HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 5469 Doe ID: 014400830006 Type: REL
Klnd: ORDINANCE
Recorded: 03/24/2012 at 03:23:36 PM
Fee Amt: $40.00 Pace 1 of 6
Wash lnoton Countv. AR
Bette Stamps Circuit Clerk
Flle2012-00002071
ORDINANCE NO. 5469
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN
REZONING PETITION RZN 11-3960, FOR APPROXIMATELY 8.60 ACRES,
LOCATED AT 1730 NORTH OLD WIRE ROAD FROM RSF-4,
RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE TO NC,
NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION, SUBECT TO A BILL OF
ASSURANCE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby changes the
zone classification of the following described property from RSF-4, Residential Single-Family, 4
units per acre, to NC, Neighborhood Conservation, as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends the
official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1.
Section 3: That this property is subject to a Bill of Assurance offered by the property
owner and runs with the land, which limits the use of the property to exclude duplexes and multi-
family dwellings and the number of single family lots to 50 as shown in Exhibit "C" attached
hereto and made a part thereof.
PASSED and APPROVED this 20th day of December, 2011.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
r
By: / tr`By: ` IS'�` �it(.Y/!LC/
5 ��/N' �s�acrrrrereteo
LI / E D JO AN ayor SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Tre�,F: 3�''0,,
M1 s e
:FAYETTEVILLE; a
s o �
•,fid'°9:pkANSA�'°
EXHIBIT "A"
RZN11-3960 WILLIAMS & COOPER
Close Up View
� 6
i;
z i'!
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Ask sr- - -
me
w i
R9F•0
BROgO R7
��FK'OR
w
w
4 U
i$
Legend
Multi-Use Trail (Existing) o o
0 0 _
Future TrailsE
_ Fayetteville Aity Limits oR
GAIN
bM2UPZN11-3960
Footprints 2010
— Hillside-Hilltop Overlay District
Design Overlay Di 3trict
Design Overlay Di trict
0 125 250 500 750 1,000
------ Planning Area Feet
EXHIBIT t°B"
RZN 11-3960
Page 1 of 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL: 765-13432-000
PART OF THE SOUTHEAST (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION
3, IN TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH OF RANGE 30 WEST, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; TO-WIT; BEGINNING AT A POINT 660 FEET WEST OF THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FORTY ACRE TRACT, AND RUNNING WITH A FENCE
EAST 443.4 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°10' WEST 542 FEET TO A FENCE; THENCE WITH
FENCE WEST 439.4 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°10' WEST 542 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING. ALSO, A PART OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
(SE1/4) OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, DESCRIBED AS A
STRIP OF LAND 41.5 FEET WIDE NORTH AND SOUTH, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS
BEGINNING AT A POINT 660.4 FEET WEST AND 242 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID 80 ACRE TRACT; THENCE NORTH 41.5 FEET; THENCE WEST 851.6
FEET TO CENTER LINE OF OLD WIRE ROAD; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH
CENTERLINE OF SAID ROAD TO A POINT DUE WEST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE EAST TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND A PART OF THE SOUTH HALF (S1/2)
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION THREE (3) TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN
(16) NORTH, RANGE THIRTY (30)WEST, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS, TO-WIT: BEGINNING AT A POINT 660 FEET WEST AND 283.5 FEET NORTH
OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 80 ACRE TRACT, AND THENCE NORTH 260
FEET; THENCE WEST 663.6 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE CENTER LINE
OF OLD WIRE ROAD THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH THE CENTER LINE OF SAID OLD
WIRE ROAD 328 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT DUE WEST OF THE BEGINNING
POINT; THENCE EAST 853 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING,
CONTAINING FOUR AND FIVE-TENTHS (4.5) ACRES, MORE OR LESS. LESS AND
EXCEPT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
(SE1/4) AND PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION THREE (3), TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN (16) NORTH, RANGE
THIRTY (30)WEST, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO-WIT;
FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE 114) OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION THREE (3) TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN (16)
NORTH, RANGE THIRTY (30) WEST, PROCEED WEST, 1049.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 00
DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST 292 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE WEST 456.09 FEET TO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF OLD WIRE ROAD,
THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 36 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 15 SECONDS
EAST 154.62 FEET, THENCE DEPARTING SAID CENTERLINE EAST 365.46 FEET, THENCE
SOUTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST 125.00 FEET, TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING, AND CONTAINING 1.179 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, ALL IN WASHINGTON
COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND SUBJECT TO A ROAD EASEMENT ALONG THE WEST SIDE
AND AN EASEMENT FOR A GAS LINE AS SHOWN. AND, LESS AND EXCEPT PART OF
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) AND PART
OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF
SECTION THREE (3), TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH RANGE 30 WEST, BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO-WIT; FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, PROCEED WEST, 1,049.00 FEET,
EXHIBIT"B"
RZN 11-3960
Pace 2 of 2
THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST 417 FEET, TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING, THENCE WEST 365.46 FEET CO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF OLD
WIRE ROAD, THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 36 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 15
SECONDS EAST 154.62 FEET, THENCE DEPARTING SAID CENTERLINE EAST 274.82
FEET, THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST 125.00 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND CONTAINING 0.918 ACRES, MORE OR LESS ALL IN
WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND SUBJECT TO A ROAD EASEMENT ALONG THE
WEST SIDE AND AN EASEMENT FOR A GAS LINE AS SHOWN.
EXHIBIT ITCH
Page 1 of 2
BILL OF ASSURANCE
FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE,AR.K.ANSAS
In order to attempt to obtain apprumal of a request for a zoning reclassilication. [lie
owner. developer. or buyer of this property, (hereinafter "Petitioner") W'-Bar Imestments. LLC,
horebN voluntarily offers this Rill of Assurance and enters into this binding agreement and
contract with the City of Fa%ctteville. Arkansas.
The Petitioner expressly grants to the City- of Fayetteville the right to enforce any
and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court of N1'ashington County and
aerces that il'Petitioner or Petitioner's heirs,assigns. or successors violate any term of this Rill of
Assurance, substantial irreparable damage justifying injunctive relief has been dune to the
citizens and Cit% of FaCcrle%ille. Arkansas. 77te Petitioner acknowledges that the Fayetteville
Platting Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonable rely uptm all of the
terms and conditions within this Rill of.Assurance in considering whether to approve Petitioner's
rezoning request.
Petitioner hereby voluntarily- offers assurances that Petitioner and Petitioner's
property shall be restricted as ibliotvs IF Petitioner's rezoning is approved by the Fa\elleville
City Council.
I. The use of Petitioner's property shall be limited to Single Family Detached units.
Muhi Fainity and or Duplex units w ill not be allowed.
Other restrictions including number and type ol' structures upon the property are
limited to a maximum of 50 single fatnilN lots with no more than two stories.
d. Specific activities will not be allowed upon petitioner's propetn include the
deN eiopment and or construction of-Multi Family and or Duplexes.
q. (Any other ternis or conditions) None.
i. Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terms shall run with the
land and hind all future owners unless and until speeilicalN released by Resolution of the
Fa%eueville City Council. This Rill of Assurance shall be filed for record in the Washington
County Circuit C'lerk's Office after Petitioner's rezoning is effective and shall he noted on any
Final Plat or Large Scale Development which includes some or all of Petitioner's property.
EXHIBIT rrC°
Page 2 of 2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and conditions stated
above. I. Jackson Williams. as the owner, developer or buyer (petitioner) voluntarily offer all
such assurances and sign my name below.
/0 - l2 -- ( I �tiat5�,., �J. cl was
Date Printed Name
P,v, Ro x 3Co to
Address
-72 7vz tn,�
NOTARY OATH
STATE OF ARKANSAS
.ss
COUNTY OF�4
r And ni.m on this the I2kday of —LLLL, leer . 2011. appeared before me.
a Notary Public. and after being placed upon his/her oath swore
or affirmed that he/she agreed with the terms of the above Bill or Assurance and signed his/her
name above.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My Commission Expires:
ID 3l V1
Washington County, AR
strument was filed on
I ceAify this in
0112412012 0323.38 PM
and recorded in Real Estate
File Number20`12-00002071
ircuit clerk
Bette Stamp
RECEIVED
October 31, 2011 NOV 0 1 2011
CITY OF FAYETTEW LE
City Council CITY CLERKS OFFICE
Fayetteville Arkansas
113 W Mountain Street
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701
Dear City Council Members,
Re-zoning request RZN 11-3960: Rezone (1730 N Old Wire Road/Williams & Cooper,
369) appeared before the Fayetteville Planning Commission on Monday, October 24,
2011. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 to approve this re-zone, but five or more votes
are required for the re-zone to be automatically forwarded to the City Council for
approval.
The intention of this letter is to formally appeal the request to rezone the 8.6 acres located
at 1730 N Old Wire Road from its current RSF-4 zoning to Neighborhood Conservation
with a bill of assurance that prohibits attached and multi-family dwellings and limits the
number of single family homes to no more than 50.
This rezone request was submitted following an extensive review of the City Plan 2025,
Future Land Use Plan, Master Street Plan and Zoning maps. This rezone was presented to
the Fayetteville Planning Commission with the City Planning Staff's support and
recommendation for approval. Your thorough consideration of this request would be
appreciated as it is believed that this rezone meets all of the guidelines set forth for land
development under the plans referenced above.
Please contact Jackson Williams 479.841.3639 or Tim Cooper 479.2336.6629 with any
questions you may have regarding this rezone.
Sincerely,
Ja son Williams
jj� ari- acarclf � a. ilk t ►� �!I I CC n, ,
(1111/2011 Lisa Branson -Re: Appeal RZN 11-3960 Ofd Wire Rd. Williams &Cooper Seite 1
From: Jeremy Pate
To: Branson, Lisa
CC: Garner, Andrew; JACKSON.WILLIAMS@SBCGLOBAL.NET
Date: 11/1/20113:46 PM
Subject: Re: Appeal RZN 11-3960 Old Wire Rd. Williams &Cooper
Lisa,
Andrew will prepare the necessary background information for this appeal and submit it to your office by
the next request deadline. That places this item on the December 06 City Council meeting.
thanks,
Jeremy
Jeremy C. Pate
Development Services Director
City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
>>> Lisa Branson 11/1/2011 1:59 PM >>>
Jeremy,
Attached is an appeal letter regarding Rezoning request RZN 11-3960: (1730 N Old Wire Road/Williams &
Cooper). Will you please let me know if you will be providing back up information regarding the appeal
and what City Council agenda date this will be on?
Thanks,
Lisa
Lisa Branson
Deputy City Clerk
City of Fayetteville
113 W Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
(479) 575-8323
Ibranson@ci.fayetteville.ar.us
TDD (Telecommunications Device for the Deaf): (479) 521-1316
a e Lvoile THE CITY OFFAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS
YDEPARTMENT CORRESPONDENCE
S
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
To: Mayor Jordan, City Council
Thru: Don Marr, Chief of Staff
Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director
From: Andrew Garner, Senior Planner
Date: October 25, 2011
Subject: RZN 11-3960 (1730 N. Old Wire Road)
RECOMMENDATION
On October 24, 2011 The Planning Commission voted 4-3-0 to forward the subject item to the City Council
with a recommendation for approval (Commissioners Hoskins, Griffin, and Honchell voted "no",
Commissioners Earnest and Bunch were absent). This rezoning request failed to the receive five (5) positive
votes necessary to be forwarded to City Council. The applicant has appealed the Planning Commission's
decision to the City Council. Staff recommends approval of an ordinance to rezone the subject property from
RSF-4, Residential Single-Family, 4 dwelling units per acre, to NC, Neighborhood Conservation, subject to a
Bill of Assurance that would limit the total number of dwellings to 50 and restrict the use to single family
detached dwellings.
BACKGROUND
The property is zoned Residential Single-Family Four Units Per Acre (RSF-4), and contains 8.6 acres located at
1730 Old Wire Road. The site contains a single family home and pasture with access to the home off of a long
driveway to Old Wire Road. The site is surrounded by three existing neighborhoods and undeveloped property
including the Regency Estates Neighborhood to the north, Spring Creek North Addition to the cast, Ramsey
Addition to the south, and undeveloped single family out-lots on Old Wire Road to the west. Access to this
property is available from Old Wire Road, Samantha Avenue to the north, Charlee Avenue to the east, and
Ramsey Avenue to the south. The western portion of the property adjacent to Old Wire Road is located within
the floodplain of Niokaska Creek.
The request is to rezone the property from RSF- 4, Residential Single Family Four Units per Acre, to NC,
Neighborhood Conservation. The applicant has offered a Bill of Assurance that would not permit duplexes or
multi-family residences and a limit of 50 single family lots, a gross density of 5.8 units per acre. The applicant
has stated that the intent is to develop the property for smaller single family lots than permitted by the
underlying RSF-4 zoning district and in a traditional pattern.
DISCUSSION
Fourteen members of the public spoke at the October 24, 2011 Planning Commission meeting with comments
centered around traffic congestion, pedestrian and vehicular safety, home values, and local flooding problems.
The unofficial draft meeting minutes are included in this staff report.
BUDGETIMPACT
None.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THAT PROPERTY
DESCRIBED IN REZONING PETITION RZN 11-3960, FOR
APPROXIMATELY 8.60 ACRES, LOCATED AT 1730 NORTH
OLD WIRE ROAD FROM RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-
FAMILY, 4 UNITS PER ACRE TO NC, NEIGHBORHOOD
CONSERVATION, SUBECT TO A BILL OF ASSURANCE.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE,ARKANSAS:
Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby changes the
zone classification of the following described property from RSF-4, Residential Single-Family, 4
units per acre, to NC, Neighborhood Conservation, as shown on Exhibits "A" and "B" attached
hereto and made a part hereof.
Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby amends the
official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville to reflect the zoning change provided in Section 1.
Section 3: That this property is subject to a Bill of Assurance offered by the property
owner and runs with the land, which limits the use of the property to exclude duplexes and multi-
family dwellings and the number of single family lots to 50 as shown in Exhibit "C" attached
hereto and made a part thereof.
PASSED and APPROVED this day of 2011.
APPROVED: ATTEST:
By: By:
LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer
EXHIBIT "A"
RZN11-3960 WILLIAMS & COOPER
Close Up View
rc
� G
iD
j' ?filiir '
fr
w:
SUBJECT PROPERTY r
a
a -'
sy i _- ril
ui�. Irl,
i
RSFd
iy
eRogo P4 •.
1, W
i tOR
� w
II J
' 4
Le1 zgend J
f,t Multi-Use Trail (Existing) o o
Future Trails5
Fayetteville gity Limits C�N09
LjQ ZN11-3960
® Footprints 2010
- Hillside-Hilltop Ov rlay District
Design Overlay Di .trict
Design Overlay Di ,trict
I 121 200 100 100 1,000
------ Planning Area Feet
EXHIBIT "B"
RZN 11-3960
Page 1 of 2
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PARCEL: 765-13432-000
PART OF THE SOUTHEAST (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION
3, IN TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH OF RANGE 30 WEST, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; TO -WIT; BEGINNING AT A POINT 660 FEET WEST OF THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID FORTY ACRE TRACT, AND RUNNING WITH A FENCE
EAST 443.4 FEET; THENCE NORTH 0°10' WEST 542 FEETTO A FENCE; THENCE WITH
FENCE WEST 439.4 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0°10' WEST 542 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING. ALSO, A PART OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
(SE1/4) OF SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, DESCRIBED AS A
STRIP OF LAND 41.5 FEET WIDE NORTH AND SOUTH, FURTHER DESCRIBED AS
BEGINNING AT A POINT 660.4 FEET WEST AND 242 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF SAID 80 ACRE TRACT; THENCE NORTH 41.5 FEET; THENCE WEST 851.6
FEET TO CENTER LINE OF OLD WIRE ROAD; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH
CENTERLINE OF SAID ROAD TO A POINT DUE WEST OF THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE EAST TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. AND A PART OF THE SOUTH HALF (S1/2)
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION THREE (3) TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN
(16) NORTH, RANGE THIRTY (30) WEST, AND BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS, TO -WIT: BEGINNING AT A POINT 660 FEET WEST AND 283.5 FEET NORTH
OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID 80 ACRE TRACT, AND THENCE NORTH 260
FEET; THENCE WEST 663.6 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE CENTER LINE
OF OLD WIRE ROAD THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY WITH THE CENTER LINE OF SAID OLD
WIRE ROAD 328 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT DUE WEST OF THE BEGINNING
POINT; THENCE EAST 853 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING,
CONTAINING FOUR AND FIVE -TENTHS (4.5) ACRES, MORE OR LESS. LESS AND
EXCEPT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER
(SE1/4) AND PART OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST
QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION THREE (3), TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN (16) NORTH, RANGE
THIRTY (30) WEST, BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO -WIT;
FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE 114) OF THE
SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF SECTION THREE (3) TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN (16)
NORTH, RANGE THIRTY (30) WEST, PROCEED WEST, 1049.00 FEET, THENCE NORTH 00
DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST 292 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING,
THENCE WEST 456.09 FEET TO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF OLD WIRE ROAD,
THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 36 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 15 SECONDS
EAST 154.62 FEET, THENCE DEPARTING SAID CENTERLINE EAST 365.46 FEET, THENCE
SOUTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST 125.00 FEET, TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING, AND CONTAINING 1.179 ACRES, MORE OR LESS, ALL IN WASHINGTON
COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND SUBJECT TO A ROAD EASEMENT ALONG THE WEST SIDE
AND AN EASEMENT FOR A GAS LINE AS SHOWN. AND, LESS AND EXCEPT PART OF
THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) AND PART
OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER (SW1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF
SECTION THREE (3), TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH RANGE 30 WEST, BEING MORE
PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS, TO -WIT; FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER
OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER (SE1/4) OF
SECTION 3, TOWNSHIP 16 NORTH, RANGE 30 WEST, PROCEED WEST, 1,049.00 FEET,
EXHIBIT "B"
RZN 11-3960
Paee 2 of 2
THENCE NORTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST 417 FEET, TO THE POINT
OF BEGINNING, THENCE WEST 365.46 FEET CO A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF OLD
WIRE ROAD, THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE NORTH 36 DEGREES 03 MINUTES 15
SECONDS EAST 154.62 FEET, THENCE DEPARTING SAID CENTERLINE EAST 274.82
FEET, THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 10 MINUTES 00 SECONDS WEST 125.00 FEET TO
THE POINT OF BEGINNING, AND CONTAINING 0.918 ACRES, MORE OR LESS ALL IN
WASHINGTON COUNTY, ARKANSAS AND SUBJECT TO A ROAD EASEMENT ALONG THE
WEST SIDE AND AN EASEMENT FOR A GAS LINE AS SHOWN.
EMMIT ttCtt
Page 1 of 2
BILL OF ASSURANCE.
FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARILANSAS
In Order to attempt to obtain approval of a request for a zoning reclassification. the
owner. developer. or buyer of this property, (hereinafter "Petitioner") %N -Bar Investments. LLC,
hcrcb% eolunlarify offers this Bill of zssurance and enters into this binding agreement and
contract %%ith the City of Favetteville..Arkansas,
The Petitioner expressly grants to the City of Fayetteville the right to enforce any
and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court of Washington County and
agrees that if Petitioner or Petitioner's heirs, assigns, or successors % iolate any terra of this Bill of
Assurance, substantial irreparable damage justifying injunctive relief has been done to the
citizens and City of Fayetteville. Arkansas. the Petitioner acknowledges that the Fayetteville
Planning Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonable rely upon all Of the
terms and conditions within this Hill of,Assurance in considering Miether to approve Petitioner's
rezoning request.
Petitioner hereby voluntarily offers assurances that Petitioner and Petitioner's
property shall be restricted as Inflows IF Petitioner's rezoning is approved by the Faycue%ille
City Council.
I. The use of Petitioner's property shall be limited to Single Family Detached units.
Multi l�antily and or Duplex units will not he allox%ed_
'_- Other restrictions including number and ape of structures upon tile property are
limited to a maximum of 50 single family lots \%ith no more than mo stories.
3. Specific acti%iiics mll not be allow'cd upon petitioner's property include the
deg elopment and or construction of [alulti l antih and or Duplexes.
A. (.Any other tenns or eonditionst Vone_
5. Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terns shall run isilh the
land and hind all ftuttre 06lnerN unless and until specifically released by Resolution of the
Fayeuesille City Council. This Hill of Assurance: shall he filed for record in the Washinmon
County Circuit Clerk's Office alter Petitioner's rezoning is effective and shall he noted on an%
Final Plat or Large Scale De\elopment %%hich includes some or all of Petitioners property.
EMMIT "C'
Page 2 of 2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and conditions stated
above. 1. Jackson Williams, as the owner. developer or buyer (Petitioner) voluntarily offer all
such assurances and silm my name below.
Date
P, 0, Bo x :96 4P
Address
Printed Name
YMIARY OATH
STATE OF ARKANSAS
1 .ss
COUNTY OF i�—,JL �
And now on this the 1 �4day of t uher . '_011. appeared before me.
I I -{ Q LL on LJ . I h a ms . a Notary Public. and after being placed upon his/her oath swore
or affirmed that he/she agreed with the terms of the above Bill of Assurance and signed his/her
name above.
NOTARY PLBLIC
My Commission Expires:
IG 31 �L;13
T`4
a
Y e -1
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PC Meeting of October 24, 2011
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone: (479) 575-5267
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Andrew Garner, Senior Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director
DATE: ^eta^ Updated October 25, 2011
RZN 11-3960: Rezone (1730 N. OLD WIRE ROAD/WILLIAMS & COOPER, 369): Submitted
by JACKSON WILLIAMS AND TIM COOPER for property located at 1730 N. OLD WIRE
ROAD. The property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY FOUR UNITS PER
ACRE and contains approximately 8.6 acres. The request is to rezone the property to NC,
Neighborhood Conservation, subject to a Bill of Assurance. Planner: Andrew Garner
BACKGROUND:
Property Description: The property is zoned Residential Single -Family Four Units Per Acre (RSF-
4), and contains 8.6 acres located at 1730 Old Wire. The site contains a single family home and
pasture with access to the home off of a long driveway to Old Wire Road. The site is surrounded by
three existing neighborhoods and undeveloped property as indicated in Table 1. Access to this
property is available from Old Wire Road, Samantha Avenue to the north, Charlee Avenue to the
east, and Ramsey Avenue to the south. The western portion of the property adjacent to Old Wire
Road is located within the floodplain of Niokaska Creek.
Table 1
Surroundinq Zoninq and Land Use
Direction
Land Use
Zoning
from Site
North
Single family residential on Ash Street
RSF-4, Residential Single -Family Four
(Regency Estates
Units Per Acre
South
Single family and two-family residential on
RSF-4, Residential Single -Family Four
Ramsey Street RamseyAddition)
Units Per Acre
East
Single family residential on Charlee Avenue
RSF-4, Residential Single -Family Four
(Spring Creek North Addition
Units Per Acre
West
Single family residential and undeveloped out-
RSF-4, Residential Single -Family Four
lots on Old Wire Road
Units Per Acre
Proposal: The request is to rezone the property from RSF- 4, Residential Single Family Four Units
per Acre, to NC, Neighborhood Conservation. The applicant has offered a Bill of Assurance that
G:\ETC\Development Services Review\201 (\Development Review\11-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (1 Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\10-24-1 BComments and Redlines
would not permit duplexes or multi -family residences and a limit of 50 single family lots, a gross
density of 5.8 units per acre. The applicant has stated that the intent is to develop the property for
smaller single family lots than permitted by the underlying RSF-4 zoning district and in a traditional
pattern.
Public Comment: Staff has received calls and in -person inquiries about the rezoning. The main
comments have been regarding local flooding issues associated with Niokaska Creek and access to
the surrounding neighborhoods.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends forwarding RZN 11-3960 to the City Council with a recommendation for approval
based on findings stated herein.
ACTION: Required YES
Date: October 24, 2011 ❑ Tabled ❑ Forwarded X Denied
Motion: Chesser Second: Winston
Vote: 4-3-0 (Commissioner Honchell, Hoskins, Griffin voted `no'
Note: Motion to forward failed due to lack of five positive votes.
COUNCIL ACTION: Required YES
❑ Approved ❑ Denied
INFRASTRUCTURE:
Streets: The site has access to Samantha Avenue, Charlee Avenue, Ramsey Avenue, and Old
Wire Road. Samantha Avenue, Ramsey Avenue, and Charlee Avenue are improved
two lane residential city streets. Old Wire Road is a two lane city street with no
sidewalks and with open ditches in this location. Street improvements will be
evaluated at the time of development. Connections to all street stub -outs will be
required at the time of development in accordance with the City's Access
Management ordinance.
Water: Public water is available to the property. There is an 8" water main stubbed out to
the property from Charlee Avenue and a 6" main stubbed out along Samantha
Avenue. Public water main improvements will need to be extended through the
property to provide domestic and fire flow for any proposed development.
GAETC\Development Services Review\2011\Development Review\I 1-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\10-24-1 hComments and Redlines
Sewer: Sanitary sewer is available to the site. There is a 12" public main running through
the middle of this property. Public mains may need to be extended within the
property to serve any proposed development. The capacity of the existing mains may
need to be evaluated with any proposed development.
Drainage: Standard improvements and requirements for drainage will be required for any
development. The design engineer will be responsible for addressing any drainage
issues at this location with the development design. An increase in peak flow will not
be allowed with any development of this property. This property is affected by the
100-year floodplain and the Streamside Protection Zones associated with Niokaska
Creek.
Police: The Fayetteville Police Department has not expressed concerns with this request.
Fire: The Fayetteville Fire Department has not expressed concerns with this request.
CITY PLAN 2030 FUTURE LAND USE PLAN: City Plan 2025 Future Land Use Plan
designates a majority ofthis site as Residential Neighborhood Area and a small portion of the site
associated with the Niokaska Creekfloodplain as Natural Area.
FINDINGS OF THE STAFF
A determination of the degree to which the proposed zoning is consistent with land use
planning objectives, principles, and policies and with land use and zoning plans.
Finding: Staff finds the proposal is highly consistent with the land use planning objectives,
principles and policies, as evidenced by the number of guiding policies for
Residential Areas this proposal meets including Residential Area Policy F to:
"Site new residential areas accessible to roadway, alternative transportation
modes, community amenities, schools, infrastructure, and retail and
commercial goods and services. "
This site is surrounded by existing roads with three street stub -outs to the site. The
site is in the core of the City and within walking distance of an elementary school, a
church, and close proximity to downtown.
GAFT013evelopment Services Review\2011\Development Review\l 1-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\10-24-11\Comments and Redlines
The proposed rezoning is also highly consistent with the six major goals of City Plan
2030 as follows:
City Plan 2030
RZN 11-3960 Compliance With City Plan 2030
Goals
Goal 1: We will
This proposed rezoning would allow infill in a well -developed area of Fayetteville. The
make appropriate
property is surrounded by existing development and infrastructure within walking distance
infill and revitalization
of an elementary school. Future development of this site permitted under the proposed
our highest priorities.
zoning district would provide the opportunity for improvements and revitalization to
existing infrastructure. The proposal would allow 'appropriate' single-family infill
compatible with the surrounding primarily single-family neighborhoods.
Goal 2: We will
By permitting infill development at a slightly higher density than the existing zoning, the
discourage suburban
proposed rezoning discourages suburban sprawl on the perimeter of the City. Future
sprawl.
development allowed because of this rezoning would be able to take advantage of
proximity to existing utility and public infrastructure and services more than a sprawling
development on the periphery.
Goal 3: We will
The NC zoning district is a form -based district with a build -to zone that would require
make traditional town
development in a traditional town form.
form the standard.
Goal 4: We will grow
Development of this site allowed under the proposed zoning will provide an opportunity to
a livable
provide vehicular and pedestrian connection between three isolated neighborhoods. The
transportation
requirements under the City's development codes for street connections would improve
network.
connectivity in this area of the City, providing more options to residents and those
traveling through the area.
Goal 5: We will
Preservation of greenspace would be reviewed and required during development.
assemble an
enduring green
network.
Goal 6: We will
The variety of lot sizes allowed because of the rezoning could lead to a mixed -income
create opportunities
neighborhood in this area of the City. Consistent with the intent of this goal, the proposed
for attainable
rezoning is not an isolated attainable housing project all under one zoning district, but
housing.
rather reflects the opportunity to create a more traditional urban neighborhood with
households of varying types, sizes, and economic means.
Rezoning the property will accommodate both the future land use plan for
residential uses, and also allow for a variety of uses and housing types, sizes and
development pattern, thus providing more choices for more citizens. The
proposed zoning for single family residences is also compatible with the existing
land uses and zoning in the immediate area. Adjacent developments include
residential subdivisions zoned RSF-4 (maximum four units per acre) to the
north, east, and south, and undeveloped and large lot single fancily residences to
the west. The NC zoning will allow for smaller single family homes introducing
variety of residential housing types in this infill location within walking distance
of Root Elementary School. Most of the adjacent lots to the north and east are
low density single family residential, with the exception of a few duplexes along
G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2011\Development Review\11-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\10-24-1 I\Comments and Redlines
Ramsey Avenue to the south. The Charleston Place neighborhood is
approximately 1,000 feet to the northeast of this site and is developed in a
traditional pattern with similar lot sizes as would be allowed in the proposed NC
zoning. The NC zoning is a form -based zoning that requires a traditional design
and the opportunity for narrow lots and houses closer to the street, consistent
with land use planning policies, and common in other developed areas of the
City.
2. A determination of whether the proposed zoning is justified and/or needed at the time the
rezoning is proposed.
Finding: As discussed in Finding No.1, the proposed zoning is justified as it is compatible
with the surrounding zoning and land uses and consistent with the City's Future
Land Use Plan. The property could be developed under the existing zoning
regulations, however the NC zoning is justified in order to provide variety in lot
sizes and to meet market demand for smaller lots.
3. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would create or appreciably increase
traffic danger and congestion.
Finding: The proposed zoning will generate the potential for additional traffic on the
surrounding street system over the existing RSF-4 zoning. As stated in the Bill
of Assurance, this rezoning would yield a total of 50 single family lots (a density
of 5.8 units per acre), subject to preliminary plat approval. The street
improvements required as part of the development should be adequate to
account for these additional vehicle trips, but would be evaluated at the time of
preliminary plat. Street connections to all adjacent street stub -outs would be
recommended in compliance with the City's Access Management ordinance.
This street connectivity should improve overall traffic flow and pedestrian
connectivity in this area.
4. A determination as to whether the proposed zoning would alter the population density and
thereby undesirably increase the load on public services including schools, water, and sewer
facilities.
Finding: The proposed zoning would potentially increase population density. The
proposed zoning would allow for a total of 16 additional single family lots on
this property over the existing zoning. However, this increase in single-family
residences is consistent with land use, zoning, and development patterns in the
immediate vicinity, as well as the current underlying zoning district. This site is
located within the core of the City with adequate surrounding infrastructure.
G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2011\Development Review\l 1-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wine Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\I0-24-11\Comments and Redlines
Increased load on public services was taken into consideration and
recommendations from Engineering, Fire, and Police Departments are included
in this report. Significant adverse impacts to public services would not result
with the incorporation of standard improvements as part of the development.
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;
b. There are extenuating circumstances which justify the rezoning even
though there are reasons under b (1) through (4) above why the
proposed zoning is not desirable.
Finding: N/A
G9ETC\Development Services Review\201 I\Development ReviewNI 1-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\10-24-11\Comments and Redlines
161.07 District RSF-4, Residential Single -Family — Four Units Per Acre
(A) Purpose. The RSF-4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density
detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted uses
Unit 1 Ci -wide uses by right
Units Single- mildwellin s
Unit 41 1 Accesso dwellin s
(2) Conditional uses.
Unit 2
City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3
Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 4
Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit
Government facilities
Unit9
Two-family dwellings
Unit 12
Limited business
Unit 24
Home occupations
Unit36
Wireless communications facilities
(C) Density.
Single-family
dwellings
Two-family
dwellings
Units per acre
1 4 or less
7 or less
(D) Bulk and area regulations.
Single-family
Two-family
dwellings
dwellings
Lot minimum width
70 ft.
80 ft.
Lot area minimum
8,000 sq. ft.
12,000 sq.-ft.
Land area per
8,000 sq. ft.
6,000 sq. ft.
dwelling unit
Hillside Overlay
60 ft
70 ft.
District Lot minimum
width
Hillside Overlay
8,000 sq. ft.
12,000 sq.-ft.
District Lot area
minimum
Land area per
8,000 sq, ft.
6,000 sq. ft.
dwelling unit
(E)
Setback ret uirernents.
Front
Side
Rear
150.
5ft.
li 15 ft.
(F)
Building height regulations.
Bulleing
Height Maximum 1 45 ft.
Height regulations. Structures in this District are limited to a building height of 45 feet. Existing structures that
exceed 45 feet in height shall be grandfathered in, and not considered nonconforming uses, (ord. # 4858).
(G) Building area. On any lot the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 40% of the total area of such lot.
(Code 1991,§160.031; Ord. No. 4100,§2(Ex. A), 6-16-98; Old, No, 4178,8-31-99; Ord, 4858,4-18-06; Ord 5028,6-19-07; Ord. 5128,4-15-08; Ord.
5224, 3-3-09; Ord. 5312, 4-20-10)
GAETC\Development Services Review\201 I\Development Review\I 1-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\]0-24-1 I\Comments and Redlines
161.26 Neighborhood Conservation
(A) Purpose. The Neighborhood Conservation zone has the least activity and a lower density than the other zones.
Although Neighborhood Conservation is the most purely residential zone, it can have some mix of uses, such as
civic buildings. Neighborhood Conservation serves to promote and protect neighborhood character. For the
purposes of Chapter 96: Noise Control, the Neighborhood Conservation district is a residential zone.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted uses.
Unit 1
City-wide uses by right
Unit 8
Single-family dwellings
Unit 9
Two-family dwellings
Unit 41
Accessory dwellings
2 Conditional uses.
Unit 2
City-wide uses by
conditional use permit
Unit 3
Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 4
Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 10
Three-family dwellings
Unit 12
Limited Business *
Unit 24
Home occupations
Unit 25
Offices, studios, and related services
Unit 28
Center for collecting
recyclable materials
Unit 36
Wireless communication facilities
(C) Density. 10 Units Per Acre.
(D) Bulk and area regulations.
(1) Lot width minimum.
Single Family
40 ft.
Two Family
80 ft.
Three Family
90 ft.
(2) Lot area minimum. 4,000 Sq. Ft.
(>) Setback regulations.
Front
The principal fagade of
a building shall be built
within a build -to zone
that is located between
the front property line
and a line 25 ft. from
the front property line.
Side
5 ft.
Rear
5 ft.
Rear, from center line
12 ft.
of an alley
(F) Minimum buildable street frontage. 40% of lot width.
(G) Height regulations. Maximum height is 3 stories or 45 feet which ever is less.
(Ord. 5128, 4-15-08; Ord. 5312, 4-20-10
G:\ETC\Development Services Review\2011\13evelopment Review\I 1-3960 RZN 1730 N. Old Wire Rd (J Williams T
Cooper)\03 Planning Commission\10-24-1 hComments and Redlines
Planning Commission
October 24, 2011
Page 11 of 15
RZN 11-3960: Rezone (1730 N. OLD WIRE ROAD/WILLIAMS & COOPER, 369): Submitted by
JACKSON WILLIAMS AND TIM COOPER for property located at 1730 N. OLD WIRE ROAD. The
property is zoned RSF-4, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY FOUR UNITS PER ACRE and contains
approximately 8.6 acres. The request is to rezone the property to NC, Neighborhood Conservation, subject to a
Bill of Assurance.
Andrew Garner, Senior Planner, gave the staff report.
Tim Cooper, applicant, discussed the proposed rezoning.
Public Comment:
Harry Jackson, property owner to the south and west, discussed that his concern is having access to his property
after this subdivision is built. He does not want to be landlocked.
Kevin Sanchez, 1273 East Ash Street, read an email that he sent to the Planning Commission objecting to the
rezoning for a number of reasons.
Aubrey Shepherd, discussed that this site is the beginning of the prairie. He discussed that flooding will get
worse with this rezoning. We need to protect the watershed.
Sallie Kelley, lives on Ash Street, moved there in 1994. She discussed that it took two years to work to resolve a
drainage problem on her property. She stated concerns with making the drainage problems worse.
Jonice Adams, 1630 Charlee Avenue, opposed to the rezoning because of the higher density will not fit in with
the neighborhood. She discussed that there is a huge amount of traffic on Mission in the morning. It is very
difficult to get out of Charlee onto Mission. She discussed concerns with Charlee being connected. There is angle
and site distance issues with the intersection of Charlee and Mission.
Ann Ratcliff, 1750 Charlee Avenue, opposes the rezoning request because of flooding issues and safety issues.
On Charlee there are children before and after school. There are families that walk their kids up and down the
street. I cannot imagine a worse safety issue. I ask you to retain the cul-de-sac on Charlee. The proposed homes
would not be the same size as surrounding homes. We do not have sidewalks to accommodate pedestrian traffic.
Laura Lindsey, lives on Charlee Avenue, I oppose this because we have children. There are 15-20 people that
park on Charlee every morning and walk kids. You are going to take out someone, there is going to be a death
and I don't want it to be my children. The safety issues are bad, we bought because this was a cul-de-sac and you
are going to make it a cut -through. There are so many things wrong with this. We have so many cars parking on
this street already. You would not want this on our street so why put it on ours. You are going to change the
whole continuity of our neighborhood. You can't put that many cars on our street. She described the pedestrian
crossing guards. You are talking an additional 500-1000 cars per day on our street. We bought in this
neighborhood because it was a quiet safe street. You don't want this in your backyard so don't put it in our front
yard.
Tom Sawyer, lives on Ramsey Avenue. He described previous rezonings that were approved including Summit
Place and Ruskin Heights that will put more homes on Mission. Root and Vandergriff Elementary are at capacity.
This should go through the school boards. I don't want people cutting through on Ramsey. We bought or rent on
Ramsey for a reason because it is a quiet dead-end street near Root. We don't want traffic cutting through. We
get people parking on our street and running across Mission Boulevard not at the cross walk. Was Ramsey ever
Planning Commission
October 24, 2011
Page 12 of 15
designed as a cut -through?
Garner discussed that Ramsey Avenue was designed as a through street and the right-of-way stubs out all the
way to the property line. He also discussed that Samantha Street and Charlee Avenue stub -outs also were
intended to be through streets as well. He discussed that the location of street stub -outs and through streets is not
something that is determined with a rezoning request.
Cabe stated that we are only considering land use. We are not considering street connections. We are strictly
looking at whether this property should be rezoned. We are just looking at land use. Development is not part of
this proposal.
Jana Berton, 1702 Charlee, lived there since 1992. I have several concerns including children that live and play
on Charlee. We bought on this street because it is a charming cul-de-sac. My children walked to and from school.
She discussed that traffic is bad in the morning and afternoon around Root Elementary. We will have a lot of cars
turning and cutting through our street. It will affect the safety of our children on Charlee and Ash street. I am
concerned with smaller high -density units adversely affecting the values of our homes. We're concerned with
protecting our homes and the size of units coming in affecting our property values.
Kit Williams, City Attorney, clarified that roads are not evaluated now but traffic can be considered. He
discussed other items that can be considered with a rezoning including compatibility.
Dale Thompson, 1690 Charlee Avenue, we have been there since 2001. We bought here primarily because of
the good school system. His primary concern is because of the smaller lot sizes. Part of the reason they bought on
Charlee was because of the house size. The other thing is the traffic. He discussed traffic in the morning and the
afternoon and kids being safe on Charlee. He discussed flooding in this area and that the drainage system needs
to be evaluated closely. He is against this rezoning.
Amy Rosetti, 1657 Charlee Avenue, my husband and I are opposed to this rezoning. There is a lot of traffic and
it is unsafe. One time I had to call Root School because it was so tight cars couldn't even get through Charlee.
One time on Saturday morning my daughter and I were in a wreck exiting Charlee onto Mission. There is
speeding at other times of the day when the school is not in. The police do not patrol this area. I am concerned
with the traffic. She discussed concerned with the proposed small homes and lack of greenspace and no place for
the water to go.
Michelle Hightower, 1645 Charlee Avenue. I am opposed to the rezoning primarily because the density is much
different than surrounding neighborhoods. The density and look will be different. I don't think there is a need to
put housing like that. I have concerns with those homes being closer to the road. I am concerned with safety. I
have four children. We only have sidewalks on one side. If our road is a connector, we are not in compliance with
sidewalks. She discussed concerns with the creek and changes in the end of the creek causing flooding on their
homes. There are already some flooding issues. Has there been a study to address the creek? There should be
some assurances that nothing will happen to our property because of the homes back there.
Debbie Heller, 1621 Charlee Avenue, they are in the floodplain. She described flooding issues on her property.
Everyday cars park in front of my house, I have to time when I am going to leave my home because it is so
congested.
Laura Lindsey (again) said she has pictures of the water and flooding and can show pictures right now.
Andy Hightower, 1645 Charlee Avenue, discussed that you could consider traffic. We get a preview of what
Planning Commission
October 24, 2011
Page 13 of 15
Charlee will be if it is it a cut -through about once a day when someone thinks it is a cut -through and it is
terrifying how fast they go. It is terrifying how fast they leave. I have four children and my concern is their safety.
He talked about the vision of the City being a safe community and said Charlee is a safe street now and would
like to keep it that way.
No more public comment was presented.
Commissioner Chesser discussed the potential for cul-de-sac streets being connected. Were the developer to
develop right now by right could the developer connect those streets?
Garner discussed that, yes, we described that in the rezoning report that all three of those streets were planned to
be connected, and the City's ordinances would more than likely require all three of those streets to be connected
with any residential subdivision on this property at the current RSF-4 zoning or the proposed NC zoning. The
comments we're hearing about those streets being used as street stub -outs would be an issue whether or not the
property were rezoned or not.
Commissioner Chesser discussed that underthe current zoning it appears they could develop 34 units and under
the proposed zoning they could develop 50 units. Is that correct?
Garner stated `yes', the proposed zoning would allow 16 additional homes over what is existing.
Chesser asked about City Plan and connectivity.
Garner discussed that it is a strong policy of our City Plan and ordinances for connections within and throughout
neighborhoods and streets in the city and to try to prevent dead-end streets and cul-de-sacs.
Chesser asked about schools and their input of a rezoning.
Garner discussed that impacts to schools is one of the legal findings for a rezoning. The Citynotifies the schools
of rezoning requests but he was not aware of the City ever receiving comments from the school districts for a
rezoning.
Chesser asked about the neighborhood being required to follow stone water requirements.
Garner stated that we did bring up the flooding issues to City Engineering staff. Gamer read a statement from
the Assistant City Engineer that is in the rezoning staff report regarding storm water and drainage requirements at
the time of development.
Commissioner Winston asked the City Attorney about highest and best use.
Kit Williams, City Attorney, discussed that highest and best use is something you can consider along with many
other factors. Compatibility is the primary consideration for a rezoning.
Commissioner Winston stated that there will be some development on this land whether it is under the existing
zoning or the proposed zoning, and there will be some connections through the streets that you all are concerned
about. There is no way to imagine that is not going to happen. He discussed that he thinks about this in terms of
development patterns. The NC development pattern is preferable to the RSF-4 development pattern. It will allow
more diversity to the living situations in the City and I'm generally in favor of that. I do want to point out that the
neighborhood is absolutely right that when these streets are connected people using these streets to get their kids
Planning Commission
October 24, 2011
Page 14 of 15
to the school will use these streets in a way that is not safe. The condition is such a mess that I live right around
the comer that I avoid the situation. Something needs to be done with other developments in the area. There will
be more traffic and more traffic. Root School is a mess and it is unsafe. I'm not sure that rezoning this to NC will
have enough of an impact to say that we should not do it. There is another question that we have to deal with
regarding Root School and traffic in the area.
Garner discussed that City staff and administration and the alderman are aware of traffic issues in the area. He
discussed that within the past year or so one of the alderman requested staff to do a street connectivity study in
the area so staff completed an east -west connectivity study. We realize there are pinch -points where traffic is
furuieled all in to one area, such as Mission. So we looked at getting additional connections between and through
neighborhoods to alleviate some of these issues. We are planning on installing a traffic signal at Mission/Old
Wire Road as one of the first improvements along Old Wire Road. The City is aware of the traffic issues and we
are trying to find some solutions.
Winston discussed that when development of this site occurs there would be different storm water requirements
than when this area was initially developed.
Garner discussed the current storm water and detention requirements, and the possibility of downstream
improvements depending on the extent of the project and status of the existing drainage system.
Commissioner Winston asked about the streamside protection ordinance.
Garner stated that it was in the streamside protection zone but that the creek doesn't really run through the site
but barely cuts through the southwest corner.
Commissioner Chesser asked about downstream improvements.
Garner discussed that determination would be based on the development.
Commissioner Chesser asked about public comment from the person that stated they may be landlocked.
Garner discussed that location of streets would be determined at the time of preliminary plat. He stated that he
had spoken to Mr. Jackson and it does appear that based on the dimensions and layout of the properties there
would likely be one or two stub -outs.
Harry Jackson came up and indicated his concern with being landlocked
Commissioner Chesser discussed concerns with the cut -de -sacs being extended but that even if we did nothing
with the rezoning they could extend the streets by right. The question is will there be 34 or 50 houses built there.
Given the goals of the City to do infill in sites just like this and to make that infrll more walkable rather than less,
and given the goals of the City to provide affordable housing he would like to make a motion to forward.
Motion:
Commissioner Chesser made a motion to forward RZN 11-3960 to the City Council with a recommendation for
approval. Commissioner Winston seconded the motion.
Commissioner Honchell asked about bringing a new subdivision into an older neighborhood like this and the
sidewalk requirements. The destination of choice will be to walk or ride to the school. What is the ordinance for
Planning Commission
October 24, 2011
Page 15 of 15
sidewalks? Development on this site will generate a ton of foot traffic down Charlee and Ramsey.
Garner discussed that City ordinance requires that almost all street cross sections in our Master Street Plan
requires new streets to have sidewalks on both sides of the street. In some cases a development might warrant
offsite sidewalk improvements if the project generates enough pedestrian traffic.
Commissioner Honchell asked about the maximum number of units per acre being four units?
Garner stated `yes'.
Commissioner Honchell discussed safety, traffic, and flooding. I won't be in favor of the applicant on this one.
Upon roll call the motion to forward failed with a vote of 4-3-0 (Commissioners Honchell, Hoskins, and
Griffin voting `no'). The rezoning failed to be forwarded due to a lack of five positive votes.
Kit Williams, City Attorney, described the appeal process and requirements for the applicant to appeal the
Planning Commission's decision to City Council.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 7.40 PM.
Date 10/18/11
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 comments on proposed RZN 11-3960:
(1730 N. Old Wire Road / Williams & Cooper, 369): submitted by Jackson Williams and
Tim Cooper for property located at 1730 N. Old Wire Road. The property contains
approximately 8.6 acres.
It is the opinion of the Fayetteville Police Department that this RZN will not substantially
alter the population density, and will not create an appreciable or undesirable increase in
the load on police services. This RZN will not create an appreciable increase in traffic
danger and congestion.
Sincerely,
Captain William Brown
Fayetteville Police Department
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
FIRE DEPARTMENT
�3 303 West Center Street
Fayetteville, AR 72701
P (479) 575-8365 F (479) 575-0471
RR
Zoning Review
To:
Andrew Garner, Amy Sloan
From:
Captain Mark Stevens
Date:
October 26, 2011
Re:
RZN 11-3960
This development will be protected by Engine 5 located at 2979 N. Crossover Road.
It is 2 miles from the station with an anticipated response time of 4 minutes to the beginning of the development.
The Fire Department anticipates 19 (12 EMS - 7 Fire/Other) calls for service each year after the development is completed
and maximum build -out has occurred of 10 units per acre as allowed by this zoning.
Item (G) would require any building to meet the requirements of the fire code section D105 to be no farther than 30 feet
from the street since this zoning allows for a 3 story building not to exceed 45 feet in height to be built. I refer you (E) the
setback regulations.
The Fayetteville Fire Department does not feel this development will affect our calls for service or our response times.
If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
Captain Mark Stevens
Assistant Fire Marshal
Fayetteville Fire Department
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf TDD(479)521-1316 113 West Mountain -Fayetteville, AR 72701
Rezoning Request
Written Description
1730 N Old Wire Road
Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703
Parcel Number 765-13432-000
This 8.6 acre parcel is currently owned by the Torbett Family Revocable
Trust, Janice Torbett, Trustee. The property is currently pending purchase by
W-Bar Investments, LLC, Jackson Williams, Member.
The current zoning on this parcel is RSF-4 which the minims allow for
single family 70 ft / 8000 sq ft / setbacks of 15 front / 5 sides / 15 rear on the
lots. The current estimated development cost coupled with the land cost
premium on such a well located parcel directly dictates the need for a
Neighborhood Conservation zone. Neighborhood Conservation serves to
promote and protect neighborhood character and is duly suited for this
residential parcel. The Neighborhood Conservation zone allows for
minimums on single family 40 ft / 4000 sq ft / setbacks of within 25' in front
/ 5' on the side / 5' in the rear and 12' from the center alley line in the rear.
The NC zone specifically meets the needs and characteristics for the
development plan for this parcel. The current proposed development plan for
this parcel includes only single family detached homes designed for smaller
families who are not interested in having a large yard to maintain; rather
their interest lay in having a well kept small footprint in a highly desirable
location.
This parcel is bordered on three sides by platted residential subdivisions and
located between the existing Principal Arterial thoroughfare of Mission Blvd
to the South and the existing Collector thoroughfares of Old Wire Road and
Sycamore Street to the West. The appearance and signage of this proposed
development will mesh with the existing residential feel and function and
will serve to only enhance the desirability of the area.
There is an existing 12" gravity flow sewer line dissecting this parcel from
North to South. There is also a 36" sewer line to the West at Old Wire Road,
an 8" line on Ash Street to the North, a 6" line on Charlee Avenue to the
West and a 10" line in the creek to South, all of which are gravity flow.
There is an existing 36" water line located at Old Wire Road, and 8" on both
Ash Street and Charlee Avenue thus there should be no significant or
undesirable increase on the load of the water and sewer facilities.
Neighborhood Conservation by definition is a residential zone and is
compatible with the surrounding properties current uses as well as those
detailed in the Future Land Use 2030 plan as a Residential Neighborhood
Area. The goal of this rezoning matches the existing goals of the current
City Plan 2025 long range master plan in the areas of infill, encompassing
the traditional town form, having a low impact on the existing transportation
system, maintaining a green focus as well as filling a need in Fayetteville for
a smaller, well located home for small families. The location of the subject
parcel is such that there are many opportunities for connectivity to existing
dead end streets, sidewalks and bike paths.
This zoning request is justified and needed at this time as the small families
in Fayetteville have very limited options for small footprint single family
homes located near the Fayetteville City Centers, shopping, entertainment,
schools, art and culture.
When one considers the location of this parcel and the goals of the
Fayetteville City Plan 2025, Future land Use Plan and Master Street Plan the
conclusion can be made that this proposed rezoning coupled with the
development plans will stand to support the overall goals of these plans and
NOT appreciably increase traffic danger, congestion, or the load on the
existing schools.
The ever escalating cost of new subdivision infrastructure designed and built
to the thorough City of Fayetteville standards coupled with the premium for
well located, undeveloped infill property dictates the need for a change in
this property's existing zoning classification. The effort set forth in making
this zoning change will benefit and fill a much needed and currently
unfulfilled niche for the smaller families in Fayetteville who choose to live
on a well located smaller footprint in town.
BILL OF ASSURANCE
FOR THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
In order to attempt to obtain approval of a request for a zoning reclassification, the
owner, developer, or buyer of this property, (hereinafter "Petitioner") W-Bar Investments, LLC,
hereby voluntarily offers this Bill of Assurance and enters into this binding agreement and
contract with the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas.
The Petitioner expressly grants to the City of Fayetteville the right to enforce any
and all of the terms of this Bill of Assurance in the Circuit Court of Washington County and
agrees that if Petitioner or Petitioner's heirs, assigns, or successors violate any term of this Bill of
Assurance, substantial irreparable damage justifying injunctive relief has been done to the
citizens and City of Fayetteville, Arkansas. The Petitioner acknowledges that the Fayetteville
Planning Commission and the Fayetteville City Council will reasonable rely upon all of the
terms and conditions within this Bill of Assurance in considering whether to approve Petitioner's
rezoning request.
Petitioner hereby voluntarily offers assurances that Petitioner and Petitioner's
property shall be restricted as follows IF Petitioner's rezoning is approved by the Fayetteville
City Council.
1. The use of Petitioner's property shall be limited to Single Family Detached units.
Multi Family and or Duplex units will not be allowed.
2. Other restrictions including number and type of structures upon the property are
limited to a maximum of 50 single family lots with no more than two stories.
3. Specific activities will not be allowed upon petitioner's property include the
development and or construction of Multi Family and or Duplexes.
4. (Any other terms or conditions) None.
5. Petitioner specifically agrees that all such restrictions and terms shall run with the
land and bind all future owners unless and until specifically released by Resolution of the
Fayetteville City Council. This Bill of Assurance shall be filed for record in the Washington
County Circuit Clerk's Office after Petitioner's rezoning is effective and shall be noted on any
Final Plat or Large Scale Development which includes some or all of Petitioner's property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF and in agreement with all the terms and conditions stated
above, I, Jackson Williams, as the owner, developer or buyer (Petitioner) voluntarily offer all
such assurances and sign my name below.
-12- 1
Date
O osr ?6 4 _
Address
hnvr1IF, A17-
-72-7vZ
��Ll(5c WI'II1•wL 5
Printed Name
NOTARY OATH
STATE OF ARKANSAS }
SS
COUNTY OF }
And now on this the I:Zkday of VL-u0er . 2011.. appeared before me,
G C -c--ji 1.j 111 , a Notary Public, and after being placed upon his/her oath swore
or affirmed that he/she agreed with the terms of the above Bill of Assurance and signed his/her
name above.
NOTARY PUBLIC
My Commission Expires:
-31- A013
stephwnie a-:rkausas
yde
Cora; iV Re
Notary Public - A.
My Commission Exp 1R013
Page 1 of 1
Cindy Monreal - Protest of RZN 11-3960 Williams/Cooper
From: Kevin and Charity Sanchez <ksanche cr gmail.com>
To: Cindy Monreal <cmonreal@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 10/20/2011 5:56 PM
Subject: Protest of RZN 11-3960 Williams/Cooper
Dear Fayetteville Planning Department,
My wife and I protest the rezoning request RZN 11-3960. We have the following concerns: 1) The request is to
rezone to neighborhood conservation which could potentially dramatically increase the density from 4 to 10
units per acre. The current and surrounding subdivisions are all 4 units per acre but the actual densities are less
than 4. We agree that this location is a prime and desirable location in Fayetteville and that land cost and home
cost is at a premium which is why we wish to preserve the resale value of our home. This alone is not a reason
that would "dictate" the need for a neighborhood conservation zone. We cannot afford to have our investment
diminished by many more smaller and cheaper units on lot sizes smaller to that of our own. 2) The planning
commission has already rezoned the Summit Place subdivision to NC and so the argument that there isn't
enough of or limited options for NC zoning that would be desirable to smaller families is not factual. 3) The
collector street of Old Wire Road is already taxed with heavy morning traffic and I have difficulty as it is
between 7:45 and 8:15 crossing it to get to Sycamore. One logical connection to the proposed development is
via Samantha & E. Ash St., but I am very concerned about the amount of traffic that would be generated from a
NC zone vs. that of a RSF-4. Not only would I have to wait for traffic already traveling those roads, but I would
have to wait behind tens of other vehicles from a more dense zoning as well. This rezoning WOULD
appreciably increase traffic danger and congestion. There is a sight distance problem at the intersection of
Sycamore & Old Wire rd that would be made worse by the added traffic. 4) Any connection to N. Ramsey St.
would severely make things worse as parents would use it and Samantha & Ash as a cut thru or staging area for
pick-up & drop-off for Root elementary school. 5) We already have a rainwater runoff issue with the current site
with its use as agricultural. If the impervious surface is further increased beyond that of a RSF-4 it will make
conditions worse for us and our neighbors. Any development activity will have to be seriously monitored. 6)
The width of the streets is of concern along with the sidewalk widths. I would like to see 50 ROW to mirror that
found in Regency estates. I would also like to be re -assured that sidewalk connections would be made with
adjacent subdivisions including those with sidewalks along Old Wire road. ROW any less is very hazardous
when two vehicles cannot pass each other if there is a car parked in the road as demonstrated by E. Amber drive
or N. Woolsey. 7) I tried to contact the applicants and have a meeting with them regarding my concerns and they
were non -responsive.
Sincerely,
Kevin & Charity Sanchez
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Cindy Monreal <cmonreal a ei.fayetteville.ar.us> wrote:
Hi,
Attached is the files that were turned in for this project.
Thank you
Cin
Cindy Monreal
Senior Planning Secretary
City of Fayetteville
PH:479.575.8268
email: cmonreal@ci.fayetteville.ar.us
file://C:\Documents and Settings\cmonreal\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4EA060E5F... 10/24/2011
RZN11-3960 WILLIAMS AND COOPER
Future Land Use
Legen
�li-U
.
�. ,..
......... gxisting)
• • • • • furs Trails ewolpt
t � ayetteville City Limits
FLIT, RE LAND USE 2030
C CS�J
Natural Area
Rural Area
Residential Neighborhood Area o
City Neighborhood. ea
a
zz
40 Urban Center Area
a
Industrial
CP1H oft
O=eWvic and Private Open Spa
/Parks
_ Civic Institutional
{ Non -Municipal Government
ROW
Q RZN11-3960
Design Overlay District
Design Overlay District
0 150 300
----• Planning Area
SUBJECT PROPERTY
000 900
1.200
M Feet
RECEIVED
November 17, 2011
Bobby Ferrell
Fayetteville City Council
2413 Twin Oaks Court
Fayetteville, AR 72703
Dear Councilmen Ferrell and Tennant:
Justin Tennant
Fayetteville City Council
113 W. Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
NOV 2 3 2011
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERKS OFFICE
Sondra Smith
Fayetteville City Clerk
113 W. Mountain
Fayetteville, AR 72701
I am writing in reference to the proposed rezoning request for 1730 N. Old Wire Road — parcel number
765-13432-000.
My wife and I oppose plans by W-Bar Investments LLC (hereinafter referred to as "Developer") to build a
new development and add a new street connection from their proposed development to Charlee Street.
We live at 1616 N. Charlee and would be negatively impacted by the Developer's proposed development
and street connection which would open Charlee Street as a thru street for traffic traveling on Mission
Boulevard and Old Wire Road not to mention the traffic generated from the new homes slated for the
development.
Last month we sent you letters stating our opposition to the developer's plans. Our original reasons for
opposing this development remain true since the developer has made no attempt to modify his plan or
address our concerns. In summary, we feel that the proposed development's plan to construct 50
homes on 8.5 acres does not match surrounding neighborhoods. The developers are requesting to
rezone to neighborhood conservation, but the definition of neighborhood conservation says it should be
compatible with surrounding neighborhoods. The density of this new development is not compatible
with the surrounding neighborhoods.
Additionally, the proposed development would require opening Charlee Street to thru traffic, which
would negatively impact the safety of our children and reduce the value of our home. Our daughters
are blessed to be able to use our street to ride their bikes and play with other kids in the neighborhood.
Adding thru-traffic and an additional fifty homes will end this practice as the vehicles utilizing the street
will skyrocket. Also please consider that Charlee Street serves as a drop off and pick up location for
children attending Root and for children catching the bus to McNair. Adding thru-traffic to this street
will make the street less safe for these kids.
The developer states in their application that the proposed rezoning "will not appreciably increase
traffic danger, congestion, or the load on the existing schools." This claim is absolutely false. How can
adding fifty houses and all of the accompanying traffic not have a negative impact on danger, congestion
and load on existing schools. We ask that you oppose the developer's rezoning request and encourage
them to rework their plan to better fit with the surrounding neighborhoods.
Thank you for your consideration.
Regards,
I -
Michael and Lara Lindsey
1616 N. Charlee
Page 1 of 2
City Clerk - Fwd: Rezoning of property located off of Old Wire Road (RZN 11-3960)
From: <kadams546@aol.com>
To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 11/30/2011 9:04 PM
Subject: Fwd: Rezoning of property located off of Old Wire Road (RZN 11-3960)
Can you please confirm receipt of this message. I originally sent to an e-mail that I was given that did not have
Fayetteville spelled out.
Please read the message below.
Thanks you!
Kyle and Johneese Adams
-----Original Message -----
From: kadams546 <kadams546@aol.com>
To: city_clerk <city_clerk@ci. fay. ar. us>
Sent: Thu, Nov 17, 2011 7:13 pm
Subject: Fwd: Rezoning of property located off of Old Wire Road (RZN 11-3960)
We want to be sure that this information is given to Justin Tennant, Bobby Ferrell and also to the City Council
members that will be voting on this re -zoning issue.
We have emailed directly to the e-mail address for Justin that we were given but I don't have confirmation that he
has received.
Can you please confirm receipt of our letter and that it will be forwarded to the proper individuals
Thank you for your assistance,
Kyle and Johneese Adams
1630 Charlee Avenue
Fayetteville, AR 72703
-----Original Message -----
From: kadams546 <kadams5460_aol com>
To: ward3_posl <ward3�osl@ci.fay.ar.us>
Cc: ward3_posl<ward3pos165ci.fayetteville.anus>
Sent: Mon, Nov 14, 2011 10:16 pm
Subject: Rezoning of property located off of Old Wire Road (RZN 11-3960)
Justin,
This is Kyle and Johneese Adams. We would like for you to carefully review the re -zoning case noted above as
we are very concerned for the safety and preservaton of our neighborhood.
We have lived on Charlee Avenue here in Fayetteville for 18 years. During that time, we have raised our family in
a nice, quiet, family oriented neighborhood. Our street has had very little change in ownership over the years.
Our neighbors have all chosen to live here for such a long time due to the qualities we have noted above.
This re -zoning request is asking that land northeast of our neighborhood be re -zoned from a RSF-4 status to NC
which is Neighborhood Conservation. Conserving or preservation of a neighborhood is not what the
file://C:1Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED69A60FA... 12/1/2011
Page 2 of 2
developers are attempting to do with the property. They are wanting to build 50 smaller homes on a 8.66 acre
tract of land. This will not conform in any way to the surrounding neighborhoods, which are all currently zoned
RSF-4. This will not be condusive to families purchasing these homes, but will lend it size and price to residents
being tenants in rental properties should these properties not be sold. With this desity of homes, comes the
number of drivers/cars that will flow into and out of this development by way of Charlee Avenue and surrounding
streets such as Ramsey and Ash.
From what we understand at this time, the homes will be much smaller in square footage in order to make the
most out of the land. The density will not be comparable to the surrounding sites. The homes will be set to the
front of the lots, not in traditional home style setting as the surrounding developments. There will also be rear
street entry to garages. With this rezoning, would come the traffic flow from Mission Avenue northeast through
Charlee Avenue in order to connect with Old Wire Road. We don't know if you have to travel on Mission avenue
in the morning or the afternoon during the school hours. If you exit our neighborhood, you best be turning to the
right to head downtown. Turning left is not a safe or wise decision anytime, but especially at peak times of the
day. Our concern is with this flow of traffic, our neighborhood was not designed for this flow. Also, at the
entrance to Charles Avenue, there is an arch to how our road exits to Mission. There is little visibility for access
onto Mission and at excessive speeds, traffic flowing onto Charlee from Mission is dangerous. When entering
Charlee, there has to be a wide turn in order to enter the neighborhood and cars cross into the far lane which can
be into oncoming cars exiting the neighborhood. This is hard to describe and put into words, and we
would invite you to actually drive into and out of our street onto Mission to experience this for yourself, especially
at those peak times for school and work.
We do feel that this re -zoning will create and appreciably increase traffic danger and congestion! We also
believe it will alter the population density thereby undesirably increasing the load on public services including our
schools (Root), water and sewer facilities. It is not consistent with current land use that surrounds it and thus has
a negative impact on our homes.
Thank you so much for your time in hearing us on this matter. We will be in attendance at the December 6th
council meeting and we hope that you will see why we ask that you vote against this request.
Kyle and Johneese Adams
1630 Charlee Avenue
Fayetteville, AR
Home Phone: 521-7879
Cell Phone: 871-3287
e-mail: kad_ams546@aol.com
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED69A60FA... 12/1/2011
Page 1 of 2
City Clerk - Fwd: Rezoning 11-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road
From: Jana Burton <burt100@cox.net>
To: 'city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us" <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 11/30/2011 10:42 PM
Subject: Fwd: Rezoning I1-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road
Please note that this was originally sent on November 18, 2011 to a different e-mail address.
Jana Burton
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: <burt100na cox.net>
Date: November 18, 2011 5:03:55 PM CST
To: city clerk ci. .ar._us, ward-- posl@ci, ayetteville.ar.us,
ward3.pos2agci.fayetteville.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning 11-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road
Dear Fayetteville City Council,
I am writing to let you know that I am opposed to the proposed rezoning of the property at
1730 N. Old Wire Road. I have been a resident homeowner on Charlee Avenue for 19 years
and I strongly believe that rezoning this property to Neighborhood Conservation status
would cause serious problems for Charlee and surrounding streets and neighborhoods.
Some of my concerns are:
Safety - Charlee Avenue empties on to Mission Ave. at an off set to Root Elementary
School. Charlee is located between two crosswalks where children cross twice daily before
and after school with Crossing Guards and it is also a school bus stop every morning and
afternoon. Mission is a highway. The 100 or more extra cars going on and off Charlee at
peak times will only make for a more dangerous situation for our citizens and their children.
I would like to know when the last time a traffic count was done at that intersection. It
seems to me that it would be safer for the exit to be connected to Old Wire where there is no
school. Even during non -peak hours it is very difficult to turn left from Charlee onto
Mission and there have been accidents at the corner.
Density - I believe that the houses built on this property (if any) should be the same type as
the homes that are already existing on the streets surrounding this area. The current zoning
for all surrounding streets is for single family homes and I strongly believe that it should
stay that way and not be changed to something that is not in keeping with the long and
current pattern of our neighborhood zoning.
Possible Flooding - The homes on the west side of Charlee near the creek that runs behind
their home will be placed at an increased risk of flooding if this proposed re -zoning is
passed. I know of at least one home on Charlee that is partially in the flood plain.
I hope that you take these reasons and my concerns and opinion into thoughtful
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED6B13BFA... 12/1/2011
Page 2 of 2
consideration and vote against the re -zoning 11-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jana Burton
1702 Charlee Ave.
Fayetteville, AR 72703
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED6B13BFA... 12/1/2011
Page 1 of 2
City Clerk - RZN-11-3960, 1730 Old Wire Road
From:
Debbie KELLER <dkcharlee@sbcglobal.net>
To:
<city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date:
12/1/2011 2:15 PM
Subject:
RZN-1 1-3960,1730 Old Wire Road
This was originally sent November 18th but apparently the email address was incorrect.
Please forward this to members of the city council. Thanks for your help.
We are Scott and Debbie Keller and our family has lived on Charlee for 15 years and
enjoy this area of Fayetteville. We have seen the traffic increase over the years. We are
the second house on the left where parents park in the mornings and afternoons to deliver
or pick up their children from Root.
The impact of 50 cottage style homes will increase the traffic on the street. We are empty
nesters but our children walked to Root for six years. There are several families on our
street with children attending Root and there is already a concern for their safety because
of parents utilizing our street for drop off and pick up. The proposed new homes would
only increase the risk. They may have an out at Old Wire but logically they would use
our street in order to turn right into Root. Old Wire is already a busy street in the
mornings because it is a main artery in our city that leads to the University, College,
downtown, etc., which makes it difficult to turn left. This is my route to work daily and I
witness Ash St. residents struggle to take this left. Mission is a main artery as well and
fifty new homes would mean a significant increase into this traffic flow. Turning left out
of Charlee during school hours is impossible. Turning left out of Charlee any other time
is also a challenge since there is a slight downward curve on Mission and people tend to
speed when they are traveling from the east.
We are also concerned about the Niokaska Creek which is directly behind our home. Part
of our property is on the flood plain. We currently do not require flood insurance but the
home on the corner does require this insurance. We have seen the creek rise to meet our
fence several times during heaving rain and during the melting of the heavy snow this
past winter. There are troubled spots in our area with flooding and it is worth looking
into when considering this many homes in a small amount of land as well as considering
the effects on the environment.
The value of our home is also a concern. Our neighborhood has been established since
the early 90's and we have maintained our homes. Smaller homes around the corner will
decrease the resale value of our homes.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED78C15FA... 12/1/2011
Page 2 of 2
We would propose the City Council park outside our home during drop off and pick up
times for Root School. We strongly hope you will vote against this proposal.
Thanks for your time.
Scott and Debbie Keller
file)/C,1Documenis and Settingsllbranson\Local SettingslTemp%XPgrpwise14ED78C15FA... 12/1/201 l
Page 1 of 2
City Clerk - Fwd: FW: Rezoning 11-3960
From: City Clerk
To: Aldermen
Subject: Fwd: FW: Rezoning 11-3960
CC: sikes.aj@pg.com
>>> "Sikes, Aimee" <sikes.aj@pg.com> 12/1/2011 2:31 PM >>>
I apologize for the lateness of this. I did not realize that I had an incorrect e-mail address.
Thank you for your help to distribute to the city council.
Best regards,
Aimee Sikes
From: Aimee Sikes [mailto:sikes.aimee@gmail.com]
Sent: November 18, 2011 04:31
To: City--clerk@ci.fayar.us
Cc: Sikes, Aimee
Subject: Rezoning 11-3960
Dear city council and planning commission,
We are writing to request your support in opposing the rezoning request for 1730 N Old Wire Rd.
(RZN 11-3960).
The forenamed property would not be an appropriate property for the requested NC zoning. We
respectfully request that you deny the rezone and allow the property to retain it's current residential
zoning.
There are several things to consider that indicate the inappropriateness of the NC zoning.
1. Safe - the design of Old Wire Road and nearby streets is not conducive to allow a projected 100
car daily traffic flow increase. The neighboring streets around Old Wire and Mission are all
neighborhood residential roads and are not designed to handle through traffic flow. There are no
sidewalks on Old Wire to allow for safe walkability and no continuous sidewalks on Mission Blvd.
2. Density - the proposed subdivision calls for up to 50 housing units on a small plot of land. Please
consider this strongly as it will have a significantly negative impact on the neighborhood footprints in
the area. Please consider nearby Charlee Avenue contains 27 single home residences in nearly the same
space. We feel it would be inappropriate to purposely design a neighborhood where people are literally
on top of one another without adequate property for children to play or elderly residents to safely walk
for exercise and community interaction. This development would be a virtual concrete jungle and
seems to go against the city's green space character.
3. Water flow - there is already significant water flow and drainage issue in the surrounding area.
Homes on neighboring Charlee Ave have already been affected by flooding and washouts. We are
concerned that due diligence has not been completed to fully understand how this additional
development will affect the surrounding properties.
4. Environmental impact - We request a formal evaluation of the Niokaska Creek watershed. What
impact will this proposed overly dense development have on the watershed and wildlife in the area?
about:blank 12/1/2011
Page 2 of 2
We are especially concerned that there will be negative and irreversible environmental damage. The
city is already contributing to the restoration of this watershed in the Sweetbriar area with a sizeable
expense. Shouldn't we take the time to ensure there are no additional problems being created?
5. School Capacity - The developers zoning proposal states that the development would not impact the
school system. Indeed it will. Root Elementary is already at capacity with overflow going to other
schools and long-term "temporary" outbuildings being used as teaching facilities. The city has not
announced plans to construct another school in the area.
6. We realize development is likely inevitable. We respectfully ask that current rezoning be maintained and
that all due diligence is planned for and executed to ensure that the above issues are addressed prior to any
development approvals. We believe that development can occur in a more suitable manner than what is
currently being proposed.
Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to receiving your support.
Sincerely,
Robbie and Aimee Sikes
about:blank 12/1/2011
Page 1 of 2
City Clerk - Fwd: Opposition to Rezoning Request
From: Amy Rossetti <ahrmdr@aol.com>
To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 12/1/2011 10:06 PM
Subject: Fwd: Opposition to Rezoning Request
I just learned that I originally sent this to the wrong email. Please forward this to the city council
Thank you,
Amy H. Rossetti
-----Original Message -----
From: Amy Rossetti <ahrmdr@aol.com>
To: city_clerk <city_clerk@ci.fay.ar.us>
Sent: Sat, Nov 19, 2011 8:06 am
Subject: Opposition to Rezoning Request
Dear City Council,
My family has lived on Charlee Avenue since 1999, and I am writing to express my concern about recent
discussion and the pending decision to rezone the property at 1730 N. Old Wire Rd. I understand that the
decision is being considered so that Jackson Williams and Tim Cooper can develop the land and build 50 homes.
I take the position that it would adversely affect the current residents and property owners on neighboring streets
and increase the city population in an area that is already plagued by traffic congestion and a school that is at
capacity.
I understand that one of the city's goals is to build housing where there is existing infrastructure. The
infrastructure surrounding the area under consideration for rezoning is already stressed to capacity. In fact, it is
our opinion that the area could not even support the development of the land under the current zoning so
increasing the number of homes allowed does not make sense. The children who move in to the homes will not
be able to enroll in Root School mid -year because the school is full. Many times a day there is significant traffic in
the area.
The property is adjacent to a number of street "stub -outs" rom either Old Wire Rd. or Mission Blvd. and the
recommendation from the Planning Commission states that "connection to all street stub -outs will be required at
the time of development." The City Planning Division states in their recommendation that this supports the
creation of a "livable transportation network" because it will provide "more options to residents and those traveling
through the area." There will be a way for drivers to avoid the intersection of Old Wire Rd. and Mission Blvd. I fail
to see how rerouting significant traffic through a residential neighborhood qualifies as an acceptable "livable
transportation network." It will route traffic to streets were young children live, play and ride their bikes. The new
homes will add to the amount of traffic in the area and make it less safe for the children in the area to walk to
school. There is already significant traffic in the area in the mornings, evenings, and at the time that Root school
dismisses. Also, about 15 minutes after the high school dismisses traffic backs up on Mission Blvd. near the
area of the rezoning request.
The area would be much better served if the City of Fayetteville worked with the state of Arkansas to improve
Mission Blvd and the condition of the intersection of Old Wire Rd. and Mission Blvd. before any additional
development is done in the area. Various divisions of the city government have long used the excuse that
Mission Blvd. is a state road to justify to the parents of Root School students why there are insufficient sidewalks
and no light at the intersection. It is time to actually solve the problem rather than make it worse.
During the time that traffic is not an issue, speeding on Mission Blvd. is an issue. Because of the angle at which
Charlee Ave. and Mission Blvd meet and a very large tree it is difficult to see if it is safe to turn. The limited
visibility and speeding add up to a dangerous situation. Traffic does not need to be added to this area.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED7FA61FA... 12/2/2011
Page 2 of 2
The City Planning Division also states that this development is consistent with the city's goals of an enduring
green network and opportunities for attainable housing. I spoke with City Planner, Andrew Garner and he
indicated to me that Mr. Cooper wishes to build a style of home with little front yards and garages at the rear of
the homes. The garages would be entered from allies running behind the homes and the houses would have very
little space in between them. I looked at aerial maps of areas where these types of homes have been built and
this type of development does not leave significant green space. Those in need of attainable housing would be
better served if the area where the housing was included more private green space so their children and animals
would have safe places to be.
I am well aware of the assessed value of our home and the associated property tax. We did not find any
information in the recommendation or request that stated a projected value of the homes and the projected tax bill
the home owners would be required to pay. Without this information, claims as to the affordability of planned
housing should not be made.
Sincerely,
Amy Rossetti
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED7FA61FA... 12/2/2011
Page 1 of I
City Clerk - Possible Rezoning 11-39601730 N. Old Wire Road
From: Scot Burton <SBurton@walton.uark.edu>
To: 'city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us" <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 12/2/2011 3:39 PM
Subject: Possible Rezoning 11-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road
Dear members of the City Council,
As a resident of Charlee Avenue for the past 18 years, I am taking this opportunity to express my concerns about
the proposal to rezone the property that will ultimately lead to a cut -through on our street. My chief concern is
for the safety of the children on both Charlee and Ash Street who walk to Root School. In addition, other
children are also on Charlee after and before school because parents use our street as a place to park and drop
their children off to avoid the Root drop-off and pick-up traffic. Like many others, we initially selected Charlee
Street partially based on its proximity to Root, and historically, it has had a large group of children riding bikes,
skating, and playing on the street, so there is concern beyond just the before and after school time frame.
Anything that results in increased traffic on our street at these very busy times of day, as well as other times
when children play, will become a safety hazard. Decisions made by the members of the City Council should
consider this increased risk and its potential outcomes. Would a severe injury to a single child in an accident that
stemmed from this decision be worth any of the favorable outcomes being presented?
While safety is my primary concern, there are other issues as well. The proposal suggested that some 50 houses
could be constructed on the property, and this seems very different from the nearby neighborhood
environments. I am not sure what types of dwellings are envisioned, but it seems that if will differ substantially
from what we generally see, and this raises additional possible concerns about the safety of children. I also have
concerns about the potential for the increased likelihood of flooding. Homes have been flooded previously on
our street due to rain, and many of us are used to having substantial amounts of water in our backyards during
and after heavy rainfall. I have to believe that the location and open land that would be used for development
has helped prevent additional flooding problems.
In sum, while there are several concerns that I have, my primary one is for the safety of the large number of
children who live and play on Charlee, and the very large number that use it to access Root Elementary before
and after school. I sincerely hope that the safety of these children will be strongly considered by the City Council.
Is there any factor as important as this?
Sincerely,
Scot Burton
Scot Burton
Professor, University of Arkansas
Resident, 1702 Charlee
Scot Burton
Sam M. Walton College of Business
(479)575-5398
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4ED8F13BFA... 12/2/2011
Page 1 of 1
City Clerk - Protest of RZN 11-3960 Williams/Cooper Fayetteville 6 December Agenda Item
From: Kevin and Charity Sanchez <ksanche@gmail.com>
To: <ward3 posI@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>,<ward3_pos2@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>,
<mayor@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>, <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>,
<wardl_posI@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>, <bthiel@cox.net>, <ward2—post@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>,
<citycouncil@matthewpetty.org>, <rhonda@adamsward4.com>, <sarahelainelewis@gmail.com>
Date: 12/5/2011 4:49 PM
Subject: Protest of RZN 11-3960 Williams/Cooper Fayetteville 6 December Agenda Item
Attachments: Rezone-NC.pdf; Zone RSF-4.pdf
Dear Fayetteville City Council,
My wife and I protest the rezoning request RZN 11-3960. We have the following concerns: 1) The request is to
rezone to neighborhood conservation which could potentially dramatically increase the density from 4 to 10 units
per acre. The current and surrounding subdivisions are all 4 units per acre but the actual densities are less than 4, 1
have calculated that the most parcels that could be placed in the area with the current zoning is 30 units or 3.5 units
per acre; furthermore, the proposed zoning could generate as much as 48 units or 5.6 units per acre. We agree that
this location is a prime and desirable location in Fayetteville and that land cost and home cost is at a premium
which is why we wish to preserve the resale value of our home and the character of the neighborhood. Because the
area is desirable is not a reason that would "dictate" the need for a neighborhood conservation zone. We cannot
afford to have our investment diminished by many more smaller and cheaper units on lot sizes smaller to that of
our own. 2) The planning commission has already rezoned the Summit Place subdivision to NC as well as another
development on Mission St. and so the argument that there isn't enough of or limited options for NC zoning that
would be desirable to smaller families is not factual. 3) The collector street of Old Wire Road is already taxed with
heavy morning traffic and I have difficulty as it is between 7:45 and 8:15 crossing it to get to Sycamore. One
logical connection to the proposed development is via Samantha & E. Ash St., but I am very concerned about the
amount of traffic that would be generated from a NC zone vs. that of a RSF-4. Not only would I have to wait for
traffic already traveling those roads, but I would have to wait behind tens of other vehicles generated from a denser
zone as well. This rezoning WOULD appreciably increase traffic danger and congestion. I have shown above that
there will be up to 18 more homes or potentially 36 more commuting vehicles per day if the rezoning is allowed.
The project to widen and improve Old Wire Rd. from Mission to Crossover must be completed PRIOR to any
further development in the area. There is a sight distance problem at the intersection of Sycamore & Old Wire Rd.
that would be made worse by the added traffic. 4) Any connection to N. Ramsey St. would severely make things
worse as parents would use it and Samantha St. & Ash St. as a cut thru or staging area for pick-up & drop-off for
Root elementary school a connection to Charlee St. would have similar results. 5) We already have a rainwater
runoff issue with the current site with its use as agricultural. If the impervious surface is further increased beyond
that of a RSF-4 it will make conditions worse for us and our neighbors. Any development activity will have to be
seriously monitored. 6) The width of the streets is of concern along with the sidewalk widths. I would like to see
50 ROW to mirror that found in Regency estates. I would also like to be re -assured that sidewalk connections
would be made with adjacent subdivisions including those with sidewalks along Old Wire road. This includes off
site mandated requirements. ROW any less is very hazardous when two vehicles cannot pass each other if there is
a car parked in the road as demonstrated by E. Amber drive or N. Woolsey. 7) I tried to contact the applicants and
have a meeting with them regarding my concerns and they were non -responsive. We reside at 1273 E. Ash St.
Sincerely,
Kevin & Charity Sanchez
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4EDCF610FA... 12/6/2011
Page 1 of 2
City Clerk - RE: Re: Possible Rezoning 11-39601730 N. Old Wire Road
From: Scot Burton <SBurton@walton.uark.edu>
To: City Clerk <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>, "citycouncil@matthewpetty.org"
<citycouncil@matthewpetty.org>
Date: 12/5/2011 11:37 AM
Subject: RE: Re: Possible Rezoning 11-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road
I think this comes down to population density and its effect on traffic on the street. If there is a connection via
Charlee that would be used by a large number of people, this becomes more of a safety concern. If they were
multi -family units or housing (ultimately) used by U of A students, this potentially could raise additional safety
concerns for younger children. Historically, most drivers on our street have known that there are lots of
children around, and drivers generally have been quite cautious.
Hope this helps.
Scot Burton
From: City Clerk[mailto:city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us]
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2011 10:43 AM
To: Scot Burton
Cc: citycouncil@matthewpetty.org
Subject: Fwd: Re: Possible Rezoning 11-3960 1730 N. Old Wire Road
>>> Matthew Petty - Fayetteville Ward 2 <citycouncil@matthewpetty.org> 12/5/2011 9:08 AM >>>
Mr. Burton - Thank you for writing. I will consider what you have said.
Can you elaborate on one of your points? I'm not sure I understand the connection between the number of
houses and safety.
Here is what you wrote:
The proposal suggested that some 50 houses could be constructed on the property, and this seems very
different from the nearby neighborhood environments. I am not sure what types of dwellings are envisioned,
but it seems that if will differ substantially from what we generally see, and this raises additional possible
concerns about the safety of children.
Thank you.
-M
On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 3:55 PM, City Clerk <city_cl_erk ci.fayetteville.ar.us> wrote:
>>> Scot Burton <SBurton@walton.uark.edu> 12/2/2011 3:38 PM >>>
Dear members of the City Council,
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4EDCACF6F... 12/5/2011
Page 2 of 2
As a resident of Charlee Avenue for the past 18 years, I am taking this opportunity to express my concerns
about the proposal to rezone the property that will ultimately lead to a cut -through on our street. My chief
concern is for the safety of the children on both Charlee and Ash Street who walk to Root School. In addition,
other children are also on Charlee after and before school because parents use our street as a place to park
and drop their children off to avoid the Root drop-off and pick-up traffic. Like many others, we initially selected
Charlee Street partially based on its proximity to Root, and historically, it has had a large group of children
riding bikes, skating, and playing on the street, so there is concern beyond just the before and after school
time frame. Anything that results in increased traffic on our street at these very busy times of day, as well as
other times when children play, will become a safety hazard. Decisions made by the members of the City
Council should consider this increased risk and its potential outcomes. Would a severe injury to a single child in
an accident that stemmed from this decision be worth any of the favorable outcomes being presented?
While safety is my primary concern, there are other issues as well. The proposal suggested that some 50
houses could be constructed on the property, and this seems very different from the nearby neighborhood
environments. I am not sure what types of dwellings are envisioned, but it seems that if will differ substantially
from what we generally see, and this raises additional possible concerns about the safety of children. I also
have concerns about the potential for the increased likelihood of flooding. Homes have been flooded previously
on our street due to rain, and many of us are used to having substantial amounts of water in our backyards
during and after heavy rainfall. I have to believe that the location and open land that would be used for
development has helped prevent additional flooding problems.
In sum, while there are several concerns that I have, my primary one is for the safety of the large number of
children who live and play on Charlee, and the very large number that use it to access Root Elementary before
and after school. I sincerely hope that the safety of these children will be strongly considered by the City
Council. Is there any factor as important as this?
Sincerely,
Scot Burton
Scot Burton
Professor, University of Arkansas
Resident, 1702 Charlee
Scot Burton
Sam M. Walton College of Business
(479)575-5398
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4EDCACF6F... 12/5/2011
Page 1 of 1
City Clerk - Mission Blvd
From: Amy Rossetti <ahrmdr@aol.com>
To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us>
Date: 12/21/2011 9:39 AM
Subject: Mission Blvd
Please forward the following to Mayor Jordan and the City Council Members
Dear Mayor Jordan and City Council Members,
I am a resident of Charlee Ave. and yesterday evening I spoke in opposition to the rezoning of the property on Old
Wire. Thank you for the opportunity and for listening to the residents concerns.
I wanted to address the points made by two members of the council concerning the resolution of traffic concerns
that have been made in other neighborhoods - the example of the church and Butterfield Trail School. There is a
major difference between the situation by Root School and those situations. Those situations involve residential
city roads. Mission Blvd is a state highway. I pointed this out in the letter I wrote to City Council prior to the
December 6 meeting. When my children attended Root School, I was very active in the PTO and served on the
Principal's advisory board. The City of Fayetteville has been approached by committees and concerned parents
about the Root School traffic issues numerous times. Some progress has been made in the area; however, the
city staff often said that they could not do anything because Mission Blvd. was a state highway. For example,
sidewalks on Mission Blvd.could not be built because the state might decide to widen the road. I pushed for a
better railing along the small section of sidewalk the kids walk on along the side of Mission to get from the school
to the crosswalk near Charlee Ave. I was told that they railing did not meet the criteria the city had for replacing it
with something safer. Next time you drive by the school, please look at that railing. It is still unsafe especially
considering how small the kids are. We do have a history of trying to work with the city - my kids are in college
and high school and the situation has not changed. If I had faith that the city would address the safety concerns, I
would not have been at the meeting last night.
As this situation moves forward, please encourage the city staff to work with the state to address the safety
concerns about that portion of Mission Blvd, even if you feel the situation will not be made worse be the rezoning.
It is a very serious situation regardless of any future development in the area. The blind spots and poor visibility
need to be addressed as does the intersection of Old Wire and Mission Blvd. It would be easy to remove the
tree. Please also encourage the city police to actively enforce the traffic laws in the area.
Thank you,
Amy H. Rossetti
file://C:\Documents and Settings\lbranson\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4EF I A94EF... 12/21/2011
NORTHWEST ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT -GAZETTE
NORTHWESTARKANSAS THE MORNING NEWS OF SPRINGDALE
NEWSPME16LLCTHE MORNING NEWS OF ENTON CERS
OUNTY DAILY RECORD
212 NORTH EAST AVENUE, FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS 72701 1 P.O. sox 1607, 72702 1 479-442-1700 1 WWW.NWANEWS.COM
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
I, Cathy Wiles, do solemnly swear that I am the Legal Clerk of the
Northwest Arkansas Newspapers, LLC, printed and published in
Washington and Benton County, Arkansas, bona fide circulation,
that from my own personal knowledge and reference to the files
of said publication, the advertisement of:
City of Fayetteville
Ordinance 5469
Was inserted in the Regular Editions on:
January 5, 2012
Publication Charges: $ 64.85
Cathy Wiles
Subscribed and sworn to before me
This 6-t" \ day 2012.
D
I%To-thry Public
My Commission Expires:
BANDRA E SCf7ACHERSW
SENTONCOUNTY
N0 rARYPU8UC-ARKANW
My Coff Wroh SarPur<,A 315. 2017
CO M kOW Na IM121
**NOTE**
Please do not pay from Affidavit. Invoice will be sent.
RECEIVE®
JAN 11 2012
CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE