Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-10-09 MinutesJ • • • A meeti 5:00 P. ville, MINUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ng of the City Planning Commission was held on Monday, October 9, 1978, at M., in the Board of Directors Room, City Administration Building, Fayette - Arkansas. MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: Chairman Rita Davis, Morton Gitelman, Beth Crocker, Ernest Jacks, Keith Newhouse, Newton Hailey, Windell Cullers, Bill Kisor, and Peg Anderson. None. Bobbie Jones, Angie Medlock, David McWethy, Scott Van Laningham, Anita Zisner, Mim Wynne, Truman Yancey, Rudy Moore, Mr. Pickell, Deborah Muruaga, and other unidentified persons.. Chairman Davis called the meeting to order. The minutes of the September 25, 1978, Planning Commission MINUTES were approved as mailed. The first item for discussion was a petition SOUTH GREGG STREET bearing 87 signatures of "residents of the area Request for bounded on the south by Prairie Street, the north R-1 Zoning by Center Street, the East by South West Avenue, and the West by South University Avenue . . . requesting a change of zoning on South Gregg from the present I-1 zoning to R-1, Low Density Residential". By this petition they are requesting the Planning Commission to initiate action to rezone the area rather than waiting for submission of individual rezoning petitions. Chairman Davis explained that this is not a public hearing, and if the Planning Commission decided to initiate a rezoning, they would hold a public hearing when the appeal came before the Planning Commission. She asked that since this is not a public hearing, the property owners limit comments. Anita Zisner, 325 South Gregg, and spokesman for the residents, presented a map showing persons who signed the petition, those they could not reach, and property owners. Mrs. Zisner said the residents are asking the Planning Commission to call a public hearing to rezone the property to R-1. She said the residents feel the City has a responsibility to do this because in June of this year the Planning Commission had amended the General Plan, and the residents understood at that time, that their property was to be rezoned but no action was taken. She pointed out that in August, one tract of'land on South Gregg was before the Planning Commission requesting the zoning to be changed from I-1 to R-3, and the Planning Commission agreed, even though residents had submitted a petition in opposition, to rezone the property. She said the Planning Commission did not seem to acknowledge at that time, that the immediate neighbor on the south side of the property in question was against the rezoning. Anita Zisner said the property owners showed up at the Board of Directors meeting on September 5 in protest of the rezoning, and the property was rezoned to R-2. Ms. Zisner stated that the residents on Gregg Street feel they have been neglected in that there was not a public hearing to rezone their property before the Mark property was, rezoned. She said they feel, also, that the Board of Directors, should have sent this back to the Planning Commission with a recommendation instead of going ahead and rezoning the property to R-2. Ms. Zisner stated that the General Plan is a guideline for the area and it shows the property as R-3. She said this is only a recommendation and they had hoped that at a public hearing, the Planning Commission could zone the property otherwise. i • • Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -2- Chairman Davis said the main item for the Planning Commission to decide is whether to initiate a rezoning petition for the area. Ernest Jacks requested that the Commission hear Item 3 before making a decision. He said if the Planning Commission decides to call a public hearing, they will have to designate for what zone. Nancy Ault was present representing a petition bearing 10 signatures, as owners of 11 parcels of property, requesting the zoning of certain properties on South Gregg Avenue be changed from I-1, Industrial District to R-2, Medium Density. Information in the agenda accompanying the petition, indicates that of 23 property owners on the Street, 15 of them, or 65% favor R-2 Zoning. Irving Zisner said Mr. Meadows and Mrs. Roy Hester had signed the R-2 petition, but would like to have their names taken off the petition. Linda Callentine said she has a written statement from Mr. Meadows asking that his name be taken off the petition. She explained that he would rather have the area zoned R-1 but when he signed the R-2 petition, he was not aware that there was a possibility of R-1 zoning. Nancy Ault said the persons on her petition would like to see consideration of the area to rezone from I-1 to a residential zone. She said she feels, however, that R-2 goes along with what is happening in the area. Peg Anderson said she feels the Planning Commission is ready to look into holding a public hearing but said they may want Planning Consultant Larry Wood to make a recommen- dation of the area. Commissioner Anderson moved that the Planning Commission ask Larry Wood to come back with a recommendation so the Planning Commission can hold a public hearing on rezoning the area. Ernest Jacks seconded the motion. Commissioner Gitelman said he is opposed to the motion. He said the Planning Commission had asked Larry Wood for a restudy of the land use plan and adopted the recommendation for changing the land use plan a few months ago. He noted that everything north of Prairie Street was recommended as basically R-3, High Density Residential District. He said if individual property owners came in asking for rezoning of their property the Planning Commission would have to look at each appeal separately to decide if the property should be R-1, R-2, or R-3, based on theappeal and what is happening in the area. Mr. Gitelman said he would only vote for R-2 or R-3 zoning if a rezoning petition was ` broughtiin. Mim Wynne said the residents want Gregg Street to be zoned R-1 since that is the way it is being used. Commissioner Anderson explained that she had in her motion, asked that Larry Wood come back in with a plan showing specifically what should be R-1, R-2, and R-3 zoning for the entire area. She said she is asking that the Planning Commission itself initiate the rezoning for the area. In response to Peg Anderson, Larry Wood said he felt he would come back with a recommendation for R-3 zoning for the entire area. Fay Jones said he has property on Gregg Street which he bought several years ago which is split in zoning. He said part of the property is zoned R-0, Residential Office, and he would like it to remain R-0 so he can build a combination residence and architecture office. Mr. Gitelman said the land use plan is a guide for the future. He said as a normal rule, the Planning Commission doesn't rezone every piece of property to comply with the land use plan. Mr. Gitelman said he could see the idea of down -zoning some of the area from I-1 to R-3, but to change the zoning of the entire area to R-1 would not solve the problem. He pointed out that the residents can continue to use their property as R-1. Anita Zisner said if the Planning Commission zoned the property R-1, the individual property owners could come back in and ask for a rezoning if they want to use the property in another manner. Commissioner Gitelman said the property owners could come in and ask for the R-1 zoning. Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -3- Mim Wynne said the residents feel the City made a mistake in zoning the property I-1. She also noted that it would cost each property owner $25 for the rezoning • petition. Linda Callentine questioned whose interest the Planning Commission is looking after in making a General Plan. Chairman Davis said there has been no new residential development in the area for the past 20 years and when people request a higher density zoning, the Planning Commission will look to see if the neighbors are taking care of their property and if the neighborhood is owner -occupied. She said it does appear things are beginning to change in the area but for the last 20 years, there hasn't been any change. Mr. Jacks withdrew his second to Anderson's motion. Irving Zisner said he doesn't feel Larry Wood has studied the area. He said the City Board said they do not have the money to improve the streets and buy additional right- of-way and if they did get the right-of-way, it would be in people's front yards. He said the streets are not adequate to handle the high-density traffic which would be generated. Peg Anderson amended her motion to request Larry Wood to return to the Planning Commission with a presentation of a zoning plan for the area. Newton Hailey seconded the motion. Mim Wynne asked that they look just at Gregg Street. She stated that it is impor- tant to combine open free space with high-density space. She said the City would need parks in 10-20 years and would have to come back to buy property for the parks. The motion failed to pass with Anderson, Hailey, and Davis voting "Aye" and Newhouse, Gitelman, Crocker, Cullers, Jacks and Kisor voting "Nay". Anita Zisner said it is easy for the Planning Commission to become hardened to the problems of people living in a specific area. She said the Planning Commission members live in the R-1 zones. She said the residents on Gregg Street do cherish • their own homes and the area in whichthey live, even if it is not a $40,000-$100,000 home. She said the people on the street have to live with the problems. Peg Anderson pointed out that the individual property owners can come back in and ask for a rezoning themselves. Next was a public hearing to consider the REQUEST TO RECLASSIFY desirability of recommending to the Board ELAINE STREET of Directors a change in the Master Master Street Plan Street Plan to reclassify Elaine Street from a collector street to a minor or local street. Truman Yancey was present representing the property owners. Planning Consultant Larry Wood recommended that the City retain Elaine Street as a collector and plan for its extension, ;to.Highway 265 as a part of the Master Street Plan. His recommendation stated that there are no other reasonable alterna- tives remaining to provide a collector street between Old Missouri Road and Highway 265. Mr. Yancey pointed out that the east end of Elaine Street has been dedicated as a park area. He said the City has reserved right-of-way for Elaine Street to be constructed as a collector street, but it has actually only been constructed to the width of a regular street. He noted that Huntingdon Subdivision, located south of Sweetbriar, will be a large Planned Unit Development with access through Elaine Street to Old Missouri Road and an access to Old Wire Road. Mr. Yancey said development of the golf course to the north has taken that property out of residential development for the immediate future and since Elaine Street was the first street constructed in the area, it was the one designated as a collector. He said if Elaine Street were constructed to Highway 265 it would be used as a • through street. He said the residents would also loose 1/3 to 1/2 of the park area. Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -4- Truman Yancey said it has been said Elaine should be retained as a collector street because of the Federal funding available to collector streets but not local streets. Mr. Yancey said the citizens in the area do not want Elaine to become an arterial street, or a vital connecting point between Highway 71 and the east part of the City. Mr. Yancey said it is their view that the traffic generated in Sweetbriar and Huntingdon Subdivisions would not justify the street being designated as a collector because further development to the north is closed. He stated if all Huntingdon traffic was routed through Elaine, it might justify the collector classification, but Huntingdon does have a second access. David Knowles showed the Commission a drawing showing the grade of Elaine Street coming off of Old Missouri Road. He said you are immediately on a 4% grade after making the turn and then are immediately on a 16% grade, and noted that the 16% grade exceeds requirements for even a minor street. He said the grade then declines all the way to the park. Mr. Knowles stated if they made Elaine meet the 6% grade which would meet specifications for a collector street, it would require approximately 8-10 feet of cut and you would need 55 feet from the centerline of the existing street to have any type of slope on the shoulder. He said it would require a 4 to 1 slope. Mr. Knowles said he felt the grade would not be changed and the City would have a minor arterial street with a 16% grade very close to a "T" intersection. Commissioner Newhouse pointed out that there are two other exits which will be developed eventually for Huntingdon Subdivision. Mr. Newhouse stated that there is a problem in Fayetteville with not having enough through streets and he feels Elaine Street would be a good through street for the area. Jo Ann Jones, 2346 Elaine, said if Elaine were extended, it would divide the park into two areas and this would make the smaller area of the park useless, and both sides of the park unsafe for the children to play in. She said many residents in the area bought property there because of the park area, and those residents had no reason to think Elaine Street would ever be extended through to Highway 265. Ernest Jacks asked how the park got established in the area and Larry Wood said the collector designation was required of the subdivision on Elaine Street when it was platted, to solve the need for a tie to Highway 265. He said the park was given because 1) it is in the flood plain and 2) for the developer to avoid building a bridge. Mike Corso, 2437 Sharon, was concerned about the traffic problem. He showed the Commissioners photographs of the "S" curve on Old Missouri Road, and the intersection of Old Missouri and Elaine Street, during different times of the year. He stated that there are many accidents on the "S" curve. Ernest Jacks questioned if the property owners did not know Elaine Street was classified as a collector street. Nan Knowles said since there was a park at the east end and the street was a "O" street, they had no idea it was designated as a collector street. Truman Yancey said they are asking the Planning Commission to look at the street and area as it is now developed, and not the way it was when the Master Street Plan was adopted. He said the problem is the direction development has taken in the area is riot the direction which needs through streets. He said what was seen as an ideal plan is no longer possible if it is to serve the people who live there well. Mr. Yancey stated that the residents are asking the Planning Commission to accommodate the situation as it is and keep it from getting worse. Mr. Yancey said they are requesting a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission to the City Board on deletion of Elaine Street from the Master Street Plan. • • • Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -5- Chairman Davis asked Larry Wood if a developer, or the City wanted to tie Elaine through to Highway 265, could they still extend it if it were designated as a local street and Larry Wood said "yes". KatherineStubblefield noted that at one time she had considered buying the land to the east of the park and west of Highway 265, but found that there were 16 utility right-of-ways there and she doesn't know how anyone could build a street there. Chairman Davis said she had talked to City Manager Grimes who said if the City decided to build the connecting street, they would give consideration to going south of the park. Peg Anderson questioned what would be gained by changing the classification and Mr. Yancey said 1) it would eliminate the requirement for extending Elaine through if property to the east were developed, and 2) while Elaine is designated as a collector, the citizens of the area see themselves being abused by the new subdi- vision using Elaine Street as an access, rather than providing a direct access to Old Missouri Road. Mr. Jacks said even if the designation were changed to a local street, if someone develops the property to the east of the park, the Planning Commission would still require the developer to tie into Elaine. Newton Hailey said Mr. Grimes had indicated to him that he is close to working something out for the children to walk to school a different way, rather than having to go through the "S" curve. He said, hopefully, they will get a fire station on the east side of this property, and if so, they will need a through street for access. Peg Anderson said she doesn't feel what is requested will take care of the problem but moved that the Master Street Plan be changed to reclassify Elaine Street from a collector street to a local street. Bill Kisor seconded the motion, which failed to pass with Kisor and Anderson voting "Aye" and Davis, Gitelman, Crocker, Newhouse, Jacks, Cullers, and Hailey voting "Nay". The fifth item for consideration was the final HUNTINGDON SUBDIVISION plat approval of Huntingdon Subdivision, a Planned Final Plat Unit Development, to be located south of Sweetbriar #2 Subdivision and north of Strawberry Hill Subdivision, zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, Northwood Corporation, developer. Rudy Moore. and Mr. Pickell were present to represent. Ernest Jacks said the Subdivision Committee had recommended approval with several contingencies: 1) "Harold" Street be changed to 'Errol" Street; 2) no access to the right-of-way shown to the southwest of this property; 3) show the flood plain; 4) waive the plat size; 5) street and drainage plans be approved by the Street Superintendent; 6) reach an agreement with Clayton Powell and Wally Brt about the interior radii of the culs-de-sac; and 7) 3 street light changes to permit no more than 420 feet intervals. Keith Newhouse seconded the motion,. Ernest Jacks said all streets will be public streets and the developers are asking that sidewalks be waived for the interior of the subdivision on the culs-de-sac streets because they want to encourage residents to use the green areas to get from one place to another. Mr. Jacks said the Subdivision Committee has no recommendation on this part of the request. Ernest Jacks moved that the Planning Commission waive sidewalks on the cul-de,sac streets inside the looped street. Bobbie Jones said this would have to be waived by the Board of Directors. Keith Newhouse seconded the motion. Bobbie Jones noted that the developer would have to get approval from the Board of Adjustment to back into the street. • • Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -6- The vote on the first motion to approve the final plat was 9-0. The vote on the second motion, to waive sidewalk requirements, was passed 7-2, with Gitelman, Crocker, Newhouse, Jacks, Hailey,-KTsor\and_Anderson voting "Aye" and Davis and Cullers voting "Nay". Truman Yancey asked if the Planning Commission had already approved the final plat and Chairman Davis said "yes". She noted that the property owners present at the final plat approval were also present when the preliminary plat was brought in. Mr. Yancey was concerned that the property owners did not have a chance to be heard, but said they did not want to make their comments at this time since the plat had already been approved. Rudy Moore said he would like to hear what the property owners in the area want to say. Mr. Yancey said they do not want to talk if it will have no bearing and the vote has been taken. Chairman Davis said she doesn't know if a final plat approval calls for a public hearing. Rudy Moore said they had notified the adjoining property owners because at the preliminary plat stage, the Planning Commission did require the developer to notify them before bringing in the final plat. Mr. Yancey said he does not feel the residents are in a position to make comments after the final decision has been made. He said the usual procedure, as he has observed it, is to hear comments before voting and he doesn't feel the citizens in the area should speak after the vote. Morton Gitelman moved to rescind the vote and reopen the hearing. Beth Crocker seconded the motion, which passed 9-0. Truman Yancey stated that the property owners feel there should be a connection to Old Missouri Road, other than Elaine Street, for that large of a development. He said they understand the problems of purchasing the property for right of way but feel the owners of those .properties:would_.be willing to grant right of ways. He said the residents feel those rights-of-way should be taken at this time and sidewalks be set up at an early date. Ray Shipman, 3325 Katherine, said Errol is shown as being stubbed out to the property line and asked if this would qualify it as a collector street. Mr. Gitelman said it is designated as a local street and is not shown on the Master Street Plan. Mr. Shipman was also concerned about the storm sewer situation and Mr. Jacks noted that the street and drainage plans must be approved by the City Engineer before the final plat can be filed. Don Giles, 2439 Elaine, said they had calculated the number of cars using Elaine Street now and the number they feel would be using it when Huntingdon is developed and they feel there must be another entrance and exit into the subdivision. He said they would like the Planning Commission to require right-of-way and possibly not require the street to be built until the subdivision is 1/3-1/2 developed. Mort Gitelman said they had gone through this at the preliminary plat level and the Planning Commission cannot require a developer to provide right-of-way outside his subdivision. He stated that someday, as the property between Old Missouri Road and this property is developed, they will require right-of-way dedication. Newton Hailey said he felt there is a good chance that the property between Old Missouri and this Planned Unit Development will be developed before Huntingdon Subdivison is built up. Kay Corso said they are adjoining property owners to the subdivision and were never notified that the subdivision was going in. She said the preliminary plat was approved contingent upon getting some kind of notification to the adjoining property owners and the only formal notification they received was a certified letter telling them the final plat approval was on the Planning Commission agenda today. Ernest Jacks moved that the final plat be approved with the following stipulations: 1) "Harold" Street be changed to "Errol" Street; 2) no access to the right-of-way shown to the southwest of this property; 3) show the flood plain; 4) waive plat size; 5) street and drainage plans be approved by the Street Superintendent; • 1 • Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -7- 6) reach an agreement with Clayton Powell and Wally Brt about the interior radii of the culs-de-sac; and 7) add one street light and make two location changes to permit no more than 420 feet intervals. Keith Newhouse seconded the motion, which passed 9-0. Ernest Jacks moved that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Board that sidewalks -not be required on the interior cul-de-sac streets. Keith Newhouse seconded the motion, which passed 7-2, with Gitelman, Crocker, Newhouse, Anderson, Jacks, -Kisor, and Hailey voting "Aye" and Davis and Cullers voting "Nay". The third item for consideration was preliminary plat PINEWOOD SUBDIVISION approval of Pinewoods Subdivision to be located on the Preliminary Plat west side of Azalea Terrace Drive; developer is Azalea Terrace Drive Bob Reagan. Ernest Jacks moved to approve the preliminary plat with -meeting all Plat Review comments and waive the scale to allow 1" = 601 . Bobbie Jones said there are sidewalks on the west side of Azalea Terrace Drive south of this property and the sidewalks on this plat are shown on the east side so that the developer will not lose the pine trees existing where the sidewalks should go. She asked that if they are left on the east side the developer add a note on the plat that would commit the people building on the lots to build the sidewalks on the east side. Keith Newhouse suggested they could build the sidewalks around the trees. He said he doesn't feel they could require a developer to build sidewalks on the other side of the street. A. C. Perry said he has agreed to buy the lots in Pinewoods Subdivision and he would agree to build the sidewalks across the street to keep from losing the trees. He said the pine trees are too large to move. Mr. Perry said he has already signed a contract to buy the lots contingentupon plat approval. Mr. Jacks amended his motion to require the developer to build sidewalks on either side of the street, at the developers option. Bobbie Jones asked that a note be put on the plat to that effect. Bobbie Jones noted that the right-of-way of Yvonne Street to the west will not be extended through to Azalea Terrace. She said there is no undeveloped property between the houses on Yvonne and this subdivision. Bill Kisor seconded Mr. Jacks' amended motion which passed unanimously. Next was the publi hearing on Rezoning Petition REZONING PETITION R78-24 R78-24, Charles T. Combs, to rezone 15.7 acres located Charles T. Combs on the north side of East 15th Street between Morningside East 15th Street Drive and Shenandoah Mobile Home Park from R-1, Low Density Residential District to C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial District. Bobbie Jones said she had received a letter asking that this item be tabled. Peg Anderson moved to table the rezoning request. Ernest Jacks seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Next was a conditional use request CONDITIONAL USE submitted by Deborah Muruaga for a Day Care Center children's day care facility at 201 201 Louise Street • Louise Street, property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District. Deborah Muruaga said she had contacted the adjoining property owners and there was no opposition. Peg Anderson moved to approve the conditional use. Newton Hailey seconded the motion. t. Planning Commission Meeting October 9, 1978 -8- Mr. Gitelman suggested that they put a one-year time limit on the conditional use. Peg Anderson amended her motion to approve the conditional use for a period of one year and the applicant come back in at that time. Newton Hailey seconded the amended motion which passed 8-1, with Gitelman, Crocker, Hailey, Jacks, Newhouse, Kisor, Cullers, and Anderson voting "Aye" and Davis voting "Nay". Peg Anderson moved to adjourn. The motion died for lack of a second. Davis stated that there was a request for a change of non -conforming use for property located at 231 South Mill OTHER BUSINESS 231 SOUTH MILL Street. Lamar Pettus explained the Planning Commission had allowed the Mill Street property to be used for C-1 purposes and the applicant, Glenn Watson, had moved a penny arcade business into the building without a Certificate of Occupancy. He said when they came in for the Certificate of Occupancy, they were told that the penny arcade was not allowed in the C-1 zone. Glenn Watson said they want to open up a penny arcade for the children in the community. She explained that the real estate person had said nothing about the certificate of occupancy and occupation license required. She said they now have 6 machines in the building and have cleaned up the building. She showed the Planning Commission pictures of the improvements they are making. Mort Gitelman asked Mr. Pettus if there is a statute regulation on minors where there are pinball machines. Mr. Pettus said he did not know, but was not aware of any. Windell Cullers moved to approve the change in non -conforming use. Peg Anderson seconded the motion. Windell Cullers amended the motion to approve the change for a one-year period. Peg Anderson seconded the notion which passed 9-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M. RESOLUTION PC 46-78 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission, October 9, 1978, fifteen (15) days after a notice was published in the Northwest Arkansas Times, a newspaper of general circulation; and WHEREAS, after the public hearing the Planning Commission voted to not recommend to the Board of Directors to amend the Master Street Plan to reclassify Elaine Street from a collector street to a minor or local street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RECOMMENDED BY THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: SECTION 1. That the proposal to recommend to the Board of Directors to amend the Master Street Plan to reclassify Elaine Street from a collector street to a minor or local street be denied. PASSED AND APPROVED this 9th day of October, 1978. APPROVED: Rita Davis, Chairman • • • RESOLUTION PC 47-78 WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on Monday, October 9, 1978, the Fayetteville Planning Commission voted to approve the final subdivision plat dated , 19, known as HUNTINGDON SUBDIVISION and submitted by Northwood Corporation; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended that because the neces- sary improvements have not been installed in said subdivision that Northwood Corporation enter into and furnish the city with the necessary subdivision contract NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS: SECTION 1. The necessary subdivision contract be executed with the City of Fayetteville prior to filing of the final, subdivision plat with. the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. SECTION 2. That the City Planning Commission of Fayetteville, Ark- ansas, hereby approves the final plat, along with the land dedicated for streets and other public uses in the HUNTINGDON SUBDIVISION described as follows: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A part of the NW', NW', Section 31 and the SW4, SW;, Section 30, T -17-N, R-29-11, and a part of the NE4, NE', Section 36, and the SE', SE;, and the SW4, SE;, Section 25, T -17-N, R -30-W described as beginning at the Northwest Corner of said NE4, NE4, Section 36, T -17-N, R -30-W; Thence N 89-18-22 W 125.00 feet; thence N 01- 21-10 E 704.12 feet; thence N 89-13-49 E 1445.58 feet; thence S 00-05-50 W 8.67 feet; thence S 38-04-17 E 227.95 feet; thence S 37-44-04 E 108.03 feet; thence S 52-05-49 W 150.54 feet; thence S 37-54-11 E 50.00 feet; thence N 52-05-49 E 150.39 feet; thence S 37-44-04 E 132.67 feet; thence S 52-18-20 E 202.32 feet; thence S 82-00-21 E 180.94 feet; thence East, 42.00 feet to the Center- line of creek.; thence along said centerline S 14-28-45 W 132.09 feet; thence N 89-33-06 W 13.82 feet; thence S 00-09-15 W 695.81 feet to the West Right -of -Way of Arkansas State Highway #265; thence along said Right -of -Way S 06-06-21 W 67.03 feet, along a 1;97246 degree curve to the left, 79.41 feet, said curve having a long chord of S 03-47-54 W 79.31 feet; thence leaving said right-of-way, N 88-10-01 W 664.10 feet; thence S 00-43-31 W 262.65 feet; thence S 89-36-08 W 340.00 feet; thence S 00-43-31 W 250.00 feet; thence S 89-36-08 W 178.94 feet; thence N 05-00- 49 E 266.00 feet; thence N 00-42-03 E 267.29 feet; thence S 89- 18-33 W 820.00 feet; thence N 00-39-26 E 784.05 feet to the point of beginning, containing 69.20 acres, more or less, Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas. . RESOLUTION PC 47-78 October 9, 1978 Page 2 • PASSED AND APPROVED THIS 9th day of October, 1978. ATTEST: Morton Gitelman, Secretary APPROVED: Rita Davis, Chairman