -nom 2 na. v�5 ,� c � 0 'Q.fl o � �• � ,o °� y £. v, `N° 4 � •`<° � 3 e F � m g E' ne≤.oE D's' oD 1OOo n£ n 4. 7 o o£ru =; N n N . 9 Y m a c C-- - 'a�' 00n $ m A .-` a •o 0 m vow 5 w w °n g S 3 7 0 3 y o o y c c T a c$° ao n n o 0 0•o n n z r n?.n =. d c 5 o n n £ � s=�aa o t+i w w� w•° ^Sc'•-49 a5 � x � � °1— o n=mv n m 5�a� m ate°°°. `o. a• ° < Sb ^.m moCn C,' e -. c' �' m_ m >: e o o n• :.� 5' y »: °' Q _ O o _S a 5. » �5' o »'�2 vo 5 cJ a m£ o n as n° H Er a ' o nv 3 N. w n# w 0 o g ≤ R c ° 5 o a ° `<°. o d m 3 `° F ' g. E o n. = o. e •o -• 3 o a= °° w'' — v° o? 5 aro s 0._ c o 3 c E CA 0 <' n g0.=0W0.9 ae$a 5 ca ^ .. ^ " y w a ° `< '' n ° £ `° w w' + ova in m v m ° o . g �. p' A ? O. Cs .» Y w N -. n 'v o $' a m n e�p n N o n" n• rp a 00 •po a5•'o ° 0a j, A H ° o aac° c.^ °°'Z = o. o w _ 9 v m o rn g 5 m H m o° n o o y' m a o_ n°. a" a ^o �• g w y$ 5 0 w y 8 0 z c o m x- g c ?; = w �< d m '? o ff �3 � °' c' °" 5 ® o a n m o- '+ '^ o' g << `^° _. as _ ' °• '+ E n m n �+, Ny _ 5 a n T N rr O ^, O .y N N �• O N^ p N= a'y d N w C R F ---.- C C WI U Ct C U bq a $ i L w N MI O h V h M P y C SW SW SSS MM MS W W MS Y Y - C g q q 'f. M. V. Y W N M q VI W g q y! S J a 5 t t 4 < f < < < < < < < < < f t S S S S 6 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■�„ - y� 0 i i S 6 i 6 i i i i L ■. ■� 6 L L L L p a _ 4 J� L 1 \a L' _ ^ -1 i, 1. r '1 dv - z I - r. U I - •••..•......•..••.••......•......1 w w C� (/) a o V� a fD fn VJ Vl a (D fA a eo M b M O y S ® m flnm nm m gm m anm nm o3 "� < `G _ J U w A `,••} W G `,••} IJ d `G w O C1 < r°ie'1J d m m = Qn 0 a ro a° a co E as £ ob 0 ° 0 . 0 c o - bb E e.c F.H 5'0 ° 0 0 _ C m 6 ° <0 w 0 m 4 o �° m �° °< °< °< a m o co, 3 aw r w e'o at .. v w w_ w E eo n. m O F m 00 0Q E n E' rcj a 5' 5 a rr tnft 3 go w v_y o a 5. S'6 �5 c.5 rnr woys� ° .. I a O a ep CJ a a 2. a < N°Fi ry 7 k o o tfl flrao A':': = m a m w eo w m eo '•" C ro o 0. o tmm7 Cf1 =f C to�° nv.o ear-, rn m �. m w o m w ., m 'o m -.- 0 O : U - j 1 oa£ co- fl n es o� 3� nE °_E• a`w+ W `. , d. ._. R _ 'l7 f N e00 0 v=i O V w c c �E ° °o °v gE - S. C-. Fa =oo aE. E Errs S 2 S. 5' 5y 3 7. ' w rp n rn eo Y 'O r r.- `G 00 — eD to fD to 0, _ < a c o o 0 .yT 0N O N w_ a .-. �p r;._t, O 0 00 00 00 5 to 00 to t $°. ray ' °� °� ° E m *f R n o .,y .e ..�, # a 5• �..� G 0 r ° r r Vl G 5, 5 q a a RR n. = m o m 9� wa c ac w 5'm G 3 0 :^ T ................. flats—� Lf R w jrn�8 ?ocjsg�=y. a [ Po o ° ^ 'epe o n. c 1 .E o Pte' g\\7..`� l — 6 S N w O /� , a o o �' w T d - 0 •< Cf' �' pfaD N a N< 0 O 1 a o eo = x 00 p ll 6 N o •o wo A v -o -e �,. ,g Ap o ,g o eoc v d o d :,'t = t as ' Eo o 1° •5 `^ a p y .p '3 °$ E A c v f v 3 E o o E p ° c o r n o p o •- a y v^ 01.0 C ° - b o `o Y F C _ ° O 4 •1 4 jF O N C GQ .y L t«.m a) y ooC3' «-=a «Tic ° Im•CS 3� v a) 1.• m `� -Z: °c 3 ffi 3 t °� •� ° a i° `� °' 5 p' ��.` N s c c cc •o 'y v c. 'o as b u flv E °o o° Q o �� °«' u« °> � o a aJ ltl C Y° EJ _ N U U G « u° - 22 o v u a 3 1a o f •`- c aci o E y° E aci i y o m °_ s s v- o ° VItfli u> L y 7 u d p N •$ A �p a p y L `'� 3 a) •J — u a) « .G. G Y s •- N Y U L C U C N V yyaa Y CJ N Y 'O O N O y w N y c ? N W N �.a u N u a) A O. A iy fla)4 Y N 2 w 0 to Vu0 ro G >>= 4 v 'O O w d ..cLU 00 �t�5ssE a. ab Q,,5_y 6b IF Q• y Vi ri V wI U M N 5° y M Y It5�.5ga3EoEc a' 5O C$ > 0 F N a F 6. w O 6 3 '� �D d'c' Nr� 7 0•❑ V) d a o 0 O S oOCr �? $.�oFE000 SE's vucamE° `o tr7 Nz D "'a.3eoa�' E ,Y ° = d OZ L C L N •• Q o G F Y°y �3 ¢, e •o a 'e^0N '; u ^ °' s E w A eo = •'m o Lo ° .- 5 v N o. s 'a ° m z •y cos Y " y 5 °� E N O y 'a'5 °' °g C d w a v ,E E$ c y m E E o •= aN - m m a z E e u� c) e° ` 3 0 39 E u S EE o a m�v c o aao w E L= V O o f s o d a w o❑ n o m F vc OG' 04 O0. ap Q $ •c 5 E° N?� ) z N y A H y .- N a S C N r E y P. F. CS =° — as b :? w 4 a `y y N� [Q- N d �gg F O N •C 0 'O Y F V y sa ad eiUa �uo o o 0 3 $.5 aE o i a¢ ° C y c •.J y •p 'O gi L`'o G 9 ga " A �` as N Cl .$ G VU'.. " 5 y m C aF d d u __ v -ra U$$rs Fw �a r�s°•o Uav w .° y m c v 2 0 0 o y y d 'o > °' a, 3 :: o 0Lo�s�u3ysu�N`�m-0_oco° 0t><, 2Ew.S v ur E 5 d p H nQa$v v ay o'°ate m F A O. s ° a' U as o F d o' s y .�' p 3 >. •° d ar o• v 5 s L .°. °' '$ •° d y 4 o oL 0 � � 0 T_ To � y av o re3 5 o Er c � t A �.0 as 0. Q E m •$ ♦L.^ v ;rj �b raL >. a=i ' = O 'O t .p y N N « — t— 4% E ° a'a 0; N 0,N p W 6 ..t,.. a— «� h .u�e� a y c.g_ ` O A a L O a 0 Li y e C u c° ,°—_' u Q Y.. as a •� a d '�- `° 5 v Q ° m o v- 1O O c o d v 3 U •° F—. - ►7 E m >o > L 3 )0V u c E V m m S — a)U' C w ,v C> •S E v o v Pr U 6 s o A a e •o n.. —w aa) $ o f Vo . v° at u. w a% ld E N o N ci. a.. °� •—. 00 L L .0 0, •O 3 0 �, L^L mUwora c °rm °'O..F°. c' $.Z`y c °y`p,� ° > H �'�� 0i Nf� 3 ' o o E t E Q 0 O •° v d d - S. v ; y E a L3 C4 V °� $ 4 jai ¢ v rJ" z a s m 3 a o° f '$ $ U c°i U U N' v t� C7 Sa 3 K' n 3 v S'C ^ — ^ r U flfl n. flY w �• w O R) n n ' "1'1 e' e"d rt Y Y p u S o o m o 3 n <o o (ny ° CJ' S' 5 m ^» o o <- o n n y. Oo N e k a riO 3 A oc e; m" O n F., w 6. n '•n N y Q �i, 9 d O V °i O °yrS ≤_£ c� a » 5.C n y 9 C Yo oT N n m ft e w G o rt o . O C n ° Y "'ft = £ C oc nn 2 n _ .. 3 ? a. c' y= p H o =flQ o ?° 'o n e m y >• °' a o. �. a c. ° 'o <° w c S +� r n y< E E a n o Q G°i1^ �' d» ap E no. ' a5'O d» N "' c_rt C D ° y N H vONi n y '�' y a" n p oa °• a N ° `n' £≤ A m ° n c N' A c o » 3 mn, 'n F. a o Yo mm 5. c. c o �2 c q° i $ °• o R0 'Y° T : !^�D ^ d a C' (� m< w m y w N c ^. °, ? N (YD O ,� O •Ci N N 6 ^r 4 'm N g fD a 3 .i p • 5^ o a m g N o_ », o < ct o Ra 5' 5 a Y rn o 0° on n n n ° _ E n o S '$ .,r. Laom 3 c w° 5' w 5• ^, ≤. °c y' +i ° d o m 3 .nn. a ° _• 3 o ft oftO Ui' .0 m vy •_• £ p�1'Jy• `" m 7°C 5. _ ° _. :? `wG O "fie, - 0 G° 5 ht .. -O -e "n'1 O �nn 0=0';1 Raw a bw d ^ 1� 5'�•y m n 0 A n n o m 00 n.+ .,Ofl A 70 �. c 3 A o s< 5' �m » p=p• r_ C y— ryc'o' A v > w o °. o• w ii < lni rt! 00 p o rt O,^ n Wn G W 7 a s S '<0 `? m .o m y w' �' .�' >: 7 m m amo cn+ �• E o A o v °r' 3, �' 5• o 6 O < � = O .y nOo00 it H' N ≤, ' n l.. y OY w •C O 3 R— N n n N R w— o N 5 D y o £ po a n 3 ° w'' A 'o' 3 3 S• W° n 00 La n • _ d ' �5y! v m m ft $' °m O ^.H °'O rs•`o o 5° ° acflc-�•p, n,p n 3, $ 0 ft 0 O . m ? N.y ≤ O•.n• • a ^T `G A Q °o a _ -E E. H O O aS .-r .°.� -° O 14 = ft 0. c O H a 3 y ? a n � nrs L • v m m' m a 0 • o o o on mm p 3 5 ft90 Iyo n m �• '� m °' N 5 z y w 3 �• a m O a p s - OY ry• 5' N• M n o R E C) "ji 4 = N y� 11 R iJa 'y a Ic 9 cg 7 a VI O N Y, n O a N Cr7 C pp1 n w may' O n w '2 5 w C 'O C m a' -;^I Y r• Y N 'J N •O n "'{ 3 S A H A 5• n n o, 2 a Y " n 3TaS A O F N =. w w $ c A N n n C4 LJ ® s 8 17 00 r S r rv:T r A (te C'r a i 31 1♦ I o- en [Y a :cec 'vb v t [a : 41 ti = r 4 ¶ u 1 1 1 0 0 1 i iP 1P II IIj I4jj ii i; W 9 ° o p > Y � > � JC � 9 T. S � " F � y .. � > -1p o I i i u 9 l 5$ l 9 R i 9 l U4 m a y a ? iz n N T cc dl -n y N y C $ t 1p •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• J In N U 1<,,4 t • J � c U LI C 00 N N 'a CO _ 0 I /a « ! . d � i .p i � r r d •p pi V N _G°.EJE �3Nov.�yr�_�Eao —Eo p y «R N o •5 U m rte. �' �' v u f1: U v I. - :j 3 n_ E 9 v; 3 u z 3 o v.010 tEflot.c} o �$ ovd o$aoo� E aiw ? O Q 4 0 y U L . •;? N i p.d rJ' h W N y 2J Ct 5 zoko� Ht Ty qq'; dgQ�o Q C Z U. O N N �r L ca °' 3 r v y y o c ` $' ° ,5 G. 4, 7 ... L O GU, 'U7 7 4� i r 5' z x D C C c A C C C C C C C C c Dlol ° G D yam. ?. . . . . ?. ° ?. ° 2 °. °. 2. °. 2. 5. ?. ??= •i a a .�. ry r. :�. .. .. 7 w w .� w w w w w w w w .. .+ Gn' y m^ -�pp O• Cio `�p w — �'J .' 'pp ,-.00 rnOCyc_� m _ : rf�v, SzSmOC�c�r 6 w O� A C o O O f O ewer ' l G_ » C an ofli zo c CDo a m -o. . ° . r n w A m ^ off' » C o n m lD n y N f° 'I, w w y rr 5 r• z ; o y y y,d F y o z r 7_ r D o n n 6 rt a E° o o 0 a " ' • y w m vi D w 5 0 0 a D x o8 8 o�m°wP.3 m w _3 v ° :. ° oN » rr ° 3 A 4° .. o y r o a o* Utl �^�•' " ° o e pip 2' u w N _ U^ O O 3 U o ry ,nEFt 0- b _ 55.w COO w. o 6 rt d T tl0 U% ^ CD m y •] fl ^T y -' o w S _ O w = E a C1 `G a C' O O• • , o 1401 0-0. O8a G pC a A • c o pg N f4 an td 00 ^no y =5•c n ° a a n m • te_ Q n' O. p G ^ ° D a T CD n no 01 d w 7 rl CA - ............... ... ... ... ..... .... LA n a C = C, 3 = - boon F ° =ft d C N C N tAr, In N N w C _ N S a N E. C N m is -. O .. 6 W m O o c o ° LA „ r q O ' p p.' -2 O O Q a a N 9 N T c Oo -O Coo 6 � A C — C 3 3'� 3'7�s W v C_ a —tn A wN U a -�o z r 7 r z 'S Q c J IL c 3 o O °o A r > f5 A -. o C a - = 3 c c rt c re 3 C It N • r P O O = OOO 3 rA a > a s p d 3 O °o y — n n o d 4 n. g Oy as A a a n -- A n » Sno, e 0 d d d C ^ A p d q N �� - O CA-. S O X F ry C S a C- It S •1 N P r. N UQ » n O d y -n d. n N N E z ^ P OG f1= O O 5 .- '-C a • 3ftc d '+ n o. N • '1 p - F O -^ r N d0 (D r D C 3 C I . d O N' 3i _ CO c 3i » C O 0 y N < o tl0 ! Q I n n 0 r, r, ft 1 ' s^- # •r, r sS';cvt t4#. P, �I � 1 - w I I -1 a1 8 OQ i 5 m CCCCCC 5•e•o.o.o•o. CacCc ���-. � rw F a 0 ' d o z o �, O m m �e .r ,°° o°o y .. N>E '.a^ o r.000 a n 001. 7 on 3 m '>' E. 3 vi •• o A 5 •00 00 0 C 0 0 0 -. - C, m y C OO as a° 0 c nc 0 .......::......................... c o 3 p V? $[i O a Co- c. Th2.E " d •p «O9 N 7 y G O$ y^ N U« N Go --C 6 p y T N 0.0 v, 0) s 3 m °J . i v c E d v o v U CQ o �>m A E o ^L° E s N-- 00 u V« y d ab •� 44 y L 3 .E - a�i .�"a U E s 0 OD p` N N N ...E S o w " o 0p OD N . Ao�.Emc^m cao`e $6,IOEEdg:! F u o $ y 3 oy o U ° p OO1-et y o'• N •Q 'r"' O: G U s E o= UQS «O y •m N O C — OO O d � � •p � � y •a 3 $ °yy'°,9?sNy'0�E 4 y C O nn Op « 00 Q w h CD q v d b0:o .: ° a y " :o V -- • =OO o v '� Ct = Y d m 3 c y -o o — N OO u 0.0 y� �. lG W y •H A d UC 0bOry d (V d 9 0 d E d y E E o tam DSO 4? Y"± H I �n IU 77,E -L ' T. )IIIL , i c:Lc. 1.1 qQ 1_ i v) d z Ct _L � Q N -• LtT LjL. LI 13 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 00 IW { »|;±f whir' •fE)§ ` k} E |/\ -_, a• %),f[ fl/{)±j §\}$!( n\* l 0. E; i[*yqE ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••I •O C � O C p y c o q • 50 r0 pp =oO 8 U •-• W E '� V `c •- 3 E ar e o cav V v.c0 N y u c 2 > Uepp o y .c E L y 4 9 - 9 coi3d Or o u L Y— ` 'I U ,. C U W L Td E u Fp O• C g eo4w •� y 4n vl pi'O U .r> > y Q• Y C = V W v' •n D C G o c U v N N VJ LOLO V4: V r C L Q O • N r a-_ c g a � m a ^ � N � u U � O w y 00 C, v U Cl N 3 v E O O oo. _ U 28 U 'N I ml • .OO a O o V r E L ••••.••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• o dig a�3•go a n n o 7 N (p 1 1 £2r � 00 Si n y m n rt a F -, ., C N OO O ft 3 v w N m F o $ R • 00 n =Aa co _ A m t .. _. F m m n k . V.r-- CDO a • rak T A 1 cs'' v rt m b7 C�/I C w 7. a y • Q S 3 yy� S w m y QQ \ll J v.. R M. N N N w •00 a ^AM z N N F c £. C w QQF r ryOp vZ C ..r r-i n a M H a N men E a r! CD O -. 4w$ w S3 c Vi •0 E D O n 5 -. r. N UO -,00 N • A m a m a• C- F. -. 3 m g y w w y 3 `• wt C 3 A • o w ry y a-. R y 1 f. • ' F = H S ^ r Q 5 g = r r. Cg -- •1 C. 0g5� P B a_ CD o G.. �t r m 9 ..........:...................... ti •� °q�'os a`�i 2 c o y g aso a y o E aa $ IC p d L N v y V R a! N t a) Y my c r m _ •Q N ≤ O N C C A w C w° w o,o�E U CyE F. F" o vii d o V /4.L�� U N 4� .°J 0o o u'ti N Qa bONM Z O •C T o —U Q -I C [ A tl C I••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1 r r z CCCCc -- w0 w a U A U A W N 4 00 t - • 0 p 00 0 o s ry a a =• _• y 0 e m � S .O„Co B' •?o °� e 3 �awc n" S San 3 6;: ' oC_•rn O O a O < o 5'^.g•ao o lI -.• ? A F a y S C,, o ry 9 _ Od Cl) N r o Q m O a O O A O. , m ry m m 5' -t ,n E o N Y1 < U pp — K A R R 40 Ii < c o + oa no v a W i # a 1 � J � d t ifP: •l ( 1 � % } a� U �eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee| ci ( a )kj}�\ V k/\/{) }})2 \ k)\§I\ §E)u / SAC C) �§2{I§) ;�■7 !®s!§§F ®/ / t) )\§/ }/ 0I2i�; ,0i ................. ....... ....... ...I 0 n 0 fl m 0 cm I I n y CCCCCCCCC c -Cc A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 3 3 -- - - -. — . ----. ; 3 A N r r U A W N .- O U A -• D\ N O' -. m zzni L� f l(� r �O E y ry qs°' ii E vFM ' m m ,4.4, c FM '� 7 a G� o� F H F `• ≤. < ee m r S c� y y 7. 6 5 c 5w r w 00 w ?. Co. y m �. as om=• m` o » » w a ry m � y m N 99 C, Q y =. a S a ^ o ao 3E o mtr1� D c A (-qn ' 07 g ode ft Y c- m •C n o O — A N aI. C S�°• Q o o a O c o O O A y F o .. (11 '' m a v » r: •w, » �' ' �, r „ A cOO A w c 'o 3t. -.n ' O tlo S o F o o c o .j. 'at ^1 o a - rn r. A f 0o - p Q O c cc O C V =y _ o x o a Cr n O Oo N A d Q 3 5 D D r ^ ro • 2 a z n a 10'1 RQr. `< m a a R A i 3 ^ d A » V m a r " • O S = <_ 0 -. rJ.' o a g'O o G 3 m g -ft m 4 ...... .:............. ............ LI C r Am 7 cID n ......... .... .............. ......1 if�LI�J/ InLJ/ a gVj/�(i5 Ll O Ol V O� 0 — nl C L y 3 E S m v a 5 d 3 « o v 6 0 0 •� o« b E A O ii a. 3 u d W v r 3 •- ti °aI A ra y y 4 O M C O 'T Z .. •pp 00 a ftl yF G N N N L� O _ C p 0 4 C. Y � y '.^• o. �.. Q s ••••••••••••••••••••••••w••••••••• -r rr z .'�a CCCCCCCc Pf a O Q O O O to n O p 0 7 7 7 7 O C O O �. VJ 7 C G N O ' n :' n n i' n .: O R r lA r » .� ; N �'. w �. N N r c A W N ' 'q" ODo O N •' N a C y r Iv' IU ," �� c o` v .0 =n < e d rt w m m Z rn o A n a m �5Qn� QoQ o I o' f v w G' o• SS 3• o N EE 0 0 o f n _ a w d vUi `^ A ro N 23 '^ �. 5, 5, ° o `° m 5 r 2 77 77 �n ,s r a .5° ^' _ d a = m m c rt rt rt 5 - d _ _ O a o o p3 ° = C O '1 v 3 3 3 A a W n ° n d£ U o '' — so - M = C�7 o G - V� m 3 oc trr7 < 3 C m r m 0 _ _ N a w O C O < r b � ►�y R 7 W ' r C M. o -t F D 1 m w �c 3 m • 8 n r z- H a, a G 5 a G, flz a vo N 0_p. N I O O O � a • "CD �% C w o .�. W ' T a a — o 'C � 5 v ao ....n•••w••.••.•.••••••••••••••• 5� I z -r 11T ft //0 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeSOIIIeeeeeeIISISIee r ( ( �]))§!k§ = ; %a.= ) \§*\\cc - / tm \{\c�k \ §5 w`■§($ ® \ j\\{fnLa 2 Pito »§a@ ) fm\�22aa ) \ kf220. / N§(}Gait% k )ai ■a!en \\\\\\\)} \%io *; •.'2 \ ) •••••••••••.•••••••••••••••.•••••• 0 0ry 3` o z m o o o o o A �> > ≥n O N p < y 7 0 a �. w w w w w w w w R - .. .. w .. N w ry 'a 7 E A N N r r U A W N N .O oo — 3, ° A [ y D m N m J R O U A U W ° O 3 R -. r r. _3 d H °s o �c O ° 0 2 -I' 5'm 5� CyQ oo`z ryN on 3. p F ? E R O n w n r p —e o g . N H e a o = r 5' -. Q ao 5 0> 0 00 ° m a 00� Nw47 y0 00 rs'a °O ,m o°' a .n, N y N y O o 'an 0=0 w >O 5 5 0 to 'q x a d o 3 '° 7� 7� n j o z r w w ° = °° °a 00 o 3 s 4' S 3' 000 3? f° b f. F. c3 ° g " m � o a F3 ? g s o o. �ry ...0 o A W ° m E 0 o R . =y °= y o 3 0 0 oJ CD rn ≤ 5 yy m ry A A N _6 -I, a a 3 9 .... H 3 a ^ ° o a a r m ry m n' a B' w o as < o 0 3 (D N ° o _. P s w N < g g a a 3 5 d > > ndCJ n CD o ,y �' 2 $i m � r ry m • 'C - a o • a ≤° O C m C 0_>n 3.-. o �o ars b (° n B 0 > > v o a oo a I , ' r I I T 4y . ;P;1S. -3.�. r ..................................1 3O I '1. I p. I ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••1 z CCCC_ CC _ Ca Cc O CD °z»wdo A 3oc_mocc��?D�'c7 a ryp c iAn5 C v .00 d.. .. �' `O ^ H 00 7'tl00 ^I� O f� fi a m N O �e 'o o y Q• C 5' y o' a o > 010 o ,y-.-. y F o n = o -.w 5 c y A O 0 y N v ^ O 0 y A v n 0 0 0 0 N N N r U r D - O y N S -=-< B rt < 00 o O u o O O y � O o w 0 - CL = 5 = = = 3 = C = - 5 o t .................................i r m n -4 C CM a a 0 r -------------------- M — ri 3 o 3 N N N •O A td ..• 'H y. = 4. v � V. C •H r •C m W O C y U J N d .. 1 Y v c .5 oU •� .N o e u c: '-'--C -i 'fl O c-0 0 vi z - C m o u �o s .5 •••.•...••....•.•..•.•...........I LL 8 00 I. n R O U r z 7Cy CCCCC a C=c O O ( 7 7= 7 0 4 n 7 7== rt ° 1.11 ^'� r "'I r. r. r. . - a0. A mrymo N U A W N — '$ ^' 10po— 3 ^ m 2 5 d. r o e E Lam', = .n `': ?. C B F qE w ''' m -,Ro 00 r rw C O .7. A 1W' OS t w 'S•.7.5 A n r S rA g m d 0.0 w as n .i = �. 11 w w 1 'n pp m G' O41 n y " y r' V' b E+r H R I F 5, r Ct T an 0.0 n rt S J O A O% oo o 6 .O. = a U m 3 3 $9 ^ E 1 m y < A g• d ry 0 ao m � O T 0 H C n11 00 m 3 B S D E D N "1 �.r .n O m - N o a 0. o w n 6 a _ r (afl � V1 .°il S d m A • • ag .. an n r. N L 'O r °^ c r. ro S' 9 - n o ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• C C v U C "z re r s ••••••s••••••••••••••••f••••••••• V C C m C) C I- C V V Li c C- C- C O 44 A � + �YEI' ' sz. , i O.C T C U V+ U G O C L 6 .0 7 V W trtl U A'v 1 o o°D 00 ��«, bD 'o E • Ct Lx, s v c a m u S .a I N f°J y O qq U C 0. °' Ct ni iii b O N •� O �I • Q O u C nun t w Q O C Z« L N O' Cl Q 7 A € « C a 4 Tw o 0 0 .................................I r 8 I 5 J S z S a Ott z '1 -� z C wi = a n0 _ -. = w 6 m - - '•.� Q' ;p to O 8 O O n r, 00 - n '° a 9 m a Vl w H H» C d C Ci N maJ a d 90 9 9 p 3 3 8q f. v " o d » 9 .=i N • n N n oQ— v 00 O 7C ''D ^"9 ''3� _ �7 5• y��..yy a pp m - E o a O N c �' a f° O 5 G C 9 r 5.95 0•F ^ y 1p/ o C 0-ro lG H =0 a a n m H 0� q d� < a o • C n 6 O • 7 a p od o �p d -n » -•B gpoo a O 0 r' c . 3 e• m a -E n .. V I-.. m -e o O. F dm < au tl00 5' 0- a a tlo 00 - ow -. (flT1 � O O ° 3 n N O T O Ct P. S. e V T �i..6��•rglti y'�L1J_LI aal f' •11 N ................................. V C V c of C L �-" — ,$ 4, is p t ,. u O y '1 1 St 8 C �.3 U 5 E Y C ra « _ v E L « $ x o V Li •' °y G L O 1, ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• z r z r z r z as c CC n - - c m0 O O o on R J a 15 2 e ° — �n d d. o .:.: a .; S O. CD OG y w N C. in A — B w A N a- o rt 3 m 3 .,°nQwEN o a 00 f 3 zw COw �n C ° E� /Hp 1 3 N Y Q A O o N 5 a C A B 3 m= o o o `° '° v OQ O o N < 1 Cr �• = Q Q. l• -_ o C a C —C. n d f n N N O R N o. > y b n v, tl0 3 S a o. r e .. _ A fl m c : _r. n a = a ' k c r On .Q a •, o -. St H ~ r N 00 �' fop rso C N 7C 'F O ,p a N d 3 m m ric' w y 3 i H. S ry » w J C • ryp _ _ S N C o a N K a "ryrye' N Y. ry N z a c n ° T °ft i T L n In O n — N G r J ti ^ a = C goO_ D O CD a N•m C c 9 n and O ry t p O Cr I. o no to as .0 r, C S 3 = r 0 .7 =• w b a 7• C/1 a o C ►r C ft n v 4 ..........:...................... z U ............ ...... .S..............I 7 z 1 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••I ci C a U c u o E O N° . N U c U cv'o£3°'s°caELL a c •8 v 00 " v, m oO t « « o C= U O. •£ e�- C A 3 d Q o L tt s .a u o .o u t a z o to L A L_ O O z .. u N o O 0 a : ` s = Q On a 3 Ou a LU y£ u S a a y u .a° t a oc L a �� d L C Z A y y°. =` m b- E A c u it o•u E_° 2 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee| I } } ®> - * r ■ ■ = vi __ R O. //o \ \ . (E 70 E. ft - ( /( - -ft 0- \\\� / - - 00 f ) �[ \) �{. ;j 2§ i\ C �1 R., L i 9 74 r PM 0 D • 4 ' j ► 'C t ,.'•, ,I I I,! II' n ', r 4. ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 00 a �' i � � O v d � ®n 0 P 5] I J � < o LI HI _ Q v> u o o C g 2 Q% y iNi > li 5 V N Ci « 0 N. I-. .� @ Q as y °' a ^�. � W ° E a a a> b N E V s u �' as o a) a w (n Ct C C ' vg � as '—o W i • ' O daa=°oZy5a'N�°'E° v O Qon IC E U 3 y . r ZL• V N a1 en Qp iJ' a °i 03 C « N y 5 N N t«Q p N O p T ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• z z z z za o ccc n c -o O On ft O 7 O ft y e = - 6 — 3, ®Ct = 1 y '•.D r. r. �. O N N d O N `� 7• W N n i•7 (i m r"• 6 8 3 n o oa A Y A e w� C'`o 3 •? C" eye e ' 2 _F eye -. v w o -. FMB T rt - 8'CDO n d fI'C (wj w a - C � a e ti I. O > ? M r r z eo ! 2 z r— v, oft n = = i ° f°• - ft o c c, o f a ft » — _ e m c❑= m O S^ 2 -. CD*r' w .� = r r q < N r. N ,n _ -n 0 3 F n CD - N CD n _ m a w — r — S — C c G = y C- w - Q r r. 2r. CD O t17 z n Page l of l Clarice Pearman - Ord. 5191 From: Clarice Pearman To: Pate, Jeremy Date: 1.20.09 5:43 PM Subject: Ord. 5191 CC: Audit; GIS Attachments: Audit; GIS Jeremy: Attached is a copy of the above ordinance passed by City Council regarding R-PZD 08-2898/Southpass. Please let me know if there is anything else needed for this item. Also please let me know if the deed needed for the conditions of approval have been met. Have a good day. Clarice J file://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\cpearman.000\Local%20Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\49760D2BF... 1.20.09 GENERAL PROYMSION5 AONION 'HE BABBLER Or THIS PS RASTER MDY-X IENIP FN SILL EJIDOIC4 DIE LNDIINCS AND DEJSKS OF THE FART \LF Cry ELDNCI. }AT FIT$ PLANNE-1. ZONING ASPECT FOR SOJTS.ASs CDMMUNO DE'SLOPNq• $ N OV RAL SXXIORMf 1XY SHE FAR T"N12 on PLAN 2D 5, IS Aen,ORZED BY PIE PRORSO,! Or SECTIONS 61 µE 166 Or THE C-1 or FAXF TtWLE LIMO( D2VE1,OPug7 CODE EXPOSURE THE PRO05IONS Or FAX PS PA5TET OcuvYMU "✓F SHALL PREVYL AND WVERN DIE DEV[LDPMg1 OF 5D.'HPA5i PROPOSE 'AVEVE T-AWHERE THE PROV90M5 OF 'H5 MASRR OJO-OPMOI LAN DO Not AVDRL55 A JAA7DUUA SDBJECT, THE RELN+R1 PRCVSIONS OF THE CTOr TAPE' •FWL£ LNIEEO S[VCOPurNT CODE, AS AIOOm, OR ANY OTHP]CABLE RESOJOANS R RLPILARONS 0" PLUS OT? OF FAYETHt aL AAu BE APR_CABLE H O FJkl*_ TO NRTHEF THE ML'J4 flCU[S- OF THE RL9OENR, CBCUPAFIS, AND ON11LRA OF THE PZO NASTO CLVR DIE NT PLW Mt DS THE PJBU: IN THE PRO 5W VAlON OF 'HE M'EGR TV OF EYE PLAN. ML PROVISIONS or THIS PLAN REI,ING TO THE USE OF LAND, TOE1AENl or COMM MCH'T, DMLOeMENI, AND MCHIIECNFµ SIANDAROS AND THE LOCATg1 OF CDMNON DRUG LEASE 6IA_ 9JM IN FAVOR OF THE CTY OF FAl£TNLE AND SHALL BE E:roRCEaLE Ai CAW ON III ANA-•' BY 'NE Cif WIIOUT LIMITARBN ON ANY FARES OR RIGJL4:ON CTIERW'SE CRAW W 6Y LAW WIIYE T,OIC 6 MORE T"AI ONE PRCAMAN vrlal THE PER NASRR E DEVOPMMENT PLAN THAI COVERS NE SAVE SUBJECT AFFflAIR.. ME PR AXON Meh°5 MOST OESF'ClH OR DIEJ]APOSCS H'CY ER S TN:MRDS OR ,AAH'ST OIE 9+91 GOVERN W.[55 DPLAMWm E' THE ZOI ME DLKLRMENT NAVN'STRATOR MANNED LIVEL OF O:DLL FD I THE O.4 !WMBP OF DEELNGS OR PER To'AL WMMCAOAL SUNNESS, OR INDJSTRIFL INTETSTY APPROVED PER DLVLIRVW PoRIW THE PLANNING AREAS ARE THE IMAAAJM DEVODWMPT REOJL5I FOP PLATING OR coMsmuCmy, THE ACTJAL JUDI or DWOLN6 OR DEVELOPMENT FOR CJMIMEROAL ,JNESS, OR POLLS PLA'. WAY BE LESS DJE TO S+B'YGSDN OR SIt IMPROV@u- PLNN REOJIROA6.3 DR STEE➢. REoa1m+UNT5 0• THE OT C004IDL PRO Irc HANOIIC A' THE PMF Or SOBDIVSIN NNAL PAT OR InD S4P DEVELOPMENT DIE APPLIVyT SEAL PROVIDE A SURAIJARY O, THE O WWO'Mflr. 10 CA'E TO THE PLANNING O'MLW. IN ORDER TO ASSURE UA)MOV OF VL.OrMG4 UMS ARE NOT IXCESSED £2,000 CFRnFtITA 4 PORTION OF THIS PP.OPLR7Y IS LOCATED WITHIN FLOOD ZON£ 'A OR AS AS DETERMINED RY THE NAT/OVAL FLOOD )NSUHANB PRDSRAY FLOOD /NSVPFHC6 CNT£ BG£ FOR WA_H0'6IDY COW'% AFLEXIMAAS (FIRM PW£L j05133C0085-D DATED NLY RI ]DOA) 3L..y5NT/ e -ITS Iry 2 - P v .-- SI"+}l i6 G: t�ue. L'AH` A,FY .. _=.Y Jam` . - .... SOUT1 FASS OVERALL MASTER PLAN l it y`. I lN[ /{i^..uray �P •T [ r DES WDIL �I Lrvy - „ Ylp_ .. - _ - rtea_ yr RY�l: 494 �L f 7 .:C-;. ro N17: r )/ FAX']479) 444—'432 REPRESFNTATW APP'AD CENTRE FOR` DESA11 INC 217 EASY DRS YDEN WE17 SUITE 104 rAYETIIALLE AR 72701 RETIRE, 475-442-1444 FAY 479-442-1458 LJLTV A:TNOIIES AONIACT WCST•Rd GAS CONTACT DERRY 31RDSDNG IT C 6DRIV 1328 E T0. BO) 132B r AYE! G-52, AR 72703 OF 479_552-869 FAX' 475-SP-9Ci` If ITFmIC (PARKS ELECTRIC CCOPERARVE CONTACT: MIKE RUBBER P.O. BOX B45 IAVETtlux. AR 72702 PH: 479-604-4696 7 PH N SCurl-WE5ITR'4 BED ENG'I[CT.41.B 0N 'ACT co", N'N'D PD SIX 7449 SPRINGDALE, AF 72766 PH. 479-542_: $64 FAX q9-452-yD COY CDNl)/10ATON CD :AC .ARRY IB5DN A9:' S 46TH =BL' S R'NGDA-E. A9 RJ62 P9' 470-872-'20C FAX 479-572-0' SD ARKANSAS DErAR-BER I OFI[L PATH COACT. TROY DAVIS <H15 WE51 hi .RN,.AM Sl2EP1 ETUDE ROCIN AP 72205 PH' 501-651-2000 FAA 501-1561-2032 ARCAISAS DEPARTMENT or UNARONNRN'AL OUALPV STOau RAPER OIVSD( 8001 NA'IO'NAL DRIVE , TYE ROCS AR 72219-5913 OH 501-683-0873 PLANNING OEPAR➢EDIT "3 XOST IMOUNVAPN FAYCT tNLLE AR 72701 PH 479-575-2267 FAX 473-B75-B?D2 CITY or PAYS FUTRIII,L 51GNEEP,INIG OE:ARID[NT I15 WEST ]OJOU14TAIN FAYETT[VLLE, A9 72701 PP 479-575-6267 FAD -479-575-8202 C'Y O% FAYF'T"N F LATER DELA VENT PJMP HOUSE FDA- FAnTJ-.C AR 27:2 PH 429-575-6356 CITY OF FMK'TEV4E WA5IWAIEP DEPARTMENT +CON LC F'wHEFP11+G OEPAOR/La7 1 3 AESi 6/OJNIA', rA T-TE V cL, All 727[' PH A79-95.8206 5iEETIdDE7( _ _ _ COVER 2 IMA5'CR DEVE.DPME°N PLA 3 WASEP DEVE_G°MENAR- ' PLAN WI'H TOROGRAPH" 4 PLANK NG AREAS PLAN A 5 PLAIN NO AREAS PLAN B 6 PLAN"N NO AREAS PLAN C 7 PLANNING AREAS PAN D 8 PLANNING AREAS PAN E I$'5.£4 HJNTAIN DE, S.cvMw.'_ C 217 FAST DLc50N 5-FgET' SITE 204 EA,E'TNLLE, JN5A51DO a OLFI,R &RE K LVP AVLTTEVI LLE. ANY-ANa4s r04 PIT, OF FAYE11EuyE I'S Ve- HOtN,AlN 5'0'9£7 =AYFTEVLLC' ANXRONYs 'Do' Ill ` . CENTRE FOR . DESGN • No. 1549 • PRO] MNGR: AER PRO].ENG. AER DES]GNER: RM SUOm Ra REJIS]ON: REVS DATE 0/10/08 DWG NAME: FOROPIOI_PZD.Ow9 sK@-I INB PLANNING AREA 3A KESSLER MOUNTAIN BLUFF / /f> NG FAMD_Y 1 1 } { -Jj IJ f 1• 1 1' 2 ' +� \ -� {/ 1 {il ( � J I� E � � rl � III m�ra x ♦. � SouthPass Master Plan PZD - Zoning and Land Use Approval $,ANNIN4 A :REk3C 7 f SStF,R-MfJIQI IN BL F / _,i L�N'NIS AEA 6 Glib - 1 } I I l f i11� V \ jl' PLANNING AREA 3B KE33LER MOUNTAIN BLUFF` '\ \ I 1 1 I J I —r / .I MULTI —FAMILY \ Jt=--+ � III J I\\ '.' 1 rr•l 14 J a rI I WE a• . i t 1 ) JA I �9 p P yEA I& T 1 J \t"%'i -- ) IIITTT �' q r•'l )j t' Tc t PLANNING AREA 3A / KESSLER KESSLER MLP MOUNTAIN BLUFF � �j PLANNING AREA 6A 1 / J / W RIION PARK 1 1 1 11 ) �' 1 I 1 l 0 9P 2\ 49g �i 1"=300' PFOPEAIY PJFIXiMATION -w%NW1331NC IS r -a a n9 -I -PR PRE 1 -JRCC® Ma B, PRO NU. 2106 /JA6 -C[RMLQ. MLL 9E PRO M9R D ni,M. s o0q CE;r •—V+�fl __ WJUBECRHiDT-MABIJI - •, 1111 xEYa6n 01J' EAS000 fl_ IJG-16— IONIC N U$1 P1=JI[ X na m N.RRENI • ICno PCN VIu O SD MO!, IN NJ `/ •{J LPIL' &,Wm • �(�) EL"1INL R6 . ;A® a0$% •`W ,ITT [NIEEM) 9H! Sit j/1 1• , �� ' . �� FPOPQ,�f>vAlUFE3 BE,• - PLANNING AREA 2A • / --�• / 1 ♦ , 1 BILO^..I,a*CII! u=,1�1 ➢P] ' JN PLANNI G RE 1 CR CE PARK A 28 // 51 GLE MILY CARPS E ASR o flo /l/ / 1 t 0 / ! ! 4 L 1 I �� a w.a. m DUNDEE — �� �NI G�A rJ CMG — — — — PPmasso o-cN7 of wo �QQQ� JUNE rc nlu.Jllc WRE), rota+ PLANNING AREA 6A 1 a l ♦ I!} f} It �E1CU J..PI..Lm NN.J.. ' ! } JWILSV Pfor ISJS6lp A mnix IDEE or Pw1v _ ZfB�I ACE-_ ._ n¢m Js omwwc JIaPLLE I ` zv° un awl"ii.:Pswa,w - Y - . / rPnlmaou w mm %. wal.urnm �/ / n) - �� bnl ua-omC lave) nt uu / \ �J ' qx Pml u�%ra1 Exx lam) aV u5o ' i' v �PBL$IP�6E i a J I�) v •/ J• } AF�A i � IJ II JI�II I l� \//' AJ ��`� � r." P 1 1 1�YIYl It I)... 11 11 ��, i � P' 1 J 11 I 1 I`%�iL"1• C I - - IP (� \. j r\ t ✓/ o tiA,)ynl, t'a per 11"i. dI�i • .5 IP111N11 J� II��I'II��P 1<I I'll{%AI 111%, Iil ✓ I� I J �' 1. larxl '1 i/ , - i /111! I o \� i ' P� S If 1uJ IE, 1,11J1t 1J V opGG�q 5 GJ?WCsx . J i ` •• MNG AREA 2B \<2 \1 i f '\\ 'y •. a_Cl .\ 1 1 1,,w ` I1uwo APARTIN ,, , / ATLAW, «- ti _ % /c „ iV C lA _ I �� . /- n •! aoleuemr LocAT, , 1, 1'.. n. v �'ON£MDPOL.J 1 F A ON ALp WII)1 0' J 4 s V �� - —t - ac_- �fy�t1� r,��}}+✓ .' 'fir ��• / \/ir I ( ___. �o _ Y''' I 1✓AIYIMIi�CQJ )iAREA 1 &NN . - fir- A i ♦ uF ♦ -. , / 1 - O I `" PLANNING AREA IC II V1 lI 1 .I r\' 1 ) � I 1 I I I ° a✓� {1! I' }r-- \. /,.3�i JI�,JW� ,�:1I ,I 'PLANNING AREA IA ' `JI '�III l�ll�il COMMERCIAL -fl CORE J s J� �� _ J } 1�- •'r•�PLANNING B / r 1 f_ �!-1' a i!! i. r ��?UAM Y,p FF�,• .�. i 1 8 ♦ -- MULTI AL ♦, { I w� wurvncf : , - 1 sP / 1 I r 1 � / �_ •+tee../ ♦ "_, s amn \ I -.f- ��� _ j ; -- n._ k ' ASS M N- , � . , ..IL �,! 1, I JJ _ / ,A - 1 /f A, . / - - /• PLANNING 3C -� r - IA a `"_,i / 3WGLE FM,A+IILY-CLU�.^�T'ER I / �P PG NG AERJEA 4A �f - iii .' i 'KFN6 11 ,MULiVV8A "III-' PA1A SouthPass Master Plan PZD - Zoning and Land Use Approval Owl (-hPuryPryrBe-'rmrtlavaq ryl[ WA W16 Cau]n' wmuva lmLuv tt •]1).p 3'�j �_T �• I L]rc'vm<.' 1, T, Lw3MA�, Uvv'} OFm Fell wm WmJ Gnven Uw 131 NAMD pl® NPBtl*wm 67Cay. ➢u 14' HOW m].oeeI Ppfugp At Cm BNmn] Uro1151:m1'yLffivt4lluprylV8W1, 000s1 favmmve LLlwm, LW'gh L'P lfl asgInJm trt pttlis UVP4 IisI a ON, t psllemn1b dT= Tel IfI 0Pp Wmt5o No W to OF FILL 4 Iv At Bvlld Is US! 24. Idllrvlwl eAl lgrlN.Ys3:m7(FMF1 111111BTL1 FII8fl 11 Mo I us unr15o IagvmaWc lbLFr Thom d+v na Pppl3 a CIA Spoor. 6+T I]INr[rmmar-u Set IvHw, 0' _ . PwWilyn4 — rXweb s. Skm)AFFI 1' Elm 6' Lwi nlW uw b l mn0hwduvymY BwL D Iw¢0 ➢wulm6 La It JNawml ,thmxtooula Nil 40 SEmaR pd AMMI,tpd Bn lvm mlv3r NF11:n5Walonl Nr+q]w Xt clod.oflu, IDW irI TlFtil O[YWw'+mLLBwlnmg [46L x�zbwaaea�wv+_'=sew'. 'L>-,-t"yr ll.]-yc109 IleAlet 9n4Yy • I,1m1mum1k16111 ID'mmrmmltllp R ellN6LmK Va tivlSwvannog Bmvl5lm 1e N Inuna Alam]m FmpM 51' Lor]dinu,tl15 54 g.M1TO FWH'N0 ImwrplgI 10]66 'SlubYrq•,p4mA�_ m1.f5-`1e'°� 7,.n O mm I Ir 1I VlInmrwr lIN I9f.r mnm][+llP Inr.m toot J Wi1Pn[ hn Lro„,Nl..w-4,a.1w,4 PA -IA Tuww3 Cc+rip IDAID!ICF*Y^IDO, e--I-Il_S.eJeID'3TeµI I a�,1'. Um1 CI%wy[u¢[s 4Lm3pl®I is p[wn Uvu H: ➢time NN has 23- Ombw msO IPLisll, wil unb41! Sh wmn Ammgt 210 pton,ll➢emir. U loin None Sr ➢cavey l.on4'oml SP Nmvml rnapI l Sq 50: Nw-real IIIDJO l'+mlr lw6Num. 381110 Acag0D !ylm Fm...IFso.ntommNliIW5 tow snla,SSu,ry Ior Pn, 0100 LW I00ILO W11 PIunnf Nm CAl C10 Is 0ITAL B° IL®wluttlnIL EMClry eli0+>Irn1l Yltiye lYtlID nmlC-- A�1u•".tp`y2{'prA]ytirlrv':ygyitds'ti'#+e"az>iJ III onAm Ol r iIL ratC]o P`Fa]n¢5vr:inlfrl' 6+11. vnnuu Colic uvL9PmelstLNF i if bau31Id bk-4v flllmml el]wrvx3:11L: legl:vulenu Ail xWusur mtIa5+YPn0 burlem6"Ic luau for tcP plWlmf AN6T prr5nob115W L'L'lo! mlb° 41 IW l0 b,sUa. SWCuIYWn IS dsat and AwIN to pp with ur u]InmuAI a¢IBI IlesunyrSu PA- A OunLUF A1v Pn0 dl Op Edq Snout 1A Yu.+al Wfr _f nt L. Li. AH D' 'r N.n. ITLep3 n.,ra alu..0 NA 10 panlbwm OILS. IS O13 Alone10enll, Owlet IX, 4Mp IFI Cyk Rlmoac �If v 4 - vl . =N,: 1pOMTIM[ With W[Cmo ;aLo{(.4rr�pv hlybin� r ry zi"i'}:•ry FITFIFFIFFRTN'td AI➢M4 ..onvmlI.ARt Tr rn°I .RTNINT LM:NTI rowµrllelolAlrr®Iolkm0.,wWnril bly �l NP B3nom b]Opft Dec BeNwm 500 57)5 To II or 50067 p¢jmmm IUW^WIIt I 'on'- r.. IF1. 111$ fmuy o'rymvf w 1c Ia Lr( re r, HUIL 'oust 51)4 T11r B1CIF nn URle *lrAYnv 1pe LRDW TII LQI1.1111M1 9 1p 4 1 1 PIP Fllnnr. Bi mf'a p.CLL4elflff 5{ir Sods Imam, O' 5'5e A03uuw Wl 5Sine ' F,,l 0 0' 1 6' Rra inw551±00 9 I Fxmrleamt loll the nghaluny 2J' Teiioo h1r-vilmlal, ¢v forth O,10Wa'vxdH idly Cot. loll Km.III. tog[, 14' mlmmmn Shut Amos ekn m Fell ALmnom Hell, at IJA PA -1B T,ow°: CeNTE, in' LK.:': .'- cl rns01L ft I[,I tl'J e_cd eorrenethli moPfp7 6,_I!aP t_.0l r0w5' bent, 'Al 'I PS Iv T'LS,, Ara mL it Dry beym,trndo't aal Code lhr lquutmmo AN Corrmvml 5t ieee 14,5 pn,Cnmb' Isal Lper Unit It tone[-mmiIy drape Unit 12. OFF M srndloc nbd rived ssntoos Unit 14 NIXON, All mJAmusemalSw11M11¢ L'WI 24 Hlme arvytm Un126 LIWn-lumlp tvAlllµry UW12 Cot, -'1 rev Ysrl F, eonicmna ur pemtil Uvu 13 Esthwplem VA115 NoStleoi.o+5 "Noppmy Bono, U0111@ SLopjm5 Goods ure25.: PNfen,loMl a9 Unit 4f5 SArw66 Ala Avrquc Ib it 0s1365115] Drunlp' IP I -4L 3,OS, rW Innn wrr,vme! 4• No nr$(171J' 111: MemmN Sy B oltim.maer 1 1 ?0 9'l) L-emit to i III' ' A,emp[ Iat15l. (I' SiwUSCLA9d LF, sS mt5N [ noumsm br(0zlr) h v5 m71m ruurt llW Plpm egAa C ]O:PAw- C_cm it Wool.W N.T.S. -C U' IOWH[ 55-64 -myPM1 1014 ARL6 P]3L T -Pp o nwFt4 FIA m5 1w1A 2'5 [y[: -,ECpnT. Wl BI .1ONXO POPryp .vl 1001) -Illj Al —v..�vP _____ iy— wv.n- p[.- Jut mw OJ,pm[ SflBdt _1""Lp$ml.' W [ 14 Nl tstCml: JY ( dl JM S K ID na'lb JNI I, AA[ OT+J. al,ntI' I, el„ o Ty.5o]°.N -{ .-- -, ♦-. vYxlrv61Zt ISI nayr 'WS Iwmlf 1110`19E -41 ]46P9.i w*A Fl47s) 447-1347 A 1125) 442-1550 NA utl®burlmliRe:rF'Ia .s a ';01.1.° ':'s,s f WA 11 Auurdm¢ no IM CID of FYI,l Uo:fi sd flrvoIM, stool CNI NoBoarooin p70s11 On. Ba± er LOX s'1 ft in TINT ,.IL We C o' f%oxdle L'11M Dn . Two 0; mve@M✓SN I.AN 5q IF oprvenlCIA, FICpr MIT on -Street pstliue' toy Fe totals Icvmt Wr c,rnmml of `X oS 001, Out a'gtAtmmu Smut. 5Oi o1 Be] dIITrNeXT, lutFwrtf WA, boll OB Ip hot 1111:-IDINP 14 b[fW[I u41F[L.'15-r B111T6 Qm-Ir]1, Iry e ll'' �� A +r•. S+ ;µay{55 Slpnjy Vl>•f ^_n {]' IuneRolBTi)T11P w%:InPTPOWI All lroronrrlT[LB Gnab ro]SImlM 1'rmmply SIbPInLLme P Mealel'bl' If➢Iwury s:thrts 9ua'tl(OF.S Altlt[nr lAlt 5' SidsSods Sip Arts We jolt C113 Jctiy, MXIANIN [477,4° mtma 1^-Tv4u4nn.m0OF Tollul 750I6n lo] Ins 'Ire egmrtrvuT SIq IN TO''Mlo'adhS: lP lAD PTI Iuynrm III be yob n Nel tort rest outl F4eet; L Do, t penINXI marvb4Om v14 tb1rmm41b 'yltotil 't,,All All Ht L7 p7LmlLLrj m47NrbuMP with molt �t1 eHhR—. • :1S mlrrybl,um _ V rm Alm GelgN a 'Iris mml'MISS TI QT sloop 11! l Mc' tIto HPyiIl a: PA -1C TowN CENIER SouthPass Master Plan PZD - Zoning and Land Use Approval es�� rw N.T.S. IIGINIfl MNS - Intl OM oFl oy ilk Lilo nlae sr by IIpT .'_tl0U6VI dl6 Sm4f•➢emJ)Ilwullnp nm¢Iau Lllm - { i: Imm + .I✓I II i'rcL b M Iyl .-u' n l.unJv Py1 Mllmn 5rm m •IS " 1 1av 4 L n JI !!n[fn teen' )�t CrrmpmlTrc 'lilt Ly) v 111 a11L16ml 't! I.p 1n1n •,t & an'r�T 4 'v I. r In r .. pr-r. vm JI 4 I m —a, .ne • Ra I Ilia •.eap • rw. w • 1-v Y w P 6*m JLL Urn lae Ia y a nlL Fatl )Ju )n7rnaCi)tr 9 T1. InLIIHI 1 1 .-.w .n 31. ✓Atrlx1u4rt1•vvci�'. !" ..3 .� - .... _aKli. �N4117.IIIWIW�I.�.S`. 32 a( Tin7 rLLum?i f¢ fill 45 ftl Il[. :vl- vy3 flea mml hr v minlmam of l v.35 Co}y apoy fns4v[Ia4 LINM.NM1Pmi) Csll Oa nniW In C04[ In a[e.Lucc jJ IIw CIINIFye1Ll4 L'l11L)Iit tipmmi rot. I a ao' mmc..iJ Im['n N I t1nit"I li IXlnupm: ek Pfl_0PERIY MF0RI✓1ATI0N _ _ rJ1PaJ I IxG IS F4 • 4W-I -DnpGdly "414 Mlr PIO35 II . -PPL 4µy51014 M(A yC6 Ai -Jran9. Wi HE PR0y P9R -_ Po.l aw ..Ili Co 1 I4. 1[ A4+Iliigvm D •9. .. a -nix₹'- - .• IW SNCIN"li MF6L mJ orm. Will w '� ' ' �� \ - G L. YZ P'I4 U tIlL.y. nmz,d,rtllll_wul Jalpl rlmJold olMAPlonmly 34 I'�T - _ n'- - flTYanJd (4 AILTLf 9PSlhid i X J. Wtp L • 1 L,, 1 l �� 1 I� • jyS 15Jf , I" Oc.ln,' /'{a' 9. O xJ' bIli li Inn"', 1p ms'annulJlelDn An➢ .,4T _ W 4L��W!-r I♦_II i(... '� M ._ v.. meT fivj[I".y1'vlTVOenly lvl mlJlf114 vnS pjryT: Il1PIS -1. 6LAu S•_ 4'I Pr • vA �- iw :' 4N. iii 9T 0.N" i • u` I A vWw,. 0" ../ �I itn� ? C: -ti♦ d .R S= � T i3 �w I I pL-T F 3k y to--.' I. Eu4 V ...- v � i. ♦ a""_: ���L �7~•••w♦ —._._ __ _I R •Wt^"Y r l [t�: 4 .��. ➢ .. I-2 's -Ygw"_ .ti z,._ d}.ice'. 5 ww•♦♦ I________-- ______lVRE3 _____-._ • YI H Y. t". a a LF .. St �.+�.� � .� I X31 i � T• ♦ ♦ S I ' fi. J'�+ _ t "4v. £� 1 .a _y �r . .�`X �4 t '.4` �ywn Ar t,� A 4 Y+ r Iy�i •♦♦ � ..... .. .�.... .- I� pf t L' / / fi yl₹vi iry 6PF1'EJ �p� _ y _Xx 'L } 1 4 n ,'-i��Le� is \=8x ..}.1 +( �1 nnoemw '!� ul - rtsG G .c+ d to JV � - J .�; 'p'tin • 1 V i1 T _ L4T 41 , ; I r3 / o rt nu T N 5w, i•• 2X w � i�q� 'ii.- ki- tr R ' IV5 - PCnC46l+...0 � � ` .J'ax'Y n �•L!9 � .fkJ y ��RCY n . f�i - 1 _ '. "n'i n y yIY I. J$I ,,// a 1' ..At' i 1 Y'. - '} IF. j.�i V�.� _ t .$$rte� .5! F 1 ^'31 13 iY. '_T ¢M � �. n 1 . I _l �J �4i� Yil� 40 Lss1'.Wl �.i}I'-mVVTI L ♦ - u ri o -1 v • xL, t w�♦�♦: �.' a..^+,�f/ li iL' Ti'-{ T _.� y \ y ^'T • f ; }' 11�} _— _ _. 'L - r r I ¢ r*1e•[5/•• 4•R " 3vj ; y?'. 'nF a/1} ,' / 1 ` of L♦L- l 4 .$' rRy _ • 1''r H 'lt`- 1. �. - p 111 ♦ 4 ♦�.y} A .tom xtr e I,+ I S ! 'l+`a /K5+' !� Veg. Iy1M1 4. er �eQ^ y w jt• I.Q2s trr L=i a i — �` y yu f I. r a P a 1 "SF_„ x Pwu1 GPonI of&CJ u.[ "� TERMINATING — -1� 1 �" �� mi z n ou40. I sL. zba F°ice:°"sae. m[ _. rT• i� X/ p r.xrn«T. tn.nv' rann.u. 11 mm fYe/ 3 u i V6TA� - I X 3 + .� - T Pm) tu-npG (oPl ua Im i { revere} u. -u¢ n• p-IP) uP-Iteo LM1ti1 I Cin-xi@ wn if lnnallimW uv[ pelmil Cnb 2 Public pFDL ID mf III in fsnli!k. 1 1 'U .an cai n (chant I,, I C,rr,cI:"I pr Lnrl 13 Fang pro {.m. I - ti[glrbMnnl9vpf^6YoIWv 1 m?` Fm'mn.wl nn 170141 5uie.mLL into \q.. neat'] 'In.4'i In' 'Tbc. 6.fnTTw\ nrma:nl LT1:II frt. I nvbcneI I Ion9 where Ir n.'a praIC. nv 1Yb4.m 4VssR IAt G•¢LLm a]'J W It Ta o01700071f,i :.DUDv Ieel Orlmnl•I0[ rmbad m 0 C'E 15 ]oLbnii mms .'Id inn Ile palely I nothr if-oal 142 LI 1 rc' Im-..el a plliy4 ^v r'n •i pall l I. .. Vlp (v l. -.pm) Iv n'CI ry..)Du Ii,, II nr MIDI fl,,nl J2n! Rev Banes[SWed. Spco s! opt lair cant JabwunY aM km Id IIL 11111 )alm,Lm Hmgbr 3! •a1 \Faunae Heipfl: 6C ro Hmphl of rcrand finus!b, 0l lE 34iamaDm tioie,sd pt. SmI no] exlerJ iO a ofpmpoeei II I thctpin :on ... n.oywea n • A.I m .. 11yc]mn1 t amf]Deleopmml I n][ 'II srr,-d7n71I T ell[ I-Io M Fayo]L JIL I IIM1F 11PT1 4f mn' r7a( e a t) It m M[I fin ItT±) bec+unVd IOC -ml "110111 meaml Nom P ni,li mgwmuen'I it l Ill Still Le o7tflt and ccNtmciEdl IC Ilapel' "I Ihr id]ICWrz1 LIup ruma,tl 01➢A-1B Pinning 4aanFill C, Jn:FLmda! II C6'J6116VFi 111[ C: o[ pxglw l lee F n'ItJ li[TZm .... n o[Ti T•'1 lav if Jlvl :l IA. LL]W`JNI L[p:.N]N maY2JNli'I'it mIIL ...x.. aLJae[ rzb =1Lnv SouthPass Master Plan PZD - Zoning and Land Use Approval Loll 1: City nffsClnilh ti -'ride ua IV 0! No Bedroom E7D rqA I.n•IF Sirwie Fnmii dw&l.lna Doc Billion, XX t2 a Lmr9 Tr{mn115• dlt loop Top ormov.. ftlovm51.CO0 t, ft Lrl m flpr-taorjll th n Wipe Lor']5 Molt Fmnlnd Fllor $Hip pyu & Su: gWO {t'ei`vAU m w'F 'Y-.'"tl:Nf 1 n l 4, m n"r `yuv4Wp la Ittl 0u12 Ca)wide No by tonldn¢d rue Nmn Side Mi 6 fcl Fr v'e11 ReII IrvmtFe)OPdnnpw Util 3: P hlic pn^miov ®d ur0,J tat,1m s 1Fdoo one nit 0 r on opyomle aide I'd Unit 4: Cultural old Lnwotionvi te-.Llie Rwl1 L UM 5: Gm'mniQ Odlili6 R iGmoge SeIWC1 SNv1 Gni.ate LVRrmlifnboluvgl ky from Unit 13. Fauy pia op rev lol lit Un1115' l.ely'UJIoehoppw b'and5 ld Ilan la Upmf oatopaplm -f(ntagpiedD 3 su''nkfQA`m^ :vTttetic'' M' Urn' fl Plea u.am LML 40 Sldtwk LIv Maarau IkLL p0 leek Wlowmp tin nry on IS upNll ode and but Llm6 on IF! nip,151If n buldrlle le JInc d pn npJined �Lfld{kd5$y4'+-rat 1 ri, epa=4, 5 SL{ pot 'hr M1rplfr`eared aM1eoan3 a mun£1 of et ahnn as Usuta ut,F Ihc:neM1 QntleI rien0'n011 Atmmt 116 RUIdtrr 0tvyiry HolmlrEe ymunc Bam mlly'wMan IF"and 3.5 vham (mashed Dive llmg L10 49B y—vdc O ___ da d=,,Fm,,,Al1.9' Nan r'.IJtdie' alessl) _ m _ _'gyp ➢g 11 Oi!Yu 61 15 X1) ill"') Ivorotl lsyNm)35O 6%t 4ax am Loo Cm®ge •AlirzgtOn.itJ faPWmhµ!Arm don n¢wruulWt ulaalmum dG51){m Dv5'mnl¢wWia lbdiRMlnFp-141rtp _ Iv(yn ___ '3 .}11 ftla i/)P YTp '•-1 li" In atnrdmlrt Wit)] a Clry Of Pe5'fllelillt Umtlm 1),vetolmml Cc_ M fm1 In n4'meev aul'J f¢L ll die" FTdtl r,tm LPf do lid, 5000 'uft. °'miAn, rma'r..nmtnlry PA 3B KESSLER MOUNTAIN BLUFF PA3A 1L.I ♦nl.n"[-loll I f xpt feL tl'I la -,h ..n June d.v nnp ale • . r 1...r. b..+r lnlp.:J P. —I aL .].t.mb f.. lu..I1 -I Rate-.I-Irvr• AnetIWl6 xadenbW oumtl I1rcl:mguua Ili DpLV J I1IJa=n I I�Ia�M1 11,; In.. All SNm:we shall be dame cod LOnawgel LL mmry Ii U, ire er'11<Ln: dtato s9mJl orPA.1fl Pkrving km nodlirhanlhsrJmu:I Di5.i Smnrlvri ollh: L'nr.`IN OcfopmmlCWry In ecvurda[[ n'i ll the Cm ArevNovi lr UnrflS 5ne]. liar Code mgmrtmgs fm M ulnJpmily dlgnm Lau 15391M have O mmifwn hl P1d111010 rw Lots 5-1 Rv tell but nm'rnlwum lw ngdT offfev lAu LSI soon IWve 14X0 s. IF,,, oma mllum Lw 53 -Ili c114mx a 5010 v ft IUI Mpminimmn b WI Aryls Iii Dylan In A3 IIM l3e r rt roar xeL ..o,,or nc Lva+r ..... M.m [1mf<:]wu.n II 1)W. ihllnµlillpN_1111111 - T_ ]'?F '+a'/ :•Ic. MOgm T WWoo r0- mm be a nWW:m: of I b3L m;NI mVrl fu.elleL mvd! n:rys'4 _ W i n•Y to wraoto !u'flat bl9 or rayemuL Lc✓mf Devtlopmrn Cede A" "FlliW -i'yi Yrse ..n 7777 Y w 11 .-w+c<e T Tv I In :1 rnvmn-av Lees Rf1 vol, Coi, PA -3A KESSLER MOUNTAIN PA3C y SCn I oe um be amp tC Ptl oamrt[led:, n•anl. oar u line ompr' xpa5VA": F. oltpmn5 AJG Wi.II L.li &a. LmaY Ir n_-IImm irnl I n lY 1 .`.tell a l_.rl Mpl 'pmtn'I.dr.tlu.`n.bvm..<lannv L. pt'arliJ MLLSL OVERLA. Lm,I L > r)It I nJ Ip.x d ,]Bb' noon 1 l l sa Lp %,ea {I 41 l+l r<amm um IrA5 ♦ nl r d, Ilnc F J46.IaIPee [ OJOfa d lol m¢omrsn \ t 1 Lo IV'-" uS wllmc Jl0en A lmum I+- •P• ".. fil.1j,f laYl oil IN I ,JtAIee IIcjr4line 11N1f. Cenrlltl_ruiWDrze:— i =+4 Llll au 11 n_ I:o-o a nab) umdml Do. uv limn Spbutll Rugalrtmmk: Lmcj. 1'uh•I pinFmun food YLlllf fM1lllury Cat 4' AIIme! told dnom'nne fit VroN 110n' ALmnum Litt, m 5: Da•muuen ft ilon Mn-Jmmp Rfvl Lnn9' Tx v rally d•pell rILs Sldd b roe' .5mn r.fY L nil Ii: Cron Plem 4 fan 'me w cap ..V Em mink L n,']5 the@hLONoal Sbuppmg Goads S Ili nn oppmm el de Irn11Y oral a_apoiea Ren - le<1 Unit 25 Pwl¢mlloo P, set. Ft w rare Svbd ce a and onl ball fcl-rabwl5-11t room .ml a b'nxn lamLJ dl<"Ce mrN' Imc omnn'aaruuq I1ugh IRv5m6dva v-: Ii tral LuvO Smanfm110 Da uln'6: u•u ISS fI, 1 Ian 6 anrr: If@a If I, mcJ lbon. I b, of farad idlM1ro nbpe 4•owlm'ol.d lu Ml• -•IrvdN 11131 'I M1 l:'' i r.»J.vr \:: n-Imu,g11 aw". RuilllinFAlty all. Vmmmm Ls larcvue Lpt)LirIW lfig:ml7�'.- I nAool NrevmmmuNma d: ulNlm g —NR iI ac, -1 Ilil%n!MreommrmurrIn: Width or50rM In ute•rtlurrte xia da'Oy orFeyavnlb Unl9ed Oe elatmne Cult. Ldt I0i.:69shall h nea m nnnm Ipnudh a140 two e dowry cmforfol '.1. PA -3C KESSLER MOU\2AIN BLUFF Am6L lira nnign cl Irvol.10F &gl lid: If:mcal p<ampl+ It 0e voifitewrti dnpn amdarin orr43nnWnmllg \m4!:) aV l I, pa 6 »vlySna swtti - . In ntnldimm',. i Cl9 II LDnw'.: m,e Dotmp flpll Code r eoLWneall 101]mtlehmil Jyepaea �6 Wpgy�� N.T.S. PROPERTY WFORMATICIN -:Jaarxr anent lee 1A -. aFVlr i.. lira 1' In a11e 'POM4n oN 5 Tnx r.y\ }IDC n:lM1� pr'u d. pnon)D Dn5i EXIST G FEANRES - _- __ uw: [o.-rnJx[ L -- ' — p.—. 9rnx -p'-111 J1 __. CLa[ taomD mare --- P4ry ISSrWc' .. —A— :e`ry Aa - n 501 prt➢A` J'^•'+ • • r arv' .sal. e^ 0 �.- .._ _.� 1 .Tnu A II¢ I p.u.r JALE P o lc co 911VIA ..- ma cmrpmw) -----'+`-- 5lum: 44a[I.r )I ue --� oprnn,lyr — - - — LWB Tr L�In LLT avlc .u. or D alopa nnppoEJ Moon m Ltr ii® eon O a.wurvt 11 [p. aT Poll iR Y. ."r AJ ema .0 6plylw .(;tf fft R IDrlp ]w )n Dw1 D 61rneL Sap! rDl a 7170truplm to,m. m mDmr« 'Nx ria ism) 4ii-1450 AREAS SOUTHPAS5 COMMUNITY 'LAN C CATO SPRINSS RDAD '.6C snr6 FAYE7TEVILLE, ARKANSAS SouthPass Master Plan PZD - Zoning and Land Use Approval PA4A •l,yy}� +tal 'i js, m+'i Yah ri' �I 1�'.i4c Ii Ipir ;YNI !I e �xfL S^a6al —1 'I lmF v, r. —_+J Irs mL,F tl}'� �' )J!'F �I ♦ .:I f ry.Y Jv a xt w.nl Cmwv Jrs 5ur]vAr !➢J.>A!'wuurv8 • 4 . L_ � f x �� ] mF Trtenve vLC drsIli '�l s"1 ^I w.. A*.. -N. l i�+� m.Ir Ilv .I t..c.m! '^.°L-\.I�M1.'1 'ily > k°I. J.!.i r. S'"r J. 2. �, i. Yrvf Anv.®J uvm - i34a r[""\UJr6le^Fx 'A 'p?L-IiFt .ewm ni.IW Iw AaJbvwem en.aNnawlwr.. 6004 Il IuatvOu[exiWW[GI NrvxmO[LvvM➢n I I '.[ZltlrySN�1 r=. £.k v '� _-�' :Ovm Cole rtquirtmmxfu SnUfmnV1LInW V 423.691 N W 1318,41 t nLI.'vv ac bL rw: euil oz Wmrl Lml9 flubp yab an mox44rr fynmm Lou 4 (fl ISM flr] ro IcMIDoaI loNlun .1x1[5 CS w. L11[ 4 x11 U4[24. IIO,[li¢Jpfsv • IJxr , a'- I L...IS IyWI I nflJ E Uv LSr ' r ll) reb-xti)n PA4B rP, p x 1 J. JDJ Ill 1 I n n is _,.I 1,. A['r'w1 .- wrM1 1 .J I,.J:pi In LJ ,J1I F-L_.n L1 �.1TM1! Iln n \ 1-...r,Le.. 191 i1 ➢r01¢,SPrP J51T ASFOAr I76 40 lm. L 10P A[[w Gart ry ne4 . 41v F:m[ B rtL St 6 4am will lIS Iro FOfl .. ...S4c rmm ➢R 16 -1hL Pm4m4e1`u1' Sexenvud or, LelLfW JMvnrnP Wle$l:am 9 6'IM 1 N llam Imhh F )r hr r yru tIWI Iry �A1 r Shull hi mu+m„ P):L[Cfly alrvn:mle Lrnfiltl Onvbpmevl f4.vr [Yeuc.... al 'Ip 1u 1111(r1 k v1[L ) "1I, ,, III L[ I IP[ LIIIIvt 1 yN PA -4A PARK K%ol I.Lmmm'.IS sk a 1=two r -.,,our .ay.vwll m[ Llp m l mmmll Ln LI zII• Il[vl J9 L lil . TLI:f - acv oNPn[J mL .vm:.nP,•z.wvil mM. 1"mi"Y{fI16v)Ilrp..J-r J nw P, rW x on lwth,y •I9u IIM'll.[ I)IUPII]1' cs rIS Lrlal .Il .. .u..4 Ja.-f 5m[gx Sma4Yi11r1aa1mPG.. �..••. .. __ I _ _ -y- _� -i_ .u.. [ufl mlm.L...l _.1Pnnip mem L Nnevmfonnu]m m.J[mly. mv'hrvnlill i ) Yu I F(/)I IiWame IIIna.l...... IC is °.'tot. l B.Jv mmmO LwS ILL 17x°01 r L -r, ,w1 )m[ q@ 5 !CC nm III $ Ire, from OI ['P [rhmx$ or me YL: 4 f¢. or, oppvv[ z,a, ]ul R :4rmzt Soltmrl r!m VIA 1vo Coll LP. olplo*sti Im In vewl nm xjt the CnJ art%mu\i!Ie UmfiN Dndopnet CON PA -4B PARR KNOLL [r9:.' J'I Pyp Lpnl➢lry m.k EJLM1: 4TYY r. maim —N—n—s—— rT.INC r.I,C, rE0. -- T FRCP rE LL W4FI 1J4 OVRA-,smc • ISIC o SF' !Oh A'r --.. dY uT. yrtxw ICW4 TR LQ nAx' M1,.._ PRDp1�DFEAN�3 — ------W'WI--- ^J,) C ILJ1` "K/ U! .IR O!T LF L . - --PAB ul7 n 0JJIP .u_ IJ flu:rpoilID1 W'.,, pr III. ® IS ® IXr5 x' ✓L4 :fi: 'r LI'Sr [wnmcE ,mr . Y I:NI ,S .Nwa40 or.. vum _ —_ rmrxur. IE7L Ox .'.ills. :' eUr < ht. P I IL B o L L r flc S. I o sp 2F Iml 01 St 9l $W T1 [ml S.L. 5utl 111, `04 I.la AC 1I` K rWIlA IF12N O{ .N 970E On) 442-F44* I479)a1J.B PAS 1170) 4Lv5p VLANNINU AHCA : cI =Lc ' / /- /J - nry 5 8I'll" 6" E - 1 M••�•+FN ............. N4I1`..'...'..'.6L SCENIC esa Fs OVERLOOK _ ' �_'----t:-f_/ - — � '-'+ ' '-c .LJ HILLSIDE 4 LV '-il. r[f%S"` �5 x -� YyyP k INATING _.......�...•�c /VI A—' J 1 PA 6B OPEN SPACE - AREA `yo+tir; 4 f Y xLF ewdY°W x v`1 Y )> Ly{.o _l r LULt.Y^"ptL.t�+ ♦♦2{`Ti+yar� �"'i' J + '[' S iJ.. p N I V y Yf a 1 a J". - 1 'i' A�hty�)'xL 1r LI L /. y. 9 17,+17h`` /� .{• S l{ i /.. Hp 1 V rvp. {yw 5`1 . OS {ir'Ie`I }':ryl .mot x. ht 1 j4 P W 7 ,--TERMINATING err VISTA J.PA5 T 0 0 02 0 SOUTHPASS SCH0-O /COMMUNITI /\r. ITrr. '„fN1111d,:Lrr.• L� RM1iN4 ,''�\µPIS .— 1_ �t•,.:� I-n.l l rn r 1 Jlm a ni. C, -1H r -N Ignlnxm m lm I'' r , n� m.-. IS,, .I I .n 1 Ir vl .1 [:w r . n+ CvlId111ouq yT. " I 1 ,.. n re a. ..nl.o..e . i 'I rIP'v d:l,00 '. 11 •.1+4P 'PLx11 tl r I• ➢[u_L_NLemlq —•d nau� -v 1P_ J —L. T.J 1 leca.enpliy{ - • Pa - ,., I P [z1 'I A Y-.,1 -L OIL C4 nlpnn.el tII Ilkll mf p.IP -N-I '116 1.� 4uWidW JtiwmJID1 +,- p&thllfE�. NI *svxn . F1 rIP .ItlN C / r' I it tn1,J'rI. dl4wn W ' ML11av f�eµq: V %r IIIVNlub V6 [Imp. " 1I ro'-Fr 11.;0 IOVi,I.� I ..I' -p'. -Jr, Mae L.g11,SL.4 W114:11 t 1 IL *L:'/m 7111 L110m@ IRI.-111la.ary. Y N'.',,f_' I'A-> CIA II PA6A Unit l: Cln ofFu),S ille o[) Wide l tbY mdl Fmn[ Minimum 30 fm Unit C Cu4ml mtlreacfioml frciItln Side' Minamim' IS fm Unil5' Gmei mmlTurilmm Cow malmrvm 15 feet LmT 2 C11yn:ar uses b) Ln YL tioncl IU[ pmn11 Lail 3 Public Pmlminl and Ullllb Fa[.]Ann 40 feei Lml 20 Comm FILl x eOeatTCr, .wpa $ nC ..x_.�y.. LnDtap 24D6 xG-IdYi4i Der1511) -- P.e]1ng UnrtxO DauR)UmK'aen0 She)' begm'emetl b) flit Gm LFPL)[IIm111e UDC \m mnuelt`4.lme,ln \q I. nl Nnnnmte,n )ll PoH3vp+ In¢ully ls9 '¢rrzI) 12a' M1 - ]:pldml¢ uuillb[C1p LIFl) beenll Lnb5[d:Te lopm llnrn X04 y�- R'i11rb R7NiMlm:" - eL L4TJ [urn P.pe:,.11p ,nn )E[Co0n1[LlmAln .9[CIO mI ImLI ion e,l e nMi[.IOlIR1GUIT.1Glli NIA _ irilitleM ml➢!Sir,:_. - _-_.i v_ gn+ve. thaI neo[.IRnczaarm le it V A nrhne-Lam.[+.gr; umdam[nl P444 P.Ln1Inli A1¢ 1wtlArva-Rer Dnilimil NI: siennnbz N A LI y[[a`dmla no, Ne City of TL)ovenlle Uniil L D -elUpn enl LCtle Dentin mi, fm lr,,,n lunel Dlgn05 :0W A,.(.nm I nnx. l PA -6A RF1 lrmAJ. PARK SouthPass Master Plan PZD - Zoning and Land Use Approval PA6B Ilnl" run 01 Fat A ADVI11P f)1) -A In'1616. Al I 1r.m 1imenLa13D 1M S dn' blwmvm-5 fe u' (cyudAuwe6l� in.'£hry 1 7 Ilw J.mlm w li lM Cml 2: Cip xior 4Y5 b) eDQIILJIs316[ p[nnil Lnl:e CWmw mid llicmmur] FD61mn Ifn UU IE)19PRi1 < -ATt '. vm_'_D '.vCm]ldo xeers16vw3[sl:¢ e lu ?._.:: sdi?iRl!3R1'411S11 ::: s .m+ @WIIEdFj{FLyW!a°�" n ".'; Iry 6 v RoRe :a69 R U Jeo ie14mTi A A 1>m:llpg Unos 0 Dne1y Il...r&AW)u y���� 111wnY1 SY -J(] T A{...6S PF-Ti F- ' OrFees,&iIw 17106X,' SgflolRoore5itlmWO Shell be 6men[d F)the City offoy mw5Ue UDC ;Ir lq IW IL'um)0 5 lRrSiu&":;{. 3 v > „1 TpF;^IIWA�ipi)Xu0'.:a: q: \i:P'e ♦ :3 T')IpJ'3F t� ."fillajeum?lieOyAAR --rr 1 + {%1jw,MlWmNm' V. w`m:dYiY+ ! Opt Iomlmpa6maIprpos use^AIh.minrs) ii these NA `mi I�dbnvl puywp Snot: pN'i.on5mv) he mLLv11le6 It n It m rn7vr9 6ulyng nl'J Mvllnnal nnb,j+wi6raWe1legiLlns' _) #�'>. i'i - sA 7aCN1dM[[ID the UNIi[L DnTlnpm en' CC5[ 57141$7Cud Iii IF-Ivl PA -GB OPEN SPACE AREA (" n N.T.S. rRmaFGRtu.Qn -:JR5p11 ZMIN-n L le F 6 P4-1 f -IMSI 1m4116A LIDa 'UV IIS =1515 wu uua ncb Aw¢ Jtm,,]5 WI: aZ PP:ns Pls�— - j _.. LEGEND...- I C%ISIIIJG FEATURES .AI .Mi ;II'ehlXl —. .-. _—c. - mw a1 nv w¢ u- nen,!I]n i YN — -- ' 1111 rArI,r1 In4W [1. b. JIC -- IN. _L Al .—T. xv1\_iuL • LVIi Pq o 4' L:A]4 5 msn.L wo IT t -p 01 ay 64171[uU v 5II rFGPOSED f-EQ'fURE5_ EI IDS —FUJI Tin s ✓6 ] IRE Ylp gIO[P J_ —[e u.l Or R3! ei • S® _LTv 4 otI ni4 pn:PISVC[ lur µi.pq. +Wi! he- I.qe ryZ15 cut, i�— ----- 'lIIxW pl[ROTT ay5) AJ u..--!v.o¢inF.' QLV.EP1lDpfR, 11' PPRR[NIR : J M®nm1 CU 11.C Swu All M➢w emus Fm Csvpc 217 ruI AI St 5T1.201 ]I) Coil Prow 5YM1 ZI. 101 rr).n.a u: v"0' r Arl m m �im Ills) 111 e]m (470) .1i I<u ¢(Ii?) 441—I 42 .1x 9r9 11]-1150 •city of Fayetteville Staff Review Form • //( (08 City Council Agenda Items 511'/ and ,P2 p a8 a�i8 Contracts, Leases or Agreements 4 d��65 10/7/2008 rr City Council Meeting Date Agenda Items Only Jeremy Patel Planning Operations Submitted By Division Department Action Required: R-PZD 08-2898: Planned Zoning District (Southpass Development, 675 & 714): Submitted by Appian Centre for Design for property located south of the City of Fayetteville at the intersection of Interstate 540 and Cato Springs Road (State Highway 265) containing approximately 910.36 acres. The request is for zoning and land use approval of a Residential Planned Zoning District with 751 single family lots, 2,881 multi -family units, 630 condominium lofts, 344,000 square feet of non-residential space, 240 acres of preserved open space, and a 200+ acre regional park. $ Cost of this request Category / Project Budget Program Category / Project Name Account Number Funds Used to Date Program / Project Category Name Project Number Remaining Balance Fund Name Budgeted Item = Budget Adjustment Attached Date q-ly-DK Date F Jg, -zl-O8 Finance and Internal Service Director Date Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Original Contract Date: Original Contract Number: Received in City Clerk's Office n ..l(Y Received in A ____ 9 Mayor's Office Mayor Date 7 OJ 1 c)Cdhd ne ed Apr l 16/d r/OS 6n //