Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout188-06 RESOLUTION• RESOLUTION NO. 188-06 A RESOLUTION TO GRANT THE APPEAL OF LINDA MAYES AND TO GRANT THE REQUESTED LOT SPLIT FOR A TANDEM LOT FOR LSP 06-2200 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS' Section 1: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby grants the appeal of Linda Mayes from the Planning Commission's denial of LSP 06- 2200 and grants this lot split as a tandem lot subject to the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit "A". ,aTmn„ it PASSED and APPROVED this 7th day of November, 2006. r .. • G c'•��? -V • 0p: c :FAYETTEVILLE: APPROVE 't• •' %;y �•14,1tkoiSP�J�'�'• By: DAN COOD Mayo • 4 ATTEST: By: aQ SONDRA SMITH, City Clerk 4 EXHIBIT "A" LSP 06-2200 (Mayes) 1 Conditions of Approval 1. City Council determination of a waiver request of Ch.166.08 F(1) requiring residential lots in the City of Fayetteville Planning Area to have a minimum of 75 feet of frontage onto an improved street. The City Council found in favor of this request. 2. A letter has been submitted by the owner indicating that a deed restriction would be placed on the created lot (Lot 21-B) limiting development of this property to one residential home if the lot split is approved. This requirement shall be noted on the lot split document. 3. The applicant shall provide written approval from the Arkansas Health Department for the any lot less than 1.5 acres in size prior to recordation of the lot split. 4. Prior to recordation of the lot split, the city shall ensure that public water is available to each proposed lot. If a public main extension is required, this shall occur prior to recordation of the lot split. 5. Adequate access shall be provided to each lot. A 30 -foot access easement shall be provided over the driveway to access lot 21-B 6. The plat shall be revised to show the location and size of the existing public waterline adjacent to the property. 7. Washington County Planning approval is required prior to recordation. 8. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications) Fayetteville City Council, aer) /r4 -do /,i nd4 016 APP -La` This Letter is to inform the city council that Jim and Linda Mayes would like to appeal the Planning Commission decision to deny our Tandem lot split on Canvas Mt. Road (LSP06-2200). Our lot is in the planning area east of Fayetteville and we felt that the commission made their decision on incorrect information that 3 of my neighbors gave. We also believe the commission made an emotional decision instead of a decision based on the facts. We are legal in all aspects of a tandem lot and have met with several different planners between the subdivision meeting and the actual planning commission meeting. We felt like we had satisfied all their concerns with our lot split. We have the approval of 19 of the homeowners on Canvas Mt. and we are legal with the city's requirements for a lot split and for a tandem lot therefore we are requesting to appeal this to the city council. Please put us on the next city council meeting agenda and please inform us on when that meeting will take place. Thank you for your help in this matter. Jim and Linda Mayes 445. N. Canvas Rd Fayetteville, AR Phone 442-0740 E -Mail (mayesji@msn.com) • RECEIVED SEP 2 9 2006 CITY OF FAYETIEvi., CITY CLERK'S OFFIC City Council Meeting of October 17, 2006 Agenda Item Number CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO To: Mayor and City Council Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations �p From: Jeremy C. Pate, Director of Current Planninga` Date: September 27, 2006 Subject: Lot Split for Mayes Appeal (LSP 06-2200) RECOMMENDATION Planning Staff recommends denial of a lot split for Mayes located at 445 N. Canvas Road. The request is to subdivide the 3.11 -acre property into two lots of 1.78 and 1.33 acres. BACKGROUND The subject property is Lot 21 of the Canvas Mountain Subdivision, located east of Starr Drive, north of Wyman Road. This subdivision is located in the Planning Area. Although portions of the property are located within an area encompassed within the Hillside/Hilltop Overlay District, these regulations are not enforced in the County. A single family dwelling, pool, and garage are located on the property. All surrounding properties are within the Planning Area. The applicant requests a lot split to subdivide the property into two lots of .1.78 -acres and 1.33 -acres. The 1.78 -acre lot complies with the city's requirement for a 75' lot frontage; however, it does not comply with requirements for a 75' lot width..A waiver request to allow a 30' lot width on a portion of the lot was requested. It is the intent of the owner to sell the 1.78 acres for single family development, and a letter has been submitted • indicating that a deed restriction would be placed on the new lot to limit development of the property to one residential home. DISCUSSION Staff recommended denial of the lot split, finding that the proposed lot is not compatible with the surrounding properties, particularly in size and manner in which it is being subdivided, and does not meet the minimum Unified Development Code requirements for bulk and area for a lot within the Fayetteville Planning Area The applicant requests a waiver of Chapter 166.08 (F) Design Standards of the Unified Development Code, for less than the required lot width. On September 25, 2006, the Planning Commission voted 8-0-0 to deny the proposed lot split. City Council Meeting of October 17, 2006 Agenda Item Number Public opposition and support has been expressed in the form of letters, petitions, etc. by the adjacent property owners and the applicant (see attached materials). Three adjacent property owners were present at the meeting to discuss concerns regarding this proposed lot split. BUDGET IMPACT None. • ityettille THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PC Meeting of September 25, 2006 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Suzanne Morgan, Current Planner Matt Casey, Assistant City Engineer THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning DATE: September 20, 2006 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 575-8267 LSP 06-2200: Lot Split (LINDA MAYES, 491): Submitted by BLEW, BATES & ASSOC. for property located at 445 N. CANVAS RD. The property is in the PLANNING AREA and contains approximately 3.11 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into two tracts of 1.78 and 1.33 acres. Planner: Suzanne Morgan Findings: Property: The subject property is Lot 21 of the Canvas Mountain Subdivision, located east of Starr Drive, north of Wyman Road This subdivision is located in the Planning Area. Although portions of the property are located within the Hillside/Hilltop Overlay District, these regulations cannot be enforced in the. County. A single family dwelling, pool, and garage are located on the property. All surrounding properties are within the Planning Area. Proposal: The applicant requests a lot split to subdivide the property into two lots of 1.78 -acres and 1.33 -acres. It is the intent of the owner to sell the 1.78 acres for single family development. A letter has been submitted by the owner indicating that a deed restriction would be placed on the 1.78 -acre tract limiting development of this property to one residential home. • Background: On August 17, 2006, the Subdivision Committee reviewed a site plan proposing to create a 1.5 -acre tandem lot with 0' lot frontage on Canvas Mountain Road..Chapter 166.08 Fl. of the Unified Development Code requires a lot in the Planning Area to have a minimum 75' of lot frontage on an improved street. The applicant requested a waiver of this requirement. The Subdivision Committee forwarded the plat to the Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial. The applicant recently submitted revised plans providing Lot 21-B with a 75' lot frontage and a 30' lot width in a portion of the lot, which negates the need for lot frontage, but requires a waiver for minimum lot width, also required at 75 feet. • Lot Width Requirements: City regulations for lots within the Planning Area require a 75' lot frontage on a public street and a 75' lot width. The applicant has provided the 75' lot width for a majority of the lot; however, the lot width narrows from 75' to 30' due to the location of the existing single family dwelling and accessory structures on Lot 21-A. The applicant has requested a waiver from the 75' lot width. • K: IReports120061PC Reports109-25-061LSP 06-2200 (Mayes).doc The Canvas Mountain Subdivision is platted with a variety of lot shapes and sizes. The lots north and south of this property are of similar size and shape. The Unified Development Code states, "When a tract of land is subdivided Into larger than normal lots, such lots shall be so arranged as to permit the logical location and opening offuture streets and appropriate resubdivision of the lots, with provisions for adequate utility connections for such resubdivision" (See Ch. I66.08F). It is apparent that the lots west of Canvas Mountain Road were platted larger than normal lots; however, the lots were not arranged as to permit the logical location and opening of future streets and resubdivision. Any subdivision of a 3 -acre similar to the applicant's property will result in flag lots. Staff finds that the proposed lot is not compatible with the surrounding properties, particularly in size and manner in which it is being subdivided. Adjacent Master Street Plan Streets: North Canvas Road (Unclassified) No additional right-of- way is required on this street. Water/Septic Systems: The 1.78 -acre lot would have frontage on a public street and access to a public water main. A private water line would be extended down the 30' lot width to serve development on the 1.33 -acre lot. During the initial review of the project, the proposed lots were 1.5 acres or greater, therefore not requiring septic system permits. The revised site plan includes a 1.33 -acre lot which will require Arkansas Department of Health approval for the septic system. Since there is already an operational system on this lot, the applicant will need to provide proof from the Health Department to ensure that there is sufficient room for an alternative system and the soils are adequate. Written approval from the Health Department for the creation of the proposed 1.33 - acre lot will be required prior to recordation of the lot split, should it be approved. Subdivision Covenants: The City does not regulate orenforce subdivision covenants. Recommendations and evaluations of development, including lot splits, are based on the requirements of the Unified Development Code. Public Comment: The Planning Division has received a petition signed by nearby lot owners within the subdivision in opposition to the lot split, a letter from the attorney of an adjacent owner with several concerns regarding the proposal, and information from the lot owner to the west regarding the drainage and concerns that additional development will magnify the drainage problems. The Planning Division has also received a petition in support of the lot split. (See attached materials.) Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of LSP 06-2200 finding that the subdivision of land proposed is inconsistent with the surrounding lots north and south of the property within the platted subdivision. Should the Planning Commission find in favor of the proposal and recommend approval, staff recommends the following conditions: Conditions of Approval: 1. Planning Commission determination of a waiver request for lot width requirements to create a lot with 75' lot frontage on a public street with a 30' lot width. Of the two site plans proposed by the applicant for approval, the first being a 1.50 acre lot with a 0' lot width and the site plan with a 1.78 -acre lot with 75' lot width on Canvas Road, staff K:IReports120061PC Repor1s109-25-061JSP 06-2200 (Mayes).doc recommends approval of the former lot layout. Although this layout would require extension of a public water main, it would not create a flag lot which could be further subdivided in the future if a street were extended. 2. A letter has been submitted by the owner indicating that a deed restriction would be placed on the 1 78 -acre tract limiting development of this property to one residential home if the lot split is approved. This requirement shall be noted on the lot split document. 3. The applicant shall provide written approval from the Arkansas Health Department for the 1.33 -acre lot prior to recordation of the lot split. 4. Prior to recordation of the lot split, the city shall ensure that public water is available to each proposed lot. If a public main extension is required, this shall occur prior to recordation of the lot split. 5. Adequate access shall be provided to each lot. As shown on the revised lot split plat, each lot has frontage and access to Canvas Road. If it is the applicant's desire that Lot 21-A retain access by way of the asphalt drive along the northern property line, an access easement shall be provided over the driveway. 6. The plat shall be revised to show the location and size of the existing public waterline adjacent to the property. 7. Washington County Planning approval is required prior to recordation. Standard Conditions of Approval: 8. Plat Review and Subdivision comments (to include written staff comments provided to the applicant or his representative, and all comments from utility representatives - AR • Western Gas, SWBT, Ozarks, SWEPCO, Cox Communications). Additional Conditions: a. b. Planning Commission Action: O Approval X Denied El Tabled Motion: (to Deny) Ostner Second: Myres Vote: 8-0-0 Meeting Date. September 25, 2006 Comments: The "Conditions of Approval" listed in the report above are accepted in total without exception by the entity requesting approval of this development item. Signature Date A: IReports12006IPC Reports109-25-0611_SP 06-2200 (Mai es).doc • 166.08 Design Standards • (F) Residential lots. The use and design of lots shall conform to the provisions of zoning where zoning is in effect. When no zoning applies, the following standards shall govern unless in conflict with more stringent city or state regulations applicable to the use of individual disposal systems: (1) Bulk and area regulations: (2) Size. The size and shape of the lots shall not be required to conform to any stipulated pattern, but insofar as practicable, side lot lines should be at right angles to straight street lines or radial to curved street lines. When a tract of land is subdivided into larger than normal lots, such lots shall be so arranged as to permit the logical location and opening of future streets and appropriate resubdivision of the lots, with provisions for adequate utility connections for such resubdivision. (3) Developments outside city developed to all inside the city standards. If the City Council grants access to the City's sewer system pursuant to § 51.113 (C) and the owner/developer agrees to petition for annexation as soon as legally possible and develop the subdivision in accordance with all inside the city development requirements including payment of all impact fees, the bulk and area requirements for this subdivision shall conform to those within the city limits rather than those within the planning area. K: IRepons120061PC Reporrs109-25-06VSP 06-2200 (hfayes).doc City Limits Planning Area Lot area minimum 8,000 sq. ft. 10,000 sq. ft. Lot width minimum 70 ft. 75 ft. Side setback 10 ft. 10 ft. Rear setback 20 ft. 20 ft. Frontage on improved street 70 ft. 75 ft. Provided, a suburban lot may be developed as a tandem lot in accordance with zoning, Chapters 160 through 165. (2) Size. The size and shape of the lots shall not be required to conform to any stipulated pattern, but insofar as practicable, side lot lines should be at right angles to straight street lines or radial to curved street lines. When a tract of land is subdivided into larger than normal lots, such lots shall be so arranged as to permit the logical location and opening of future streets and appropriate resubdivision of the lots, with provisions for adequate utility connections for such resubdivision. (3) Developments outside city developed to all inside the city standards. If the City Council grants access to the City's sewer system pursuant to § 51.113 (C) and the owner/developer agrees to petition for annexation as soon as legally possible and develop the subdivision in accordance with all inside the city development requirements including payment of all impact fees, the bulk and area requirements for this subdivision shall conform to those within the city limits rather than those within the planning area. K: IRepons120061PC Reporrs109-25-06VSP 06-2200 (hfayes).doc • Jim and Linda Mayes Lot Split 445 N. Canvas Fayetteville, AR 72701 Canvas Mt. Subdivision Planning Area 1. We are Legal with lot minimum (10,000 sq. ft): 2 lots with 1 1/4 acres a piece one with 65,347.42 sq. ft. and one with 74,444.21 sq. ft. 2. Legal with width minimum (75 ft.) Both lots have 189.94 width 3. Legal with rear setback of 10 ft. The lots we are splitting have a 20ft. setback at the back and a 50ft. setback at the front 4. Legal with the side setback of 10 ft., we have 2011. 5. Not legal with the 7511. frontage which makes for a tandem lot. A. We are legal with the frontage on a tandem lot, it requires a minimum of 25 -ft. road frontage easement and we have 30-11. road and utility easement B. Tandem lots are required to have a paved drive with a minimum of 25ft from the road. We have a 352.37 ft driveway to the lot split with 160 ft. of pavement that has existed for 10 years. We have a beautiful wooded planter entryway at the - street. 6. We are Legal with the utility easement. They have already signed off on the lot spilt. • • 7. We are legal with the sewer system. The lot has been approved for a septic system. 8. Legal with the covenants of Canvas Mt. Subdivision. They call for only the approval of the subdivider, which is Jim Lindsey. • We have a sign document from Jim Lindsey with his approval of the tandem lot split. The homeowners were given legal notice through the covenants. We have 19 signature of property owners on canvas Mt. who approve. the lot split and 4 who don't want to get involved. 3 ezR SOAK> 04,1 (U sistcT ou o lt_ 9. We are legal with the title. Donna Stuart at Reality Title Company has approved the title work. Weare asking for the approval of this tandem lot split because we are legal by the standards set by the city for tandem lots in the planning area and for the following reasons: a. There are 2 tandem lots in the subdivision already. Lot 3 Block 2(see enclosed plat) and one directly across the street from us Lot 23 split off 3 lots which their only access to the city street is through a road and utility easement. ( see enclosed Easement Morrison/ Robertson Oil and Shirley Trust filed April 12th 2001) b. The city has already .split off 2 lots in the subdivision ( enclosed warranty deed Andre' Marc split his 3 acres into 2 1/12 acre lots.) and Lot4 Block 2 split off21/2 acres the J R. Arnold ( see attached form) c. 16 out of the 32 lots in the subdivision are 1 % acres d. lot 22 which is next to us has an easement dedicated to the city fora city street( see enclosed easement Martin to City of Fayetteville) through it to a 200 acre tract of land that the road will extend to and could be developed into, at the minimum 200 houses and more 1ikd 000 house if the subdivider puts in the drip system for sewer' Tim Conklin told this to us. To: City of Fayetteville Att: Jeremy Pate Re: Lot Split Request Please add as a deed restriction the following information: 445 N Canvas Rd Lot split for Jim and Linda Mayes. The new lot owner may only build one residential home on the property and must follow canvas mountain covenants. Please edit this to meet the city guidelines. Sincerely, Linda Mayes C.� • • i PROTECTIVE COVENANTS CANVAS MOUNTAIN A.Subdivision in Washington County, Arkansas Covering the following described property situated in... Washington County, Arkansas, to -wit: A part of the'Fractional Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 7, Township•16 North, Range 29 West, and part of the Fractional Northwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 16 North, Range 29 West, being more particularly described as follows, To -Wit: Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Fractional Northwest Quarter, asd running thence S09051!41"W 1311.00' thence NO 03'53"W 659.18',. thence 589051'41"W.�20.66', thence 50003'53"E 659.18', thence 58951'41"W 497.17', the8ce South - 1324.29', thence East 631.32', thence SO 83'53"E 1305.70', thence East 1343.39', thence,N8 03'53."W 1305.70', thence East 372.61', thence.ND 26'56"W 1329.90' to the Point of Beginning, containing 119 acres more or less. ___. _ KNOW ALL,.MEN DY THESE,PRESENTS, that as owners, Lon R. Farrell, .7 a W. Gel and "Mar3olene'babel; Cord'onA: "L'ong-and•-Jone11n1:ong; ------- and James E. Lindsey and Nita V. Lindsey, and James E. Lindsey.as' subdivider of all the lots in Canvas Mountain Subdivision. in Wasl4ngton County, Arkansas, hereby enter the following restrictive coven'Sngsi'yith respect to. said subdivision. (1). All lots in said subd-ivision shall" be'•residential lots, and no structures,•shall be erectgd on any of said lots other than one detached., single family dwelling to be used for residential purposes. A guest house, cabana, and/or detached garage may be allowed as long as it is in keeping with the architectural design of said residence. Any dwelling house construction upon any - lot.shall have at least 1400 square feet of heated area excluding porches, garages and breezeways with at least 1200 square feet on the ground floor. (2) No vehicles may be parked in the streets of this 'subdivision. Lot owners shall provide sufficient off street parking to accomodate the vehicles used by their family and guests. Also, no semi -trailer trucks shall be allowed to park overnight in said subdivision, either on the streets or on a privately owned.lot. N abandoned...a toomoobiles or inoperable automobi-l�s-7 y e stored on any lot in said subdivisi•-- (3) No lot shall bf p -se ivided or re -platted wit hgslSr4,(_ the prior written conse+it of the above named_ subdividezttL5LL hirsuccessors -of'r assigns, and approval: o : the applicable local • or governing authorities. (4) No trade or business sha - o in sa33-snbdi.S-azvn, nor snal anything be done or performed thereon which may become an annoyance or nuisance to the neighbor- hood or detrimental to the residential value of any lot in said Subdivision. - (5) No trailer, mobile home, tent, shack, metal building or other unsightly building or structure, temporary or permanent other than the side family dwelling, guest house, cabana; andfer detached garage as described herein, shall be erected or used as a residence on aid lots. e.-./ (6) Recreational and camping vehicles and trailers may be stored and parked on the lots. However, these vehicles and trailers shall be located behind the house, guesthouse, or'fence,-or in or behind the garage, or otherwise screened so that they are not readily visible from the street or adjoining lots. Screening EASEMENT FILED FOR RECORD '01 APR 12 API 11 06 WASHii4CToh; CO AR KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: -8. STAMPS That we, HOWARD KEITH MORRISON and LYNN C. MORRISON (by H. Keith Morison, her attorney in fact under power of attorney recorded as instrument #200016302 of the records of Washington County, Arkansas), husband and wife, hereinafter called Grantors, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations to us in hand paid by ROBERTSON OIL CO., - . INC., an Arkansas corporation, and THE SHIRLEY FAMILY TRUST u/t/a dated June 27, 1997, hereinafter called Grantees, do hereby grant unto said Grantees, and unto their heirs/successors or assigns, an casement for the purposes of ingress/egress and underground utilities over and across the following described land, situate in Washington County, Arkansas, to -wit: An easement being 20 feet in width across Lot 23, Block 1, Canvas Mountain Subdivision, Washington County, Arkansas, and being 10 feet each side of the following described line; commencing at the NE corner of said Lot 23, thence South 88 degrees 28 minutes 39 seconds West 18.03 feet to the point of beginning, thence the following bearings and distances; South 43 degrees 37 minutes 24 seconds West 108 84 feet, thence South 67 degrees 22 minutes 37 seconds West 145.36 feet, thence South 77 degrees 17 minutes 44 seconds West 68.83 feet, thence South 88 degrees 50 minutes 00 seconds West 203.98 feet to the right of way of North Canvas Road. In mutual consideration of the foregoing easement, the parties acknowledge and agree that they shall have such rights with respect to construction, operation, maintenance and repair of said easement as are recognized by the laws of the State of Arkansas. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said lands thereunto belonging unto the said Grantees and their heirs/successors orassigns, forever. Witness our hands and seals this t2 day of April 2001. 2M.4x0*(2),..7i'fi•—` (seal) HOWARD KEITH MORRISON t' e.•4 'y �V SGX.e101itw— (seal) LYNN C. MORRISON by H. KEITH MORRISON, attorney in fact ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) On this It -day ofApril, 2001, before me, a notary public, personally appeared Howard Keith Morrison and Lynn C. Morison, by H. Keith Morrison, her attomey in fact, known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they had executed the same for the purposes therein set forth. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and official seal the date above L 0/3?:, O1aR - tpackkgsbilvi Rion expires: 101 1Vez-a-2-001 . o«cnu„ i,�,. 28 (Pagel of 1) WARRANTY DEED HUSBAND AND WIFE CONVEYING AS TENANTS 8Y THE ENTIRETY, JOINTLY OR IN COMMON KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That w., ANDRE E. MARC SHIRLEY A. MARC husband end wive. hereinafter idled Grantors. For and in conskld.(bn d the sum 01 dm Dolor DISCI and Ma pond and vababb censkiertlbn to me h hand paid by KENNETH LEE OSBORNE and LORI ANN OSBORNE , HUSBAND AND WIFE hereinafter seta Grantee. do hereby pant barbell and cel unlo the said Grantee and Grantee's hobs and assigns. Ihn bhrwMg doscibed land, situate h WASHINGTON County, Stale of Arkansas, IowC rILUC TOR HUGH(' '96 PIAS 15 PI7 2 day WASHINGTON CO AR K. HARNESS PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 11A) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 114) OF SECTION EIGHTEEN (18), TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN (16) NORTH, RANGE TWENTY-NINE (29) WEST, DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING 253.5 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER (NW 1/4), THENCE NORTH 300 FEET, THENCE EAST 215 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 300 FEET THENCE WEST 215 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.48 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD Inc sail bins and appurtenances derdnto bebryiw unto the sok Grantee and Granite's hob and assigns. facever. Md we, the ash Grater. hereby covenant that we ere lawfully stied W aid lend ad premises, drat the same Is unencumbered. d m B mercer I and ddend the Iib to IM said lands Idabel et butt chins whatever. And we. the respxlls Grata; hereby mina v%4 nenquIsn pato the saki Grantee ow respective dowvhul.sy and hmnsleed'n and to IS lands. WITNESS tun hands d stab on Mb 14th day el THIS INSTRUMENT PREPASED BY: PLEASE NAIL TAX STATFMENt T'0: BANCOXLiBOMA MORTGAGE COPA. P. O. BOX 35688 TULSA, OK 74153 It March 1996 . pal m`: m Veer do- asc % o' codw e1 oo_N oalpa �.1-. :Tel At1"ry 41i1 CKNOWLEDGMENT ANDREE. MARC (Sep A.e to N* -.-FA raid y k F.aa 7JfS.�.11 SHIRLEY A. MARC (SW STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON On this the 16th any of March 1996 . mlpa Ne, • notary pubic. personae/ ropend ANDRE' E MARC end SHIRLEY A. MARC know to me (or salLnaciorny prppnl to be the Anions whose names subscribed to the foregoing M Wment and tcknowlodpod Nal Ih.y had e.dvted IM same' (, itheipurpeaw Mash sat tah. In Wneu l eN'T>:r6a W o .911%hlnd and oboist seal Mytommiis4WIreitO LSKIC2aI1f1 STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF ..••••, CERTIFICATE OF RECORD - ss: I - Ctcuk CM and E OW b Recorder Id the County sloresa do hereby cwtly that the enromngnsd d and bdnp umendl wriig was d Iw b record my Waco en the day of al o'clock M., and the same h w cliff r¢dMd vih IM MnewbgTrtenl d. . h Record Rook. al Paps NW . IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I have Macula sad my hand and althea the set d sail Cern Ihb day of 1 wally under meRI d Su swea*,p hat L IMP tha bcth OWE .w+ d dmtmenurc ramps mm— m MIS bsnrmitl a Grdma G ; it 96015759 kw.,na.r Se^S '1 x'101 "111124n (Pagel of 1) WARRANTY DEL _HUSBAND AND WIFE CONVEYING AS TENANTS BY THE ENTIRETY, JOINTLY OR IN COMMON • KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, ANDRE' .E. MARC SHIRLEY A. MARC husband end wile, hereinafter called Grantors, for and I consideration of the sum of One Doltar (SI.00) and other good and valuable consideration lo me in hand paid by RUSTON L. COLE and MARA D. COLE , HUSBAND AND WIFE • hereinafter called Grantee. do hereby gran, bargain end sell unto the sald Grantee and Grantees holy end assigns. the farrowing described land. situate In WASHINGTON County. Stale of Arkansas. WWI: PART OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER (NE 1/4) OF THE NOR WEST QUARTER (114) OF SECTION EIGHTEEN (18), TOWNSHIP SIXTEEN (16) NORTH. RANGE TWENTY-NINE (29) WEST, DESCRIBED AS BEGINNING 466.5 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER; THENCE NORTH.300 FEET; THENCE EAST 215 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 300 FEET; THENCE WEST 215 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 1.48 ACRES; MORE OR LESS. • TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said lands end appurtenances thereunto belonging unto the said Grantee and Grantee's heks and assigns, forever. And we, the said Grantor, hereby covenant that weere lawfully seized of saki land and premises, that the same Is unencumbered and Mai we will former warrent and defend the title to the said lands egainsl ell legal claims whatever. .. Md we, the respectNe Grantors, hereby release and rellnqufsh unto the said Grantee our respective dawe(artesy end homestead In end to SSM Lands. WITNESS our hands d creels on this 25th day THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY: t'^ :^e^ d' eneN htct!cott em o.' stay r da[c'-' tu'lall CmOVeI a• hcac peen Vl�a�ccidYdpdb 1?3• m;!saNca - ontae _ %IW1m STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON On this the 25th day of ANDRE' E. MARC • October 1995 ss: October know to me (or salisfactonly proven) to be the persons whose had executed the same for the, purposes therein In witness whereof 1 her... y hand and oKclal el. STATE OF AR COUNTY OF NDRE' E. MAR . (Seel) (Seal/ SHIRLEYRC A �O tet.--04_,-�J _��Zs�er -1‘2 4aNJre> y_tea„« (Seep WLEDGMENT 1995 , before me, a natant public. personally appeared and SHIRLEY A. MARC names subscribed to the foregoing Instrument and acknowledged That they Notary Poona ERTIFICATE OF RECORD Ss Circuit Clerk end Ex -Officio Recorder Lx the County aforesaid, do hereby certify that the annexed and foregoing instrument of writing was filed for record In my office on the day of at o'clock M., end the same Is now duty recorded with the acknowledgment end certificate thereon. In Record Book, el Page .IN wrTNESS. WHEREOF, f have hereunto ser my hand end affixed the seal of said Court This day al •v F6e93.I.MO 11092) 6747 • Cocoa Clark and &gnyo Recorder. /5060702 (Pago1 of 1) FILED FOR RECORD WARRANTY DEED - 99 OCT 9 p� 2H ,and and Wife Conveying as Tenants by _ the Entirety, Jointly or hi Common ' WASHINGTON CO AR KNOW AL1KMak Rtirs13-IESE PRESENTS: That we, Gene W Arnold Jr. and Karen D. Arnold, husband and wife, hereinafter called Grantors, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration to us in hand paid by David R. Faulkner, a dingle person, hereinafter called Grantee, do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Grantee and Grantees heirs and assigns, the following r � described land, situate in Washington County, State of Arkansas, to -wit: A part of Lot Numbered Four (4), Block Numbered Two (2), Canvas Mountain Subdivision, a Subdivision of Washington County,Arkansas, as per plat of said Subdivision on file m the Office of the Circuit Clerk and Ex -Officio Recorder of Washington County, Arkansas, being more particularly described as follows: Beginnirig at the Southwest corner of said Lot Four (4); thence N 00 degrees 11 minutes 57 seconds E along the West line of said Lot.Eour (4) 310.31 feet to a set iron; thence S 89 degrees 53 minutes 36 seconds E 335.27 feet to a set irdn on the East line of said Lot Four (4); thence S 00 degrees 04 minutes 24 seconds W 310.31 feet to the Southeast comer of said Lot Four (4); thence N 89 degrees 53 minutes 36 seconds W 335.95 feet to the point of beginning, containing 2.39 acres, more or less. The above-described 2.39 acre tract being subject to .the Right -of -Way of Wyman Road (County Road 48) and any other Easement and/or Right -of -Way of Record. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said lands and appurtenances thereunto belonging unto the said Grantee and Grantees heirs and assigns, forever. And we, the said Grantors, hereby covenant that we are lawfully seized of said land and premises, that the same is unencumbered, and that we will forever warrant and defend the title to the said lands against all legal claims whatever. And we the respective Grantors, hereby release and relinquish unto the said Grantee our respective dower/curtsey and homestead in and to said lands. WITNESS our hands and seals on this. I -5—day of October, 1999.. Gene W. AmoIc�JT-=-'---' Karen D. Arnold THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY; Richard L. Miller Attorney at Law P. O. Box 3354 Fayetteville, Arkansas 72702 ACKNOWLEDGMENT" STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON On this the 1st day of October, 1994, before me, a notar public, personally appeared Gene W. Arnold Jr. and Karen D. Arnold, known to me (or satisfactorily proven) to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they had executed the same for the purposes therein set forth. In witness whereof 1 hereunto set my hand and official seal. t. 4tt1 °•„My Ctonlrkidsion Expires: 7-3-0/ • ?tiff c,. • Notary Public 99090041 WARRANTY DEED J Fj.JSBAND AND WIFE CONVEYING AS TENANTS BY THE ENTIRETY, JOINTLY OR IN COMMON KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we ROBERT E. MARTIN and JANFI•N MARTIN, husband and wile, hereinafter called Grantors, or and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration to us in hand paid by MICHAEL B. CABBAGNO, JR., and MEILDY F. CARFAGNO, husband and wife--------------- hereinaller called Grantee. do hereby grant. bargain and sell unto the said Grantee and Grantee's heirs and assigns. the following described land. situate in Washillrjton County. Stale of Arkansas, to -wit: F112± T. RECORD '92 JUN 10 fill 8 98 l).1 CO AR I.:.I E YE R Lot Numbered TWenty-two (22) Block Nulrbered One (1), Canvas Mountain, a subdivision in Washington County, Arkansas, as per plat on file in the office of"the Circuit Clerk and EX -Officio Recorder of Washirgton County, Arkansas, subject to all roadways, easements and restrictions of record. • 'varvi/y for no mat al �. Om° uni of 4d yo//a1 d47, O""me /`rey/y in I, stamps eel lo TO HAVE AND TO HOLD rhe said lands and appunenances thereunto belonging unto the said Grantee and Grantee's heirs and assigns, forever. And we, the said Grantors. hereby covenant that we are lawfully seized al said land and premises, that the same is unencumbered, and that we will forever warrant and defend the title to the said lands against all legal claims whatever. Md we. the respective Grantors, hereby release and relinquish unto the said Grantee our respective dower/curtesy and homestead in and to said lands. t WITNESS our hands and seals on this g day of June THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY: BAC, Fayetteville, AR 19 92 ERT E. MARTIN �"\O.gi44 MARTIN (Seal) (Seal) (Sod) STATE OF ARKANSAS County of _Washington Robert E. Martin ACKNOWLEDGMENT ss. r�7� On this the�_day of June 19 92 before me. a notary public. personally appeared and Janeen Martin, husband and wife ames subscribed to the foregoing Instrument and acknowledged that know to me (or satisfactorily proven) to be the'" sa they had executed the same for he pure ) aerates in %Minds whereof I hereunto set my hand . lL7 My Commission ExpIres ary Public 92 28234 .1 ICA(:1' NO. ...... ..._. .. ' S'fr\Thi OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON • ,: WA _t, GRAN KNOW ALL MEN RY MESE PRESENTS: llsat fm and in consideration of and oilier valuable considerations to the undersigned, Robert E. Martin and Janeen Martin, ... Husband and Wife paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the raid Grantor does hereby GRANT, SELL AND COVEY unto the. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation (herein styled Grantee), its successors and assigns, the right of way and casement to construct, lay, remove, relay, enlarge and operate a water and/or sewer pipe line or lints, ... .. manholes, and appurtenances thereto, on, over, across, and under tie following described real estate, to -wit: PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: A part of the fractional Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section Seven, Township Sixteen'North, Range Twenty— Nine West. EASEMENT DESCRIPTION: A permanent easement of 25 feet in width of equal and uniform width and a temporary construction easement of 50 feet of equal and uniform width. .Both easements running parallel with and contiguous to the East right of way line of Joe Fred Starr Road., :n r 4: , :o 7.- w 0 '1'0 IIAVIi AN I) TO HOLD unto said Grantee, its successors and assigns, so Inng as suds pipe line -or lines, man• hides and/or appurtenances thereto shall be maintained, with ingress to and egress from the real estate first fterci 1al,ove luso ibcd for the purpose of constructing, inspecting, maintaining nod repairing said lines, manholes and appurtenances of (:mutee above described, and the removal, renewal and enlargement of such at will, in whole or in part. 'I Le said Grantor is to fully use and enjoy the said premises except for the purposes bcreiuhefore granted to the said (:r:uw:c, which hereby agrees to bury all pipes, where feasible, to a sufficient depths so as not to interfere with cultivation nl soil, and that ntanhohes will be constructed Rush with the surface of the ground except in bottom lands where they dull Ise as a height above highs water, and to pay any damages which may arise to growing crops or fences frim the cnn- ' sI ruction, maintenance and operation as determined by three disinterested persons, one thereof to be appointed by the said Grantor; one by the said Grantee; and the third by the two so appointed as aforesaid, and the written award of sncli three persons shall be final and conclusive. lite Grantor agrees not to erect any buildings or structures in said right of way other than fences and said fences shall not exceed six (6) feet in height. •I'lic Grantee shall have the right to construct additional pipe lines upon the above described easement at any time in dm future and agrees to pay any damages as a result of such future construction as set out in this casement. The consideration first nhove recited as being paid to Grantor by Grantee is in full satisfaction of every right hereby graoted. All covenants and agreements herein contained shall extend to and be binding upon the respective heirs, legal scpresentas icts, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. - It is hereby understood and agreed that the party securing this grant in behalf of the Grantee is without authority to make any covenant or agreement not herein expressed. - a WITNESS the execution hereof This the asst day - of ..._..y..-.TsUNEry. �_.... -y- ... .. .. .., (f oIl-l'' t C . I / /'Q/L(-G•2 air. ACKNO WLEDGM}'NT S'T'ATE OF. ARKANSAS t C(If1rf1 !„ )F-WASI{INCTON r f�r� j�-J�/ corimttssinikec7'ayll actings personally appeared/,} o*`"V'Co..721SC-ll�r-1 ). 44-e4.4J ((.e41-i(i} J to me well • 1 'knuyn as ``h��jjl�e�sori(r) who executed the foregoing Rigl r of Way Grant, -for slit' An ides-atitw and purpose therein mentioned sill set forth. s y . .' WITNJ S1ny hand and teal on tlsis `�" day of 9 "Wri1.l2rAt 818 klEC14.i.16E.MEMBERED, that on this da ,_Before me, a Notary Public within and for said County and State, duly t: f Fly commissiun expires . fat .1 11/9e ....'had executed the same t/) n,gt/ Notary oldie • (Page2 of 2) • FEB -20-00 03:07 PM L EerL ,f RLE - FAY ACKNOWLEDGMENT 'SI 443423s RFATF.OF Lpa140f A.e. : OmmTy F .n 3ercafrj,PO - ■ERREMEMBERED, Thn no else day came before me. the BMcsip'ed. a Nmacy NRilk. *Milo and far the die • _PAUL C. 33011300.21 AND PATRICIA A. wORRV.A. _ may dejp Isla duW aemB f m the foregoing Decd. PtID GIFL bmew'tRInOWvn ate6mmm --- uWriled dtal _ t oty _ bad teemed tic sore MCRc c denninn and P+Txe therein oaCmnd and ter Sues And onlhc"mealy atm wWmhiM mins &Tart nc. he aid MU. C. ;COWMAN AND PATRICIA A. wokDw!. IIOSBARD MO Wirt ser weir known and declared that dm lard. of their chi own aid Deed mll,f amid said Deed and signed and scaled Ce etlmgbAr tbmmd of m;'catmy and homestead m the masidcrmim and proves Rana smuined and ss forth. *item campu1"°n or wda iddclK of toi' WITNESS my hard nor teal an sea Notary Nbty nn Au _ l — - . of Wash-. eampiderb $pn.L ($ 7-c0 • JOHN HAYHUHST OOMM.11216389 DOWNIV®.IC- CALFORMA SAN BEMORO OGOUITIY Convrtssim Hires Aper 18.2003 • 2000016307 (Page 1 of 2) FEU -20-06 es Y6 Ptl LEN 201dse5FY TLTLE - FAY NIR LENDERS TITLE COMPANY WARRANTY DEED W4— PAUL C. WORKMAN and PATRICIA A. WJRMpw bmb+M and swift, for and in eunslittruicrsofdon=of Ten and Of LOP oma Tabmbk axuldaaum m m in hard paid by irpTPAlq_Awn sun ,hem_M1w tilled Gnats , the retains of which is birdie aciOlo'akdl'Od. do Earthy FR baPaN,Wdlard roaatygnm Ormci_arid alga 3 C. Fabs and aniyn fumte- *ct&lowingbod in W3.1il_Smal Coin*, Athos= Lot Humbered T✓enty.Tbrea (231, Block Numbered One (I), Canvas Mountain, a $Ybdlvinion in Bashingmn County, Arkansas. as per plat of said Subdivvttloo on tt 501443.436 P. 02 FILED FOR RECORD '00 MA 3 API 8 04 WASHINGTON CO AR K. HARNESS and STH ^fin si„�w �R�TL£�16188iS0Y._—. file in the office of the Circuit Clerk and Ex -Officio Recorder of Washington COunty. Arkansas. subject to existing edsana Cs, building Iinea, and ..assements of record, if nY. f cord* ender penalty of fahc mooing to at lee We legally hive Was pfmcd w this 'vemrment if mac down, Cmazic Or AD= Gaga% Address TO HAVE AND TO HOLD Ibc xamcwunfamte 3 and ono brigs and assigns fm+tr, old, sit acymosuncn draimra bcIo *C IBA BotchytoveaantsidtGGnnln 3. that we will roma Wilma and defead the 'No to raid Panda' ayaimsdl eli®swhatvc. Md%t. PAUL C WORMS! rd PAtRICTn A BOREMAN far Reconsideration eccsd bath, do hereby iekala all relinquish oma the said finrd a and cote rises Y be(gsM asdim. all ilea right Won, erN-.y all honnead in and m said bods. rnstrICtions g ®5 5867 correei exclaim amount coosideration peld srcmareoB-� 70796/ 0 kfe WITNESS ouchwds and sash this let March 2019 day of PAUL C. NORMAN \ Wr:4, pedzsituu PATRICIA A. 140P.04M1 2000016306 Page 1 01 1) CcY La/ /� cep2102.5 in 's96 ' '253.5' or NEc, syf/[or gat s Her Nrv4 iVoad N ooesaToo' floors' 1 / g %Yac7- A N Otr DO' OW tI0.o0' I N 00'00'o0'_1Y. t10. aV a LEGAL DESCRIPTION TRACT A: Part of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4,Section 18,T-1 na beginning 253.5 ft. East of the SW corner of t NW1/4, thence North 300 ft., thence East 215 ft.,t thence hest 215 ft. to the point of beginning,co more or less. TRACT R: Part of the NE1/4 of the no beginning 460.5 ft. East NWl/A,thence North 300 ft. thence West 215 ft: to the more or leas. NW1/4,Sectlon 10,T-1 of the SN corner of ,thence East 215 ft., point of beglnnlnP.,c a CJI3 a 6-N1R-29-W,descrlbed he said NE//4 of the hence South 300 ft., ntnining 1.40 acres, 6-N,R-29-W,described the said NE1/4 of the thence South 300 ft., ontnlning 1.48 ncren • SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE • I hereby certify that the survey platted and described hereon wns completed under my supervision, and the cornet markers were set no shown, to the beat of my knowledge and belief. According to Flood Nap(FIRN,F118N), Community Panel No. 05143C0115 C. ,effective date 1991,this property in situated in Zone X. 'CLIENT: Andre Marc , Fayetteville,Arknnnas COUNTY: Washington Date: February 11,1995 LEGEND Found Stone Pound Iron Pin Found concrete monument -x ---x- Pence -- - - -- Right of Way Line Set Iron Pin ---- Centerline Scale: 1.in.= 100 ft. I I I 0 100 - 200 95013373 •: /UW(9ati 1• ��? 1 �ata NJ 1'49 a la vu r 1:1 C 0 n 0 P p G1,0,1�1r1 MAR 1r`14-3 I{�UIII WASH es�an ecillir( _ PLANRI(c AOMIINIS11:GOR (Paget of 1) 5-g Cor La11 /6- C 6C g /2s rn; . !J • e ,5 frG • 253.5- NFcor•sWd Gar tot S /fed N(v4' 5-•a c,a� a,) N Weaoa t tlo.o �.(�. •4 t N .7 0 Co TRACT A: Pact of the NE1/4 of the NW1/4,Section 10,T-16-N,R-29-0,described on beginning 253.5 ft. East of the SW corner of the said NE1/4 of the NN1/4,thenco North 300 ft.,thence East 215 ft.,thence South 300 ft., thence Nest 215 ft, to the point of beglnning,contoining 1.4R acres, more or leso. 11 90* Off Or If tIo.00' LEGAL DESCRIPTION z< oo•oo'ooet ti a. oo' �tn • cn o �o TRACT R: Part of the NE1/4 of the NN1/4,Soction 10,T-16-N,R-29-N,4escrihed as beginning 46R,5 ft. East of the SW corner of the sold NE1/4 of the NW1/4,thence North 300 ft.,thence East 215 ft.,thence South 300 ft., thence West 215 ft: to the point of heglnning,contnining 1.4E ncren, more or leas. , SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE • • I hereby certify that the survey platted and described hereon was completed under my oupervision,ond the corner markers were set ea' shown, to the best of my knowledge and belief. According to Flood Map(FIRN,FIIfH), Commun.lty Panel No. 05143C0115 C, ,effective date 1991,this property is situated in,2one X. 'CLIENT: Andre Marc , Fayetteville,Arknnnas COUNTY: Washington Date: Fehrunry 11,1995 LEGEND Pound Stone Found Iron Pin Found concrete monument -x ---x- Pence -- - - -- Right of Way Line Set Iron Lin ---- - ---- Centerline Scale: •l -in.= 100 ft. I 1 0 100 95013373 I 200 •o13TeR'r7.,,` J £StAttor'•1 Imo:•"n'cAnsAs ri: :nes i 1 ��A 0109.•: I°I�p TGI' 0 d i Ir wastimGION cOUNLY PLANNING SgMINI2tta3R fl4(fu5 ��& i Ic Shackelford: • Y. °E a2 i td T n 0 cd Y .' ha) a) '-+ d 0 +4 `4-I s: N 8 O "� G• .., uasocn .a. 0O yOcn Wh°J a U °_.4°C 0Y.cY PV O 0.1 � `41 153 :� cnmv Y -0 E..' pjO ° °°' a cd O U YO YO i G 4. C t G 2 .Y �) = E a2 8 .et ne y N OD -E N n T N N V -a T O °' c0 .�'!- 0 c did •D rn c'-' E^ in y tri •C> In 0 EA y am' 3 n °' t .2 ... 7 8 0 o 0 "=' 'u 3 ,. CL( v v •5 y �' p, N 4) ° y0 P ° 0 ' 3 -- Z -y V fi ° 'O "" ° N rn 3 UI 3 > 00 v 0 o i m a 3° s0 ° 0E o ° "� ..a9.0 0 o d c >• p00•20antiLIaw•aOt_c j° `n > O c..=Y> a^t y z • ° 0 cd _C y O2te'0 V6) vi N .0 C.4 W Yn C a) 'tri 4Qa° s..pmal ,ocd 0-) -0 CI)•on i j tl dio a ,-0 °i0 d 8 fort No. ' s' ) ai ..0 Y .. 0 0 0 a° a 0 ''6O a m 0 4� a aa°.O <1.; "...°ova° ° .. on $ o an .r."3 b 6Tvn 0 � 0 —1on �)U 2C -' t ° °.?pN . • Ca ° a o E 0 Ei 0 ti• n al 0 PC °N0 'OO N CVa 0.0 Y E a) oc.0 C C '-'"' y . -C °..n F..°cdiw°v7)j� cd 282 O0 ° (" t NWY Ya a2 E gEi0 N Oy T O 0d O 0n CG W tu .. +. id '0 ..— .) n. � -. ▪ • a) O N O .V•a/fl0aW% Y•pn .mo 0 n Y ad° En W¢Y aC 7 V A.0'' C n + •- b0 a) Vmac C . • ad 1/40 •° Z a°' ° cis) o� d M 0 X r v o y. rnn"' `"N°s vn ° < a°]�,ti " ( a R cn 'b o°v 0 c• by C G .D O - 3 aa) .L Y"°n ya' J) °H Rw ' C [° 0 a) O E .. tl •00 F. ' N O73 .Wov 00o°=y v � E on0 30 N tr.1 LI n c3 vo °cU 'Y 2 roai ouav a a a ." a el T t m > 8ado a>. -0Y Y °:ti . 0 0z .Utt ca S al (93 2 3 a.)w 3 2-v 0.0 on E 0 .4 Planning Commission .January 9, 2006 Page 66 CUP 06-1861: Conditional Use Permit (HENRY JORDAN, 366 Submitted by WILLY BERCHTOLD for property located at 2150 N. LEVERETT AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY — 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 7.67 acres. The request is for a tandem lot. LSP 05-1777: Lot Split (JORDAN RENTALS, 366): Submitted by BRIAN SCOTT GEOMATIC CONSULTANTS, INC. for property located at 2100 LEVERETT AVE. The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY — 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 7.67 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into 2 tracts of 0.93 and 6.74 acres. CUP 06-1860: Conditional Use Permit (HENRY JORDAN, 366 Submitted by WILLY BERCHTOLD for property located at 2150 N. LEVERETT AVENUE. The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY — 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.93 ACRES. The request is for a detached dwelling (existing) on the subject property_ Morgan: This property is located east of Leverett Avenue and extends north to the terminus of the adjacent street. To the west of this property is Leverett which is a collector street and to the north is a planned collector street on the Master Street Plan. There is an easement for access to the north of this property. It is currently developed for Multi Family Use. There are apartment buildings on this property at this time. This applicant has three requests submitted before you, the first if the conditional use; there is a lot split request to create a 0.93 acre tract which will not have frontage on a public right-of-way and therefore is a tandem lot; and there is a conditional use request to erect a detached dwelling unit on this property. These three items are being treated separately with separate recommendations; however, they do tie in together in concept. Staff recommends approval of the lot split with the approval of condition requiring a conditional use to approve the tandem lot. This property will contain a single family dwelling only. There are currently two structures on the property — one of which will be utilized for the single family dwelling; the second is currently a storage area It used to be a laundry facility for the apartment complex. With regard to the conditional use request for the tandem lot, which is item 18 on your agenda, Staff finds that a tandem lot in this area is not an inappropriate use of the property, and recommends approval of this conditional use with all conditions of approval listed in the staff report. This action does create a non- conforming structure; however, the building setbacks for a tandem are twenty feet on each side, where not adjacent to .a right-of-way. The existing structures on this property are the existing single family dwelling unit which is closer than twenty feet to that side setback. Any redevelopment or reconstruction of that structure would have to comply with that non -conforming requirements of non -conforming structures or they would need to see the Board of Adjustment for a variance of that setback. The second conditional use request is to erect a second dwelling unit on the property, not necessarily erect that second dwelling unit, but do modify the existing storage unit to a second dwelling unit. While a second Planning Commission February 14, 2005 Page 16 Childers: • 1-m <Barbara tiiiders,:'.I'm;.the.property .owner What I'm tpipposiagyto build back. there. tor sq.R: log cabin,:houseknestledrinside•the trees baok there to use for-rental/roperty .I,agree *ith al of the,condmoiisof thecity,,.: I don't know exactly what you want me to say about it. I would ,lust like to have a nice little home back there. I have deer that come back there. I don't want to disturb them. I don't want to cut down anymore trees than I have to. Moving it back further off the road is to accommodate the conditions of having the lot moved back and combining the two lots together I think is an even better idea. Ostner. Thank you. At this point I will open it up to the public. Would anyone like to speak to this CUP 05-1364? Seeing none, I will close it to the public and bring it back to the Commission. Staff, have you heard from any neighbors in the area? Morgan: We have responses from three neighbors, two of which are in favor of this request. One of which had several concerns with regard to traffic and has submitted a letter, which is included in your staff report. Clark: How many home owners are back there? Morgan: At present there is one home, Ms. Childers' home, located to the south of the lot and there are no homes located to the north. Clark: Morgan: Clark: Ostner. Pate: How many folks did you notify as immediate property owners? Four. Ok, I'm just trying to get it in perspective. My question about the neighbors was going to this neighbor who was worried about -traffic. Does staff feel that traffic is going to be a safe situation if the Conditional Use is processed? Yes Our findings indicate that the alley and street sections that we still. use today the alley is essentially for vehicular access.` This lot m effect; doetnotiiave frontage .because. the street in front: elif has t never been connected` For instance, the hoines that do front onto Huntsville Avenue all use this alley for access. I believe Solid Waste also utlizes this alley to serve the residents there fronting on Huntsville Road as well. 1 know from another application that was processed in a nearby vicinity, the Planning Commission did tour through this alley with the bus and it was quite safe in my opinion driving the bus. Shackelford: I'm a little confused on condition of approval number three, a new access drive shall.:be'paved a:miniinum 25' iti engtl is that length or width? • Planning Commission February 14, 2005 Page 17 Morgan: That would be length. We would assure that the width of the private drive to the home would satisfy any emergency vehicle requirements in order to provide emergency service to this area. Shackelford: It has to be built from the intersection of the drive to the intersecting right of way. It is rare that we put a minimum length figure in there when we are trying to build a road between two destination points so I was a little confused by that. Pate: That is actually part of the findings, part of the requirements for a Conditional Use for a tandem lot so that a standard driveway wilt be constructed even though it does not have frontage onto a street. That is part of the standard findings within the packet. Shackelford: 1 find everything to be in line with staffs findings. I will make a motion that we approve CUP 05-1364 subject to all stated conditions of approval. Allen: Second. Ostner. Is there further comment or discussion? Anthes: Because we have a lengthy report in here that talks about cars blocking drives and that sort of thing, can you state for the record and for anyone watching, what the recourse people have if that is happening in their drive lanes. Pate: I believe part of the recourse has already been taken. No parking signs have been posted in this alley so that traffic trying to move along this alley would not be impeded by parked traffic. The best way would be to call the Police Department to report it if a vehicle was impeding traffic in that location. Ostner. Thank you. Is there further discussion? Could you call the roll please? Roll Call: Upon the completion of roll call the motion to approve CUP 05-1364 was approved by a vote of 9-0-0. Thomas: The motion carries. CIT v; >. °1.�°• °? o. oa , <°a a u 0 3 .. = eo . `a pL a •ta0 N O v u. •1" N N 0 al N N° 4.4 7.0 A g V N 3 "Op Na•t y2r:, Cti.0 w �F.n ORi Oh w ',�„• .. is [- p c. N a ... >' OCvn.O tib ..u .N f_ c) yw " .0 y`n+..°•0u0y0.-4 O E ... °141 Qc'°ad3av ' 000vw04 5 .0 0o Dao 0 09'i Y v o 0o,a 11 0 24 8 4.7"04.5 2 0 -0 04 o u o > via V I o v oo> :� tn 0 04 R O O •4 O 3C ., 1 0N V n. -O O .-- s0cCOa. O.. .3 -O N1- O , .i. C .q U o o' *Ia N 0 Cld N J7 a pwwal 0 '0° Yj00'0 p, yy .0 0 NU b u!cv, •N.No wVO Q8 2 Q� OvOO.i0 7-0'.c ti) o vg ao y� co) , 0 ; v RI :y.--, Sa0°O .c '4-10 `oL V >. y ,..a 2V 0 ..a1 pv• U 3 mu,40>°rtg0[- :4i.°'and vo x �"o vm>. 0 0to a ,'wa •y'v"t3 'A v ao tn pr Q. es us a 0 ova o 5 a� 3 204 v 3 0° 0 w 04 ot°° 0 3 en:d v o m m 0ww h mAra �� o N o a 79 79a 3 ..^ .0 "0 7 `Civ❑❑'+•a ro�� o o.°. a� �b w. o O R y.0 y >. N ca W .s7 - w 'O Owmmo ..63,) .s.., 0aw at dO'vvb is y o p Y> o °� O y c ..- C voi O w 0 (4„c-72 .b 0 F' >, v >, • o0 m S C O a' o 3 a C ° 0 is :. • 0 0 0 0 O - `I.. C m o a 0 L m 0 3 o U 0 o x 9 0 0 o ° O C O vV V 0OO Nt]°.>. N c a+ o V Q aN O. ❑ C L)r.. U° 8 .'.e •Q : Y U 2 0" Ow viaU c VA V vi you. Is the applicant present? 1-4 O 0 N 6446O o 0 3 a O N., V 'fl N a+ Co erVi O YO O ov on v -m v 5 o 761 a 0 ;d • a Gv • V a) x tad ✓ I-8 N eti ad g 1r4o Planning Commission December 13, 2004 Page 6 LSP 04-1312: Lot Split (RON PAYNE #1, 5261565): Submitted by HOLLY PAYNE for property located at 689 RAY STREET. The property is zoned RSF-4, SINGLE FAMILY - 4 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 1.86 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into 2 tracts of .30 AND 1.56 ACRES. Ostner: The next item on our agenda is LSP 04-1312 for Ron Payne #1 if we could have the staff report please . Morgan: If you would allow me to address this as welt as the next two items, a Conditional Use for Ron Payne as well as another Lot Split for Ron Payne together. The applicant currently owns a piece of property that is 1.86 acres It is located west of Ray Avenue. The applicant, if you address your survey which has been given to you, requests with this first Lot Split that .3 acres be subdivided from the property to the north of the tract. Additionally, they are requesting a Lot Split to create a 1.12 acre tract which will have 25' of frontage and utilize property behind the .3 acre tract to the north and a .44 acre tract to the south which currently houses an existing single family home. The second proposal for the 1.12 acre tract is to create a tandem lot, which would require the approval of a Conditional Use. Staff is in support of the two lot split proposals as well as the Conditional Use request for creation of a tandem lot. The lot in question is a very large lot with quite a bit of property to the rear and south of this lot. Staff finds that utilizing this area for development of a single family home is appropriate in this area of town. There is an existing school to the north of this property and those who develop this tract may benefit from that service provided. Additionally, as part of the Conditional Use approval we are to look at construction of sidewalk and as a condition of approval for this tandem lot staff is recommending construction of sidewalk along the 1.56 acre tract of property That has been recommended by the Sidewalk Coordinator and would help facilitate construction of sidewalks in an area which is needing sidewalks due to the school and pedestrian traffic in that area. As I previously mentioned, we are in support of both Lot Splits as well as the Conditional Use. Ostner: Thank you. Is the applicant present? Payne: I'm Ron Payne, the property owner. I am a licensed residential contractor and plan to do the building on the site. Ostner: Thank you. At this point I will open it up to the public. Would anyone like to speak about these issues? We can talk about them together, we need to vote on them independently but we are talking about two Lot Splits and a Conditional Use, LSP 04-1312, CUP 04-1313 and LSP 04- 1343. We can take public comment on all three items at once. Seeing none, I will close it to public comment and bring it back to the Commission. In H M Y Y Y 0�.c o on" c i o U cd > O a , O y O O ti� Sir � �Q.-. O O Y N 0 O U O N N'- .- I-' 4)Ifl a� a , > 3 O YSC T fA N 1 W a y •yrJ rU-1 Y „-0 'o_ o_3 v OO rr1) 3 tl afl N O U O O ' .fi U O 0 0 „ a c d Yc Y r� O y Y S1 ../ N f -J ^ Y ,` EL •'�I .1Y.0yyyl Q �r V �yOy ° Qi Q ° r v o> z ° rowed Cl. -01) a � N O^ O U p&° p yam••' O 9 N ,� 'O " Q C W Y N p ca asm, °°°aoO03" ca•r�w> -3 FW'� rL c.c ao2 caa 3 $mod all x a •> •b z::M. a F oq a.'� O �' -C cc O a0i 0— w O v - °a. v O Cd V d W O U "�•� ti✓ 4- _a.dc_ ,,C w C y '-rO O 0 sue. C .-0_c-bO % F7 b v N 3 3 • t .r -Cs-O U p N — N u 'b J F W ab N sU.'i V= b .r+' i Ca o a o.... v H a v 3 E a a m„ c > o.m o.9' oN `" D Y C) 0 ^ a' of •a .fl ,.c o �•! U F ti . • a U �, b4 W Y u i .C cC 'z 1 ti 3 1) o C W -yO^ Q r� o .° ,c . O ' o �t — P4 a3 oyea W ,l Planning Commission April 25, 2005 Page 6 CUP 05-1466: (ISRAEL, 451): Submitted by CLARK CONSULTING for property located on STARR DRIVE. The property is zoned R -A, RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL and contains approximately 30.99 acres. The request is to approve a tandem lot on the subject property. Ostner: The next item on our agenda is CUP 05-1466 for Israel submitted by Clark Consulting for property located on Starr Drive. If we could have the staff report please? Pate: This property is zoned. both R -A, Residential Agricultural and is also located within the Planning Area. It contains approximately 31 acres. This item and the following item are in tandem. The request is to create a tandem lot.. This item is a Conditional Use request to create a lot that does not have frontage onto public right of way and is instead accessed by an access easement that is filed on the lot in front of it. The larger lot, which would consist of about 28.95 acres would have that access easement as shown on the plat along the north property line for ingress and egress. It would be wide enough to accommodate emergency service vehicles. A driveway would need to be constructed in that location as well. The tandem lot would be approximately a two acre lot that would consist of one single family home and accessory structures. Staff has made findings of fact with regard to this Conditional Use request as required by ordinance on pages 6.3 through 6.7 and have recommended conditions of approval based on those findings of fact. Those are listed on the first page of your staff report. Staff is recommending approval of the Conditional Use to approve this tandem lot request as well as the following request, which is the Lot Split request that does meet ordinance requirements with the exception of frontage. There are a number of conditions. As I mentioned, one single family home is the maximum allowed on this tract of land by ordinance. On this particular tract of land a building permit will also be required for any structures because it is located within the city. Much of this property that is in front of us is located within the county. The city limits line meanders in and out in this location. Item number two, a new access drive shall be paved a minimum of 25' in length from the intersection of the drive and intersecting Starr Drive right of way. That will need to be maintained by the tandem lot owner and comply with city ordinances to provide safe and adequate emergency access. The ingress/egress easement from Starr Drive shall be 30' in width. Also, with regard to solid waste disposal, staff is recommending a cart be rolled out to the street as opposed to the more typically recommended by ordinance brick screening type facility, which is not useful for the city's purposes for handling solid waste. I'm not sure if the city actually services this area because it is part of the county but in the case that they do that would be more compatible with our type of arm system. The building setbacks shall be 20' for all property lines for the tandem lot. That is a basic ordinance requirement. Also, the developer is required because it is a Conditional cix v SfSt ti .1+ i•lt r. r +� _ Y `> f) v ` { n 4ai:Y 'f - \�ti•- ,Jt �r .r+t}. ': v h .1 na '!) Ir[ A i a I- v , n r v ^'lam tv lrtu 13'+� •-v 1 t I ♦t rit[ i ?� }��''r.. rhyyyof{iif ljC r, �'! nil I{~ +lj- } 54 Ii �s t jJ*.% +j 'i' i f YI , ) x, fm \i, are,_ 1"1 h ! I/V..F) i tl ) 1111l a Rl - l >.r a ..t♦ ] i S -J .Jh ♦l rr F _ -4$+1,[♦ e "I v avI �lr /."• x y l a nn�I�r S3 , F v a.Y ) j Sf j\ i awr t�}+y,r+�G,i�� ) a v I Y I' t o {f \ xt,{ c �d.}1•ai�TT!-r 'NiY 1 lh . "!•L , n - t , \:^[rl ly` 19 a \1 et - JhY�n c ! r ;a -;y; t ( T irr eaF .i nLd t . .1 �A? C `�";,�� 1 t"' ! ru '{�� 1)xl n ✓.Y�! p VI i n' i .f\ , +}LS t fw v"+'�,sa. # Yy h+ : ,e Y 7 h [� _l+f EI-} ♦ YhY r'r It 1� 1 a fort ' t �t F _ x)t I 9 y+ + +-4 ✓uq. M11 fwl l i, t t,t U,l t e +./Ftrrl ta, 1r` 5, i 11*Y 4444+4 a } '•4•'y\!•aiiyi vaEY%YS I,.e t�vli : Y '.+♦• (V.Yi Y)+v✓l a 3 Y `i Y4.. `I ti ♦ ! �'4nRr t I"�rl leln e+S+'^ .1 .TtEi; 3a1. - a t!it`1 aw �I r° a•`hJ 4 f[ �y}{ Gr' `y)a a '3� rt�,fu. a y. i' 7 tir/ - ICI iA1 t�j w ,f '6aAI,.!• b < etf ^ �.?t5`"ek)� l 'fif' f Y S d r.1�v y„ �x' ♦ i- �e Y y + [ tY k x If} I._ -.&,. it vA�> , ••[ I x 4_ tYt i�3 + ♦4 a tct$' \�7''� i' It >✓yfx''�t'r'e`R' ?. t + •...)Syi rR tY kg„ y t'r. 4 4.3 :�.•� > Y[>�i. Q�o r w .Xy Tk" s .app t- rn ` . SiJ i Y I `s� 4Y!S_ A•.Yr is I>V t Y/ I �. ry 3y i i L rr.ISI } rv. ft ry I. a .}r�}i. gyp\ ♦ > j v' u '1 - I: IT1n. \.I 2 ' y`W i iy"}y J' [i' i R a � TM Irlyq+ •�a'.+tz-i f t i UIT'�. [.'t 1 _. ): ( .._L l • n L.y .e terra yJSE rL. !�. JtJ LT �� ♦ e♦ ells -r f\�tl'Y itY�4Y. —.x �+W- i .` 13-�tiii.l• i Y(l ffLYY r 1 'L'v Jii'aWWr'f4� - 2 111 CACACA'AY le •yI'e �r ?f $tF •S�P ` c w r'f mil "$`Y •Y ISM .: !� 1 Y+ a �� ),�\lti •Y �� �? p( 1 �,! l f Jl &F a 9f ...&t$544 :1. ;rte• l w t}S Y" 1 i \ r, 2t', Z/� f I \ Y ( 1•' I I p y 1)1 r9 b7} SY f L r v hnixL ,¢ s vJ 1iY'"i, •11ft _yA ¢f�G�1; t �1 x rs•o. .V' :pry >Yt'+ft�� )I ' 4L 1I x .. St .!''�n l .15 �t6 I Y„ C1� JI( :l yY....�>• IM♦>ti'a . ♦[r fr a +: Y'. is ^: ♦ .R tt� J Y trvJl [- [@ill zeL6 i?fi` " yn Y({�rtY C�}` 54>'}. t EX aNx I'. - J.++ S ♦ I r I i ✓ r'^i .eira. F1[�$iy i, l(��:�jJ� -'+`3n y %' 0Gti+ �IAY + 3J,a /l `r AI �'-•Ly1 `. ✓ fl.\♦�-w_ 1r. " ♦ 4 'tr V.f.) ,i tl♦✓ l V4'i''. w`Y�nV "Vi-'.r-Y.+.y.- }�i T J] M1 yi.Y�- 'r�� �a�G.t1�Id !(„ ]• P 4. a t\r r • fr�'.(1 t �}.".l vlial`P fiq'liYi W �{NH'.t^�IYV'"`+�T w ` ) ktF d�.tii�y"Nfi .1 _ t �- '�'+I'I )V.yyr ➢.' Y R5 I i F J•e RS< r rytwti11'. J., .ira4lf �( 2y'QiCF� >+.'} �"\'T' '�+1 + ^ ti t w t. n$it. RV�a , [cs •y (:r5 y!^ f;/elf .¢_ r f"� '..{t5 flat Yd S,pf+=. . +�h+ 'fa r -I )• '4 ' . F I f f. �; 1�-l✓f '+Y'rkr �+ )l.,i '-Y "A $ a S +n yaA r n t 'C' -. y. Jr.r.4T 1 \' ' �I �V fv v l ♦ nr 6w: - R[ i+\i1I�` 11't N �iY{fJr 4+ .4I i ♦ i�S4 1•♦ { �I�T +Y '1x a1 1'�I ... 11 ry\ /'' 'i ,.lr t. v i T ��. ,!�>y i/{'1 n�' / • % rr i Y l [ q [ rK i ..1 av fY 1)4 a.✓. \.^!�C t11 :Ix rr r1 , 'ta ` i /.v/. ia3`"Zt II iw yrr .R•F'A ly 1 .L' y �' a3 �rf6Rt -l! 1f41W a}Rs� •.: { „ f ° \+ f �fM1X�T .T�✓LA Yy Ni .i.•Sc"I�l? ♦ �'�T.�•�l'..i:\Y +♦n 1x ITY .~ J_�:.. : a�$M" T � . Canvas Mountain A Subdivision in Washington County Arkansas ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND CONSENT TO TANDEM LOT SPLIT That I, James E. Lindsey, as subdivider of all the lots in Canvas Mountain Subdivision in Washington County Arkansas, do hereby acknowledge and consent to the Tandem Lot Split (re -subdivision) submitted by James I. Mayes and Linda Broyles Mayes as reflected ' on the attached survey which is marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein. This acknowledgment and consent is -given pursuant to paragraph 5 of the Protective Covenants of Canvas Mountain, a subdivision in Washington County Arkansas and filed for record on February 15, 1979 with the Washington County Circuit Clerk at Book 983 page 746. - K, STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON Before me, the d, a Notary Public in and for said County and State on this h1.f day of 2006, personally appeared JAMES E. LINDSEY to me known to. be the iden. 1 persons who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that they executed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein set forth. Given under my hand and seal the day and year last above written. NO OFFICIAL SEAL My Corhmission Expires: KAREN McCOY / NOTARY PUBLIC -ARKANSAS. C'- Ot 17/ MY COMM EXPIRES 01 2012 •I.o Si d .rr To The City of Fayetteville Planning commission, We the under signed. understand that Jim and Linda Mayes are splitting their 3 acre lot in to 2—I % acre lots and we have no objections to it, 0Y rD V ty,�s ML Homeowners nip��a 4"9 D F cnnuws �d . (// CtoJ coo/-(o6yo o+ I co (- I0bt1 I - oo I . REwe60 7a. FS -/9-06 a -n Qjrnas (j . 5%S- 600O 6/SY A S4 ^- %k -oo - OoO (;TI �T 2, Qox�Si t qty oo q otc oot CB �� o�� F^K n Y. To The City of Fayetteville Planning commission, We the under signed understand that Jim and Linda Mayes are splitting their 3 acre lot in to 2 —1 % acre lots and we have no objections to it, Canvas Mt Homeowners -` "`- `tom 57Afl2 1'l �z- /ff (u(Qa f i OO 1 -10353 -OO3 fXo U�, /Lc 4380 (� vn a �,P-�- n/ To the city of Fayetteville Planning commission, I Ralph f. and Marketa L. Burns 520 Robshire Lane Fayetteville, AR 72701 Cell 501-350-2997 We understand that Jim and Linda Mayes are splitting their 3 acre lot into 2---11/2 acre lots and we have no objection to it. ign and Sign and JERRY L CANFIELD, P.A. THOMAS A. DAILY, P.A. WYMAN R. WADE, lit, P.A. DOUGLAS M. CARSON, P.A ROBERT K BRIGGS, P.A. + C. MICHAEL DAILY + CORY W. LOGAN + Also Licensed in Oklahoma September 20, 2006 DAILY & WOODS A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ATTORNEYS AT LAW. Ms. Suzanne Morgan Fayetteville Planning Deparment 113 West Mountain Street • Fayetteville, AR 72701 58 SOUTH 6'a STREET P.O. BOX 1446 FORT SMITH, AR 72902 TELEPHONE (479) 782-0361 FAX (479) 782-6160 516 EAST MILLSAP ROAD, SUITE 200 FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703 TELEPHONE (479) 582-0361 FAX (479) 251-8111 Re: LSP06-2200: Lot Split Mayes, 491 Dear Ms. Morgan: VIA HAND DELIVERY JAMES a WEST Or COUNSEL HARRY P. DAILY (1886-1965) JOHN P. WOODS (1886-1976) JOHN S. DAILY (1912-1987) As we discussed, I represent Mr. and Mrs. Toothaker, who own the property immediately to the West of the proposed lot split. After reviewing the survey of the revised lot split, the plat of Canvas Mountain Subdivision recorded in Book 8, Page 33, and other relevant materials, I note the following objections to the proposed lot split, and incorporate those I previously relayed to the Planning Commission in my letter to you dated August 14, 2006 (attached as Exhibit "A"). Approval of the proposed lot split would be contrary to the Unified Development Code purpose, which is "... to promote an appropriate mix of land uses in an orderly manner; enhance aesthetic quality, moderate street congestion, secure safety from events such as fire, flood, erosion and landslides; prevent overcrowding of land..." "The UDC provides for ... the development of land uses which protect established neighborhoods ... allows compatible infill of established areas ... protects significant environment resources; and makes a livable community." Sec. 150:02. (attached as Exhibit "B") 1 believe the petition signed by many of the landowners (attached as Exhibit "C") in the neighborhood in opposition of the proposed lot split illustrates clearly that approval of the proposed lot split is contrary to the UDC's stated purposes including the protection of established neighborhoods. 2. As proposed, Lot 21-B violates UDC Section 166.08 (F)(1) (attached as Exhibit "D") design standards which require a minimum lot width of 75 feet (for lots within the planning area). Over 300 feet of proposed Lot 21-B is less than 75 feet wide. Also, the same design standard requires a 1.0 foot set back from side Page 2 of 3 boundaries. The proposed driveway appears to violate this set back requirement. 3. The proposed location of the new driveway for Lot 21-B falls within the dedicated 15' utility easement area. In addition, the proposed new driveway encroaches on the northwest corner of proposed Lot 21-A. 4. The resulting two proposed lots are not compatible with the surrounding properties, particularly in size and shape, which is contrary to the to the intent of the developers of the subdivision and owners of the subdivision's lots. 5. The "Certificate of Ownership, Title Dedication" on the final plat recorded in Book 8, Page 33, for Canvas Mountain Subdivision (attached as Exhibit "E"), provides that."we do hereby further certify that the platting as filed on record cannot be changed unless vacated pursuant to applicable local and other law." Clearly the subdivision has not been vacated and any attempt to redefine the platted lots is contrary to the plat as approved by the Fayetteville Planning Commission and Washington County. Thus, absent a vacation of the platted subdivision, the Planning Commission is without jurisdiction to hear, or at least approve, the proposed lot split application. 6. The plat recorded in Book 8, Page 33, contains a "Certification of Approval of Water and Sewer Systems" (attached as Exhibit "G") based on the design of the final plat. This certification of approval does not include the impact on these utilities of the additional proposed lot, and it appears that additional approval from the Arkansas State Board of Health and the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, has not been obtained. 7. The applicant apparently has not obtained a septic system permit for the proposed 1.33 acre lot. 8. The proposed lot split is not permitted by the recorded Protective Covenants for Canvas Mountain Subdivision (attached as Exhibit "H"). A. Paragraph 5 of the Protective Covenants provide that no lot shall be re - subdivided or re -platted without the prior written consent of the subdivider (James E. Lindsey), or his successor. It appears that the applicant has not secured such prior approval of the amended proposed lot split. Even if the applicant has acquired such consent, the final plat dedication described in paragraph 5 above clearly prohibits the proposed lot split without a vacating of the subdivision. B. The applicants' proposed a gravel driveway to Lot 21-B. This is contrary to the paragraph 9 of the Protective Covenants for the subdivision. Even though the Planning Commission does not enforce restrictive covenants, this proposed violation of the Protective Covenants provides another example of how this lot split would be contrary to the uses of the land within the subdivision. C. Paragraph 6 of the Protective Covenants provides that "... nothing shall be Page Page 3 of 3 done or performed ... detrimental to the residential value of any lot in the subdivision." I believe that those landowners who signed the attached petition, and my clients, believe that the proposed lot split is precisely the type of act which will reduce their privacy, devalue their land values and reduce their enjoyment of their property in the subdivision. I previously expressed to you the specific problems my client has experienced with ground water drainage running down from the proposed Lot 21-B into their home. My client has spent over $30,000 for the construction of a retaining wall in an attempt to divert this ground water runoff. They are naturally concerned that further reduction of ground cover and the construction of driveways, sidewalks, etc... will increase the runoff from the proposed Lot 21-B and tax, if not exceed, their retaining wall's capacity to divert groundwater. Finally, it is my understanding that the applicants have purchased land outside of the subdivision and that they intend to relocate. The sole purpose of this proposed lot split is for them to sell both lots individually with the aim of increasing their profits. There is absolutely no"benefit to the City of Fayetteville for approving this lot split. Instead, it will only harm those who have invested in making their homes in Canvas Mountain. Accordingly, on behalf of my clients, I respectfully request that this proposed lot split be denied. Very truly yours, Robert R. Briggs Enclosures cc. Mr. & Ms. Toothaker JERRY L. CANFTEID. P.A. THOMAS A DAILY, PA WYMAN R. WADE. JR., PA DOUGLAS M. CARSON. P.A. ROBERT R- BRIGGS, PA. C. MICHAEL. DAILY + t AIS9 Licensed Mn Oklah4+n4 August 14, 2006 DAILY & WOODS A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABI.RYCOMPANY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 58 SOUTH 6'^ STREET P.O. BOX 1646 FORT $MI TH, AR 72902 TELEPHONE (479) 782-0361 FAX (479) 782-6169 516 EAST MILLSAP ROAD, SUITE 200 FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703 TELEPHONE (479) 5E2 -36I FAX (479) 251A111 JAMES E WEST OF COUNSEL HARRY P. DAILY (1886-1965) JOHN P. WOODS (1866.1976) JOHNS. DAILY (1912-1987) Ms. Suzanne Morgan Via Facsimile Only (479) 575-8202 Planning Commission t 13 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Re: Proposed Lot Split of Lot 21. Canvas Mountain Subdivision Dear Ms. Morgan: I represent the owners of property located downhill from Lot 21 of Canvas Mountain Subdivision. At this point, those individuals wish to remain anonymous. I am aware that other neighbors of the Applicant have signed a petition opposing lot splits in the Canvas Mountain Subdivision. My clients have not signed that petition, but are adamantly opposed to the referenced proposed lot split for the reasons set forth below. My clients' home sits down hill from the proposed new lot. In 2003, the Applicants cleared the trees and undergrowth on the proposed new lot.. This had the effect of creating drainage of rain water issues for the properties down hill from the Applicants' property. The approval of the proposed lot split, and subsequent construction, would clearly worsen the rain water drainage issue with reference to my clients' property because of the additional clearing required to build on the lot, the paving of a driveway, patios, sidewalks, and, of course, the construction of a structure which would repel water. In addition, because this subdivision is not connected to the City's sewer system, run off from a failed septic system would likely run into my clients' property. 2. 1 suspect the neighbors of Lot 21 who signed the referenced petition, moved to Canvas Mountain for the quiet and privacy Canvas Mountain offers with its large wooded lots. The proposed lot split would necessarily reduce those aspects of the 6 'd 9101 oN 4oul A#1Pay uol IEP0 Wd9l:£ 9006 'til '8nV Page 2 subdivision. 3. It is my belief that the proposed lot split is contrary to Fayetteville's ordinances and policy. In particular, the proposed driveway does not meet the required clearances, and the new proposed lot would not satisfy water tap location requirements. In addition, it appears that the proposed new lot is located with in the proposed hillside district. 4. In addition, the proposed lot split is contrary to the covenants for the Canvas Mountain Subdivision. For example, the Applicant has proposed a gravel driveway, which is prohibited by Canvas Mountain Subdivision covenants. 5. Finally, there is no history of lot splits within the subdivision. The approval of such a split would be contrary to the established use of the subdivision and to the use intended by those who platted the subdivision, and obviously, contrary to the uses of those who have invested in purchasing, and improving property in the subdivision. I understand that nearly all of the residents in Canvas Mountain Subdivision oppose this lot split, and are prepared to make their objections before the Planning Commission, should this proposed lot split advance to the Commission level. I can see no benefit to the City of Fayetteville for the approval of this lot split. Instead, approval of this lot split would only serve as a detriment to the owners of Canvas Mountain Subdivision, not only in terms of environmental and ambience loss, but also economic loss to those property owners who would suffer additional economic harm. because of increase drainage issues. Thus, on behalf of my clients, I respectfully request the Committee deny the referenced application for lot split. Very truly y urs, bent R. Briggs aab cc: Client £ 'd 9L0[ °N •DuI A11eay UO1tJE3 WdLV£ 900Z 'til'2"tl We, the undersigned property owners in the Canvas Mountain Subdivision, are opposed to any lot splits in our subdivision. Name r .1 L LL • j Lj , N Address 311 Ni Canv4s,J �i. �pa3 *s4o ( DC Phone No. 4W76 73 yyz/- ISN 57/-/q9/ s2 -f -10043 Lf&uL 'M ri \'' \l/, I S fi I r rl kt ay:_. JV I/. �Ilrf S .L '4: I I\ a a, n 'Ga 1 l IY fn `"W I v •'L a T :a l - /- �5Vil� leri r_ 1 la. n .f t i 9'' .1I a 1 a N �!] 4 1' Iir rw1 I f b 5 A %,_ a 1 / t1 •h •/ F 3 f vl , l' eA i L) .(`.>lA / .1..f a •f ♦ 1l 1 `}<r x , n ;F5 ' � � to i./Y / r:{ NI fn a'$-jJF n.. .`nE II 'te a ��v ` l i a'Fn J -� s • I S / r p'•) \" tMJ v�. Y- JCS!^.1'G_!y ' I' F .♦ >jF/. f, J / -L .s �; a a Ji _ 6�`c I Yi -'! -yr S < ds� 11 ]ia I / f`, r ^ v 8 iii / 1 ♦ N9 aJ. 1 ~ fY a. ws fV 'r y 9r Y♦} Y..M1 raI Y .iy.' 15 k 1-• a .. ` 4 a(�(` J k4 /J I}s Yai Y f L F{F l r r ♦ M1 ff,�I� if.rf' I n '1: , �n7 a -S �. jai J 4•a�' fTYJ ie I ir'�6�fwK('. ' 4'}r.. ISM, Y}IF.113 ^ !ill .. .♦ 41V V).,�11, e .rl" a 1,(4. . �#1 t. -.a .yt n :jI ) Q{ l'LJt . •. a. } � 1YYf LI f .. < h.i i ri '1 Ji ') �r lu'. / - !Yi ♦, r, r. -�Jyr \ .5 a. ! ..V 5 i+ i ♦ �,.. Io I I4' •N Y�I l3 c N'. #i-•'{ 1-a.a vyl l'• a / e + i£•�L i?lfs� e,?,a ) { it „ fT)A �• Yn!♦.<„ / r "�l • 11/L` ( i �iY rF�Y _ r 1 yeLa� . � � 2 r 1"%)E • 'ti v , 61 �" n I�,�y♦S' [ Cfl '.T 1r r �.r fL .(l x n✓a l 1 ^1 qT•' .1/ Nii • -i YFa f':♦F�. i „i ay ar � . YnAr` •^ i f ` r I , y�e ` 1 1 i• 5I ` -! {{ P r a t0-al'r 'lvJi yr x'a Jf l ] a _ �a( J 1 S +. 3 \�iar RI l 1 r:&tl ..a'[ a Yl 'i 1"k t .� 111•"i. Y[t -l7_ 1 dAy I • w " '�:.-�ua y fl ,S 1btvy' �.,~vL` `V1- J .}I �`. .� i v. 'fib �I{.♦p u.� awiAu r.-Ae la�r1 e5iN%' J l m V1r^�GI�a ] a far. rL I - . saY tr_ r 5. .: 115 �1 I:; ry' t r- �y✓- P' ` t LrrJ + x 6: �Y/r . )'r/"i ", • 1li .a i ,wi jr '.. ` ��• n' ! I �\ i +s'%i J Ali ty..`in� ��ef ♦I 'F£' /,�1 F �v,,af 1T_ Ly _ 1♦ ..E!� /l*• ^�' 6 /t4 jA ✓"', tJ )l , , ;.�1{ iasv. 'a ail ` ♦ =S r )F.ilvg�y�' rvr 3{ i K �f fll ,4a,y, - 1 1 niY "i`.... �$ aY'��J'CA �I'u'%�4 ]is Fs^�4Y�a:i.t!!t ` f^A,+.L \I -'. ..�-.=1 �'r:•;+'1. - r-a9vr '•iy¢ }H ti 41 ip . k ., . }. v'� 143. y l • 4RJ � Jfr IILNI//r/4. 1. 4 .ii 1 �y ` 1 r-'•,Ni{I;%/s7/. YkgH�a ; .r�- v s' a_ / •1 l r r e \y♦� jw .+r °S:'{!.e x `j+-iiLirl.,.x �rf i'k iyfY'yJt '4 tw :4� IY VI.li F�'1.�.: 4y'iO r f i1.- -J w I _i f ,r ki Ph: I±? +� .I�VhIJ +".Cvvi � 'e ••;-:_ y `c t- i I. Y. rIIY. C {r a iPPi F. 1' yy F � . Mn Subdivision Committees August 17, 2006 Page .22 LSP 06-2200: Lot Split (MAYES, 491): Submitted by BLEW, BATES , & ASSOCIATES for property located at 445 N. CANVAS ROAD. The property is in the Planning Area and contains approximately 3.11 acres. The request is to divide the subject property into two tracts of 1.61 and 1.50 acres, the smaller of which being a tandem lot. Anthes: Our fifth item today is Lot Split 06-2200 for Mayes. Would the applicant come forward, and may we have the staff report? Morgan: This subject property is Lot 21 of the Canvas Mountain Subdivision. It's located west of ... excuse me, east of Starr Drive, north of Wyman Road. The subdivision is located in the Planning Area, and although portions of this property are shown in the maps attached to the staff report as being. located in the Hillside/Hilltop Overlay District, these regulations cannot be enforced in this Planning Area. The property is developed for a single- family home, as well as a pool and accessory structures to that home. The applicant requests to subdivide the lot for sale for a single-family development. The proposed property is ... the proposed lot is 1.5 acres of the overall 3.11 -acre property located in the rear of the tract. As this. property will not have any frontage onto a street ... a public street, the applicant requests a waiver of the 75 -foot lot width requirement. The applicant has proposed a 30 -foot access easement to ... for ... to serve as access to that property. There . is an existing driveway on that access• easement at this time. Canvas Mountain Subdivision was platted with a variety of lot sizes and shapes. As you can see on the, I believe, sixth page of your agenda, or a couple of pages into your agenda, there is a ... your staff report, there is a map of the overall subdivision. Lot 21 is marked. That is the subject property. And as you can see, the properties to the north and south have a similar lot configuration and size. Based on that, staff finds that the proposed lot is not compatible with the surrounding properties, particularly in size and the manner in which it is being subdivided. We have a received a lot of public comment from the surrounding neighbors. Also included in the staff report is a petition against this lot split signed by 17 homeowners within this surrounding area. We also have a letter from an adjacent ... a representative from an adjacent property owner listing concerns regarding drainage, as well as compatibility and history of lot splits ... that here is no history of lot splits within the subdivision. Also handed out to you this morning was a colored packet of photos supplied by one of the neighbors just addressing that although there were.... have been drainage problems on this property and affecting his property, as it is adjacent prior to the clearing of the back portion of the property, he's afraid that any development of this back portion will just accentuate any ... all of the drainage problems that are existing. Staff is recommending forwarding this lot split to the Planning Subdivision Committee August 17, 2006 Page 23 Commission with a recommendation for denial. Mainly, we do not find in favor of the waiver request for lot width requirements. We have listed six conditions to address and discuss, though, but that is not a condition. I. Anthes: Thank you, Suzanne. Are there further staff comments? Matt? Casey: Just that sewer service is not available. This is in our Planning Area and a public water main will need to be extended to serve the rear lot. That's all I have. Anthes: Okay. Sarah? Patterson: (Shakes her head negatively.) Anthes: Introduce yourself and give us your presentation. Bunch: I'm Bryan Bunch with Blew, Bates & Associates, representing Ms. Mayes. They want to split off the back half of their lot because it's just ... you can see how long it is, and it's too much for them to try to take care of, and plus it would make it, you know, more marketable. They have a. building site back there already that they haven't ... you know, it's just a natural building site, a flat spot before it drops off, so that's just kind of what had got them started thinking about this. We just request that they be allowed to split off the back portion of the 1.5 acres. They've already had septic approval for it, so, you know, it will sustain a residence. I guess I'll address any other comments as they come up. Anthes: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Bunch. Would any member of the public like to• address this Lot Split 06-2200 for Mayes? Please some forward and state your comments. Just use the podium there. Toothaker: Thank you. My name is David Toothaker. I am the resident of 4128 Mural Drive. I am the west side, downhill neighbor of the Mayes. I don't.... know the actual lot number, but it's the 7.1 -acre lot to the west border of their property. The photos you have from Ms. Morgan are compliments of me. Those are photos taken from my property. Let me start by just quickly saying I am very much for what I consider to be responsible development. I'm not here to try to destroy development on Canvas Mountain or anyone else's desire to split lots. My wife and I did not sign the petition in the neighborhood for that reason. Because if you look at it closely, it says it's against all lot splits; we are not. We're simply against this one for some very substantial reasons, not to mention the fact that it seems .... just looking at the plat, which I've had a chance to view with Ms. Morgan, it seems to be incompatible with the neighborhood, but Subdivision Committee August 17, 2006 Page 24 specifically the drainage issues onto my property. Several years back the Mayes cleared the back half of their property. You have photographs of that from my property boundary and theirs to see the adjacent properties are completely wooded, and theirs is on a significant grade. I don't have privy to that information, and I trust you do, but that property was cleared and at that time the drainage problem that did exist on our property was exacerbated by that, forcing my family to invest a significant amount of additional money in the construction of a cantilever retaining wall and drainage system that you have pictures of there from my property. So that. cantilever wall, approximately $33,000.00 of my own expense, a great portion of that was due to increased drainage problems that we noticed once that property was cleared. But my concern is very simple. With the addition of ... oh, and I wanted to make a couple of comments about that as well. I understand that 3 acres could be a lot to take care of. Everyone else in the neighborhood takes care ... most of us take care of that or more, and with the clearing I understand that mowing that is certainly a bigger challenge. I sympathize with that. There may be a natural building site in many people's eyes to that piece of property; I've yet to find it, and I live next to it, because of the severe grade. It may be at the top of the property, it may be small, but it would put it very few feet away from the Mayes' current home. So I'd like for you to consider that as well. But specifically, I live with a great concern that putting a roofline and that drainage, putting a septic system in that drainage and putting all the other ...patio and everything that would ... and a gravel ... and an asphalt driveway, which is according to the covenants not be graveled, it's been proposed by them, would definitely create an additional drainage problem onto my property that I've already spent a lot of money to solve, and I just see that as ... this approval of this would cause me to spend a great deal of money dealing with that drainage and problem. That's why I come. Thank you. Anthes: Thank you, Mr. Toothaker. Would any other member of the public like to speak? Good morning. Mayes: Good morning. I'm Linda Mayes. I want to hand you these, too. These are the (inaudible). Anthes: Now, are you the applicant? Mayes: Yes. Bunch: Yes. Subdivision Committee' August 17, 2006 Page 25 Anthes: Oh, okay. If you would please situp here, I'm taking public comment right now for people not in association with the application. Mayes: Okay. Anthes: Would any member of the public ... other member of the public like to address this Lot Split 06-2200 for Mayes? Seeing none, I'll close the public comment section. Did the applicant have additional comments? Mayes: Yes. Anthes: Okay. Mayes: Let me kind of go down this so I'll have it. If you'll look at your plat there ... Anthes: (Motioning to microphone) . You need to move it. It's kind of weird. Thanks. Mayes: Okay. 16 of the 32 lots are an acre and a half, and that's what we're asking to split. The property does drop off the back. It's not that severe. All the houses ... we are on a mountain like this.. Okay. My house is on this side of the mountain. I'm wanting to split the lot off this side of the mountain. The way my realtor was talking, the property prices out in our area have skyrocketed. A lot down the street for 4 acres is going for 170,000. That puts us up in a price range that is almost impossible to get. We don't have that kind of homes. We're not a Savannah or whatever, but anyway, her idea was to split the lot off from the top, 2 -acre -and -a -half lots, which is what 16 of the lots in the neighborhood are, and then we could try to sell our property. We've bought a farm. We are moving.. We've been there 27 years. We've raised our kids there. We love this subdivision. We do not want to harm it in any way. But this would give us.a more marketable piece of property if someone can afford to build by that 3 acres, that's the way we're going to list it, but if they don't want to buy the 3 acres, we have an option that makes our property more marketable at an acre and a half, which is what the realtor said most people want .;. two halves. About an acre and a half is all they want to maintain and can afford this close to town. Now, as far as drainage problems, we've never heard anything about any drainage problems from the Toothakers. He did put in a retaining wall. Where this house ... we would be putting a 50 -foot setback off of our property, which puts it over a hundred yards, the size of a football field, away from my house. It also would be a hundred yards away from his house, the size of a football field. My house is closer to the two adjacent lots. If you'll look on your map Subdivision Committer August 17, 2006 Page 26 here, this green area, my lot is 21. The cul-de-sac is right here. There is an easement into a 200 -acre farm here that could be developed tomorrow with a thousand, five hundred houses on it and they would have access right through our road, which they could, you know, be an acre, half -acre lot. It's already approved for a septic tank. It already has water and it already has electricity. It already has a drive. Nothing on the front road would ... no one would even know it was there. It already has a separate drive with a retaining wall, entryway. Nothing at the front of the road would stop. I spoke to all the neighbors on the top. I did not speak to that side of the mountain because there's only one lot which is ... or two lots, one's not built on, but Mr. Toothaker's lot ... I did contact him and told him what we were doing. The other lots are all an acre and a half. I didn't feel like I needed to speak to them because they have an acre and a lot. I don't know what their complaint would be. You know, theirs is an acre and a half, also. The covenants require for me ... the covenant is ... Number 3 only requires for me to get Jim Lindsey's signature, which I did. I called him. He said he put that covenant in because of the larger lots. He knew it was close to town and that he would approve any lot split that there was because there's anywhere from 3-, 4-, 5-, 6-, and 7 -acre lots up on the top and he knew they would want to be split later. You've already approved a split lot on Lot ... I think I have it written on there ... Lot 4. You approved a split lot of two and a half acres three years ago for J. R. Arnold. There's already a tandem lot in the subdivision. It is Lot 3. And I think that's just about it. Do you have any more questions? We have no homeowner's association. Never have. No one wanted to be. I was the first home on the mountain, tried to startone. Everyone said, "We live out here in the country and we don't want to follow any rules." All the lots in yellow on your plats are people that are out of ... in violation of the covenants for one reason or another. You know, we just feel like that we should have the option to sell off our property and split it and make it more usable to someone. If someone wants the three acres and they want to keep the whole thing together, well, that's the way we're listing it. We won't sell the acre and a. half without the house first selling, and give the person the right for the three acres. But if they want or can't afford, which is a big thing in our area, property, like I said, 170,000 for four acres is a lot of money. Anthes: Well, we're going to have the discussion with the Commissioners and we'll get back with you if we've got questions. Mayes: Okay. Anthes: Hillary, do you have any comments? Subdivision Committee August 17, 2006 Page 27 Harris: Let's see. I want to sort of sort out what we're looking at. The covenants, of course, are nothing that the City enforces, and again, so what I ... I think what we're really looking at today, in terms of the staff findings so far, seems to be ... the major issue here seems to be the zero frontage on a public street, correct? And would you ... I'm sorry, was it Jesse? Whose was this? Morgan: Oh, that was mine. Harris: Suzanne. I'm sorry, Suzanne. Zero frontage, that was the problem, and it's not compatible with surrounding area? Morgan: Yes, that was our finding. Hams: Okay. Do you mind just elaborating on that a bit more? Morgan: Certainly. With any lot split, and of course the Planning Area does not have zoning, but we do have a requirement that every lot have 75 feet of frontage on a public street, and if it is less than that, we do evaluate it in terms of compatibility. It'.s helpful to think of the things that we review with tandem lot conditional use permits in the City, those types of findings ... adequate access, etcetera. Certainly this applicant is providing access back to the property; however, the lot:itself will not have frontage. And in reviewing the overall subdivision and the lots to the north and south of this, they are all similar shape, sizes. Most often in the Planning Area, we look at subdivision of lots that are not within an overall subdivision, but just parts of lots that have been split out and subdivided over time. So in this area there is a standard size and ... of the lots, because of how ... in the manner of the subdivision. And so in review of just this proposal, we did not find that a house on a lot in the rear of this property would be compatible with the surrounding 3 -acre -plus lots to the north and south. Harris: Thank you.for that. Anthes: Normally with a tandem lot we do see a dedicated access, that it would have a tail that would belong to that lot and then a different piece of property, so I am troubled by the zero frontage and would follow staff's recommendation on that. I do have a question. This cul-de-sac that is at the end of this road, is this actually a stub -out to the north, and this would be a road that could be constructed in the future? Morgan: It appears that there is an easement to the north. I am not sure that that is dedicated right-of-way or if the lot lines actually go ... or if it is an Subdivision Committee. August 17, 2006 Page 28 easement, and it would have to be dedicated for right-of-way in order to construct that street to the north. Anthes: I'm sorry. Do you have anything, Lois? Bryant: Well, currently the only thing that ... one of the main things that troubles me with this right now is the covenant. Anthes: We cannot ... we cannot consider the protective covenants, so ... Bryant: Well, that's ... Anthes: That's an internal ... Bryant: Internal to them. Anthes: ... to them, uh-huh. Bryant: And the other that did trouble me, that when I did go out and look at this it looks more like it just. kind of dead ends out instead of an actual cul-de- sac. And. this. driveway does ... this asphalt driveway on the side here runs all the wayup the side of the hill? Bunch: To the back Bryant: To the back? Mayes: It runs all the way to the property, yes. Bryant: If this were split, would this remain ... Motion: Anthes: I think this one's pretty complicated and the whole Planning Commission needs to see it. I'm going to take staff's recommendation and move that we forward Lot Split 06-2200 to the full Planning Commission with a recommendation for denial. Bryant: I'll second. Harris: I concur. Anthes: Okay. We'll see you in a couple of weeks. Subdivision Committe,. August 17, 2006 Page 29 Mayes: Thank you. Do you want to keep those? Anthes: If you would like, I'm going to give them to staff. Is that all right? Mayes: That would be great. (At this point Hillary Harris leaves the meeting.) II L<4.U• I I '1 10 III 10 • I CANVAS -MOUNTAIN 1 ci II ,I } O o I! 0.11. • tIMtKT } o C4 .N(t cs C*S(YCui y(hci 'ffi C Z NC W ,MOV< SCE WIC 4 N[ Id.Tlw ,• 'cc'ssihjlilie •t CY KC14,TIW-Ria „•I C • 51'41- I 4 Iii ['°.'S______.J I-------_ S:Ae hLl TT3.J •g,, O ^ II Y w f 11 S.L I 1= i 1 ` • + _ (23 i w SOLD 22 <W J Gu-i G3 Soso r • I n --- 23 4 5 ; © tJ2 SOLD ..... «.: r i •• f 3 f r r• �V4-t•{�r-t vi • a 1 f I 0 1 Gs •1 O L.11 a •w sOLD I gEat. 1)^y ♦ 1 ' ( - PwT 7t.3 ci !r. _ •• _ • o• P Ne ]]G-st I ]50.11 oI z ' = -- S ,y'i I a 1.33 I 8 a20 Ft g Fa I g SOLD .Y.a a 1 1 Y - -- 3e;_Sp`i 4 _.ioK`. .- - - 2lilalr IG«n•l.7i' - =n5NMI•)e'or'v 350. -. ----- •Y) /� C CGST�-w...-E,4-$q._-7i.�Ei'%�«4'S.�"`��'�. _.•... ..-�� (.44 a • -�� p. fi• !a 1 .i ] ,.y-1Ca<a�,rw M •..[ w «av (^ .Ozlh on'—'My7•A a•.a • , �^ , )e W ACS [<M1CSS O VIOIT- s;�lo� yo nl.]F #----__ _- a<r.]a ' �. 4u1CAST i. •�' iv lWltt [4S} . Yaau[Ns • EAST €31.32 YJP 'a;:•� IFS . P[W.NYN . st cwwa A [2 •. ♦♦..G (6 j• scc 1••Nf+e-ft4w .. oV+.MYw�-�++ KGIO•il<,YPLlF PPTCi ttfCPCIRC sot's A RO 24ILMe3 • (<� 4 I • S.L K••• '4♦V4 XT ""d $MR ONY[ APL SY cur 3i• < �ai,y< �. 5 OF YCST N,er[OTT Utl[. ^ . ` '. 4.sL �•, - ♦: �� -- St- - - O<Tu Lwss Nouurt Sat •• ti4flCt4l OF•<YT .z.• 4013' 1. ≥, c35,1a L}I.•A «L•L•<.1bw !OY aJ-tYn' 11 SOLD ' 61 r,..,t sa]ai[ 3]o•uY s I 0 [IY 13Y0KCi1N6 C tt w✓+Nw< L«I }_ . I F ' r / !, ( 1 1: <NIwN LN.t1 �J \ O O L 11 2 3 n 0at•d•a O ..3e-tsrt• <Y•.w•Y uun }.M a<M ^ LAG tan }.f.uo II t vtaw'rN. to - II II G 11 } 1 cur 3F - sALSTrFLyI EE YN)s EASE I _ . i� -._=__- r .` a 4• la 0 Daly` ♦` .,<, ,Jr -- <• - 1 II r 1 yp• • --eCYCt/1 EAST 1)4).)9 WN •ti••,•w_•.-Y••••t• LSP06-2200 MAYES S Close Up View fyr a n n y SUBJECT PROPERTY • ... H Y • r 1 , 1 I IY - Y 2 .a OI J 8 's 9� F I 1_ p G...r.Fa . , 1. • � Y. I: ) n' .w r`/tN PA"• Overview Legend y0000 Overlay Disoict — FLO0DWAY -- 500 YEAR ©000$ — 100 YEAR --- LIMB OF STUDY _ _ _ BaseUne Profile O Fayetteville Omside City LSP06-2200 W vectorGDB.Foolpnnt2004 ® Mlside�Iiftep Overlay District 0 75 150 300 450 600 Feel ' JERRY L. CANFIELD, P.A. THOMAS A. DAILY, P.A. WYMAN R. WADE, JR., PA. DOUGLAS M. CARSON, P.A. ROBERT R. BRIGGS, P.A. C. MICHAEL DAILY + +Also Licensed in Oklahoma October 20, 2006 City of Fayetteville City Council c/o City Clerk 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 DAILY & WOODS A PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 58 SOUTH 6"' STREET P.O. BOX 1446 FORT SMITH, AR 72902 TELEPHONE (479) 782-0361 FAX (479) 782-6160 516 EAST MILLSAP ROAD, SUITE 200 FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703 TELEPHONE (479) 582-0361 FAX (479) 25I-8111 JAMES E. WEST OF COUNSEL HARRY P. DAILY (1886-1965) JOHN P. WOODS (1886-1976) JOHN S. DAILY (1912-1987) Re: LPS 06-2200 (Mayes) / Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Proposed Lot Split Dear Council Members: I represent Mr. & Mrs. David Toothaker, who own the property immediately West of the Applicants of the denied lot split application. Please consider this letter to be in response to and in opposition of the appeal of the Planning Commission's 8 - 0 decision to deny the proposed lot split. On September 29, 2006, the Applicants submitted their appeal letter to the Council. In that letter, the Applicants alleged what they believed to be the basis for the Council's overturning of the unanimous vote of the Planning Commission. I submit to the Council that the allegations by the Applicants are unfounded. Even if true, those allegations would not provide a rational basis for the Council to overturn -the Planning Commission's 8 - 0 vote denying the application. Immediately below, I have commented on the Applicants' unfounded allegations. "We felt that the Commission made their decision on incorrect information that 3 of my neighbors gave." I am personally familiar with the facts of the application and was present for the comments given by the three (3) neighbors referenced in the Applicants' appeal letter. Those neighbors did not provide the Planning Commission with any incorrect information. Moreover, the Applicants have not detailed any ����p��® information which they believe was incorrectly provided to the Planning Commission. OCT 2 .) 2006 GUY OF FAYETTEVILLE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Page 2 2. "We also believe the Commission made an emotional decision instead of a decision based on the facts." As I mentioned, I attended the Planning Commission meeting and note that the Planning Commissioners, Planning Staff, and various public speakers discussed the facts of the application in great detail. The Planning Commissioners' comments were limited to a careful and professional discussion of the merits of the application. The record is replete with facts for and against the application, and by judging by the extent of the Planning Commissioners' discussion of the application, it is quite clear that the Commission thoroughly considered all relevant facts in making its 8 - 0 vote against the Application. 3. "We are legal in all aspects of a tandem lot...we are legal with the City's requirement for a lot split for a tandem lot." This allegation is simply not true. I would point the Council's attention to my September 20, 2006 letter to Ms. Susan Morgan, Fayetteville Planning Department, which details how the proposed lot split was contrary to several requirements. Moreover, Ms. Morgan's memo to the Fayetteville Planning Commission dated September 20, 2006 in the paragraph titled "Lot With Requirements" further details how the Proposed Lot Split was contrary to legal requirements. 4. "We have approval of 19 homeowners at Canvas Mountain" I assume the Applicants were referring to the petition submitted by them which contained the headings "We the under signed understand that Jim and Linda Mayes are splitting their three (3) acre lot in to #2- - -1 1/2 acre lot and we have no objections to it". Of those that signed that Petition, the owners indicated by petition • numbers 3, 4, 5, 14, 16 and 19 do not own property within the platted Canvas Mountain Subdivision. The petition number 10 was signed by an owner who sold their property 10 days after signing the petition and no longer lives in Canvas Mountain Subdivision. Petition numbers 12 and 15 were signed by owners of property who do not reside in Canvas Mountain Subdivision. Finally, Petition number 17 was signed by Fred Shefte with Bank of Fayetteville for John Hein. John Hein was unaware that Fred Shefte signed this Petition on his behalf and did not authorize the same. In fact, Mr. Hein opposes the proposed lot split. I have attached a copy of an email transmission from Mr. Hein I received i relative to this issue. A petition in opposition of the Applicants' lot split was also submitted to the Planning Commission. In addition to those who signed the petition opposing the proposed lot split, the owners of the three (3) adjacent lots to the proposed lot split spoke before the Planning Commission in opposition to the proposed lot split. No Canvas Mountain Subdivision owners, save the Applicants, spoke at the Planning Commission meeting in favor of the application. The proposed lot split simply failed to meet the City's adopted Unified Development Code as well as several other requirements. Moreover, the proposed lot split was opposed by those neighbors who would be affected by the lot split. The Planning Staff recognized that the . proposed lot split, and the revised proposed lot split should be denied. The Planning Commission agreed with the Staffs' recommendation in its well considered 8 - 0 vote to deny the application. There simply is no rational basis to overturn the Planning Commission's vote. Accordingly, I respectively request that the City Council affirm the Planning Commission's vote to deny the application LSP 06-2200. Very truly ours, Robert R. Briggs aab cc: Client Dear City Council, I, Mike Carfagno Jr., my wife Melody Carfagno and my two children ages 16 and 13 have lived at 463 N. Canvas Rd. Lot 22, for 14 years. We fell in love with the serenity of the 3.5 wooded lots, which provided privacy. It was like being in the country, but yet just five minutes from town. We love that we have so much property and not a "postage stamp size yard." We immensely take pride that we built our home ourselves. We are completely confused on how or why a lot split in our plated subdivision is even a possibility. The access to the proposed lot split in the back, of Lot 21, would only be accessible by a 30 -foot alley, which 15 ft is a utility easement. Is it not required to be 75 feet of lot frontage to the main road? This would create a flag lot; there are no flag lots in Canvas Mtn subdivision at this time. We feel this type of lot split would jeopardize the value of our property. If this lot split was to be approved, would it allow all Canvas Mtn lots to become flag lots? We are also very concerned with the water pressure at our homes; the main water line is only 2" in diameter to service our homes. Since we live at the end of the street, on top of a mountain, and regularly already experience low water pressure. If additional homes were built what would happen? The proposed house site would be located directly in our backyard view. The Mayes have never contacted us about the lot split. We only can assume they are asking for it due to financial reasons. We also have heard they plan to sell their current home and move to the Huntsville area where they are currently building a home. So they would be leaving the subdivision with no concern to the rest of the property owners. Attached will be signatures of seventeen current residents of Canvas Mtn subdivision opposing the lot split. I would also like to address and correct some of the comments made by Linda Mayes at the Planning Board meeting on September 25. We do not own or run a plumbing company out of our home. Mike Jr., is only an employee of Carfagno Enterprise Inc. and brings home his employee vehicle. There is no traffic caused by driving to and from work: I heard her say "We built our home on the front half of the property with intensions to split the lot in the future." If this is true, why did they build their swimming pool in the 'access roadway? And why did they remove all the trees from the lot when trees add value to the property, it would seem that building a house site woudl ECE;VEO OCT 13 2006 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE CITY CLERICS OFFICE more practical. My father started the plumbing business 30 years ago in 1976; we have been plumbing new residential homes and commercial buildings in Northwest Arkansas. I am not apposed to governed growth, I believe that I'm honest, hard working, and I take a lot of pride in what I do. Or the family business would not still be in business for all these years. We can only hope the city of Fayetteville will follow the rules and regulations on lots splits, which would make this lot split impossible. Thank you for your time and consideration. Mike & Melody Carfagno Jr. We, the undersigned property owners in the Canvas Mountain Subdivision, are opposed to any lot splits in our subdivision. Name Address Phone No. 1• 4 l is 'TIlt L1 £j £73 S E' 'tn UQ5 it L7�D 07PJ 3 I /k Camvg3 col X0 4a7 10 E nr�v_�=jam `ioa3 t�_"Y tr a t C. s'' I--(.095 ?3 CG,r,v4.s S1/23s'j Fayetteville City Council Members C/O Fayetteville City Clerk October 12, 2006 Dear Fayetteville City Council Members, RE: Agenda item C-5: Mayes Lot Split Appeal - 10/17/06 City Council Meeting I am writing to you to register My wife and I, along with our two daughters, are the proud owners and residents of 4128 East Mural Drive — Lot #6 in the Canvas Mountain Subdivision. We are the west side neighbors of Jim and Linda Mayes. We purchased our home in March 2000 because of the remote, wooded setting and the beauty and serenity of the neighborhood. Since that time we have invested significantly in our home, not only for our enjoyment but also to bring our property up to the standards of the community — you have pictures in the Planning Commission records of the asphalt driveway we put in as an example of this investment. Let me be very clear — my wife and I are in favor of. responsible development. We are not opposed to all development on Canvas Mountain. For this reason, my wife and I did not sign the petition signed by 17 or so of our neighbors in opposition of the Mayes lot split because that petition states opposition to all lot splits in the subdivision and we do not share that opinion. In spring 2003 the Mayes chose to clear the back half of their property (proposed lot 21-B). This portion of their land is a very steep grade and is considered to be in the Hillside Hilltop Overlay District, although this is not active outside the city limits. Upon seeing a bulldozer on this steep portion of their land knocking down everything, we approached them and asked them to not scalp the land... fearing it would make our existing drainage problems even worse... and it did. - Once the Mayes' cleared (scalped) their property uphill of our property, our drainage problem became considerably worse. In the planning commission packet you have 3 pictures taken from the western boundary of the Mays property looking uphill in which you can see the dramatic clearing of the land — note the stark difference between this scalped hillside as compared to the wooded lots to the north and south. That scalped hillside is located just above my property (adjacent to me on the east side) With the increased drainage problems we began construction of our retaining wall and water management system on September 16, 2004 after months of planning and review. Pictures of that construction are also in your packet. As you can see in the pictures, this was not the installation of a few landscaping blocks but rather it is an engineered cantilever wall made of piers and reinforced concrete with an extensive water management system. Total cost of the retaining wall is as follows. Backhoe and Digging (Pense) $4,815 Wall construction (Foundation Specialties) $25,121 Fencing (Goshen Fence) $970 Grass to hold the soil (Razorback Sod) $ 1 GRAND TOTAL 32 6806 RECEIVED OCT 13 2006 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE The retaining wall and extensive water management system is a very large expense we were forced to incur to protect our investment in our home. We are very concerned that the further reduction of ground cover and surface soil (house. driveway, sidewalks, roof -line) on this lot will significantly increase the already substantial runoff... if not in fact exceed our retaining wall's capacity to handle the groundwater. We have invested significantly in our home and we are simply trying to protect our investment from a very real and demonstrated threat. My wife and I respectfully request that you affirm the Planning Commission's ruling denying this proposed lot split We thank you for your time and for your service to our community. Sincerely, i � I CHARLES L. STUTTE Attorney at Law Post Office Drawer1048 206 North College Avenue Fayetteville, Arkansas 72702-1048 Arkansas Bar #83174 CLStutte@aol.com Oklahoma Bar #10486 November 3, 2006 Fayetteville City Council c/o Ms. Sondra Smith, City Clerk 113 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Tel: (479) 444-6999 Fax: (479) 444-9666 Re: LPS 06-2200(Mayes) / Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Proposed Lot Split Dear Council Members: I represent Jim and Linda Mayes, who have asked that I respond to the arguments advanced by Mr. Robert Briggs in his correspondence to the Commission and Council, dated August 14, September 20, and October 20, 2006. Mr. Briggs is the attorney for Mr. & Mrs. Toothaker, who own property immediately to the West of the proposed lot spit. I would also like to respond to the Planning Staff recommendation Memo dated September 27, 2006. It is my hope that I may somehow clarify what is before the Council for consideration and eliminate some of the confusion. The Mayes desire to subdivide the 3.11 acre property into two lots of approximately 1.50 acres each. The property is outside the city limits of Fayetteville, but is within the City's planning area. Because the Mayes' have withdrawn their request for the flag lot configuration addressed previously by the Planning Commission, the majority of the objections advanced by Mr. Briggs and the Planning Commission are now moot. The tandum lot proposal being submitted to the Council for consideration is a rather simple and straightforward request. Inspection of the subject property, as well as the surrounding neighborhood should allay any fear that the proposed lot split would adversely affect adjoining property or their values. Though adjoining landowners have voiced opposition to the requested lot split, there has been absolutely no evidence presented that would support a claim that property values would be significantly reduced. At the time the Mayes purchased their property it was contemplated that it could later be subdivided, as evidenced by the letter submitted by the original subdivider, Mr. Lindsey. Because the physical and legal requirements necessary to comply with the tandum lot split provisions have been met, I would respectfully submit that the City Council should approve the application for lot split proposed by Jim and Linda Mayes. Sincerely, Charles L. Stutte RECEI` IED CLS/cs GV V G cc: Jim & Linda Mayes NOV 0 32006 CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE CITY CLERKS OFFICE From: James Jernigan <jimjer@sbcglobal.net> To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 11/6/2006 1:00 PM Subject: Mayes lot split, Canvas Mountain subdivision To: Ms. Sondra Smith Will you please copy this letter to each of the Fayetteville City Council members for the meeting tomorrow night(? Nov)? And will you please acknowledge receipt of this message? Thank you, Jim Jernigan To: Fayetteville City Council •I own lots one and two in Block two of the Canvas Mountain subdivision in Fayetteville. I purchased these lots from the developer in 1994, and am currently making preparations to build a home for my family on lot two. I have talked with Linda Mayes about her desire to split the Mayes' lot of just over three acres into two lots of one and one half acres each. The Mayes family then plans to sell both lots, one with their current home. I am aware that the increase in land values in our area has outstripped that for existing homescreating a situation which makes it more difficult to realize the full market value of a lot when selling it with an existing home. This is the problem facing the Mayes, and indeed is the problem of anyone in our subdivision who wants to sell his or her property with a structure on it. With nearly half the lots in Canvas Mountain sized near one and one half acres, I have no objection to creating two more. My own property lies adjacent to a lot of that size, and I don't feel that creating more would threaten the value of my property. I do feel that it is incumbent upon anyone wishing to make a lot split to provide assurance that the split allows for adequate access, does not increase the burden of water drainage on neighbors, does not create a nuisance or hardship for neighbors, and does not negatively impact the value of property of others within the subdivision. If these conditions are met, I have no objection to the Mayes' lot split. Sincerely, James P. Jernigan POB 3338, Fayetteville, AR 72702 (1176%2O06) City Clerk Mayes lot split, Canvas Mountain subdivision Pag2 1 From: James Jernigan <jimjer@sbcglobal.net> To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 11/6/2006 1:00 PM Subject: Mayes lot split, Canvas Mountain subdivision To: Ms. Sondra Smith - Will you please copy this letter to each of the Fayetteville City Council members for the meeting tomorrow night(? Nov)? And will you please acknowledge receipt of this message? Thank you, Jim Jernigan To: Fayetteville City Council I own lots one and two in Block two of the. Canvas Mountain subdivision in Fayetteville. I purchased these lots from the developer in 1994, and am currently making preparations to build a home for my family on lot two. I have talked with Linda Mayes about her desire to split the Mayes' lot of just over three acres into two lots of one and one half acres each. The Mayes family then plans to sell both lots, one with their current home. I am aware that the increase in land values in our area has outstripped that for existing homes, creating a situation which makes it more difficult to realize the full market value of a lot when selling it with an existing home. This is the problem facing the Mayes, and indeed is the problem of anyone in our subdivision who wants to sell his or her property with a structure on it. With nearly half the lots in Canvas Mountain sized near one and one half acres, I have no objection to creating two more. My own property lies adjacent to a lot of that size, and I don't feel that creating more would threaten the value of my property. I do feel that it is incumbent upon anyone wishing to make a lot split to provide assurance that the split allows for adequate access, does not increase the burden of water drainage on neighbors, does not create a nuisance or hardship for neighbors, and does not negatively impact the value of property of others within the subdivision. If these conditions are met, I have no objection to the Mayes' lot split. Sincerely, James P. Jernigan POB 3338, Fayetteville, AR 72702 _(11/6/2006) Sondra sthithTFa:Meei lot split, Canvas Mountain subdivision _,T Page 11 7 a:. From: City Clerk To: Aldermen Date: 11/6/2006 412 PM Subject: Fwd: Mayes lot split, Canvas Mountain subdivision Please see the following email. Thanks City of Fayetteville City Clerk's Office 113 W. Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 479-575-8323 >>> James Jernigan <tim ier(asbcolobal.net> 11/6/2006 12:53 PM >>> To: Ms. Sondra Smith Will you please copy this letter to each of the Fayetteville City Council members for the meeting tomorrow night(7 Nov)? And will you please acknowledge receipt of this message? Thank you, Jim Jernigan To: Fayetteville City Council I own lots one and two in Block two of the Canvas Mountain subdivision in Fayetteville. I purchased these lots from the developer in 1994, and am currently making preparations to build a home for my family on lot two. I have talked with Linda Mayes about her desire to split the Mayes' lot of just over three acres into two lots of one and one half acres each. The Mayes family then plans to sell both lots, one with their current home. I am aware that the increase in land values in our area has outstripped that for existing homes, creating a situation which makes it more difficult to realize the full market value of a lot when selling it with an existing home. This is the problem facing the Mayes, and indeed is the problem of anyone in our subdivision who wants to sell his or her property with a structure on It. With nearly half the lots in Canvas Mountain sized near one and one half acres, I have no objection to creating two more. My own property lies adjacent to a lot of that size, and I don't feel that creating more would threaten the value of my property. I do feel that it is incumbent upon anyone wishing to make a lot split to provide assurance that the split allows for adequate access, does not increase the burden of water drainage on neighbors, does not create a nuisance or hardship for neighbors, and does not negatively impact the value of property of others within the subdivision. If these conditions are met, I have no objection to the Mayes' lot split. Sincerely, James P. Jernigan POB 3338, Fayetteville, AR 72702 (11/6/2006) Sondra Smith - Fwd. Mayes lof split _ _ '� Page 1 From: City Clerk To: Aldermen Date: 11/6/2006 4:24 PM Subject: Fwd: Mayes lot split City of Fayetteville City Clerk's Office 113 W. Mountain Fayetteville, AR 72701 479-575-8323 >>> "Ruston Cole" <ruston1@cox.net> 11/5/2006 8:22 PM >>> Dear Ms. Smith, This e-mail is to inform you of our support for the lot split request tendered by Jim and Linda Mayes. There is no reason the lot should not be permitted due to previous splits approved in the neighborhood. There are tandem lots in the Canvas Mountain area with many of the owners receiving easements across the owners drive way. For example, our property crosses part of the road going to the south end of the Canvas Mountain area. Those homeowners drive back and forth every day. We have never noticed any particular increase in vehicle traffic. Additionally we understand the approval for a lot split has already been approved by the developer Mr. Lindsey as stated in the covenants for this subdivision. We do approve of the lot split since the request adheres to the covenant rules. If you have any questions please feel free to e-mail us, Respectfully, Ruston and Mara Cole 4201 East Canvas Road Fayetteville, AR 72701 (11/7/2006) City Clerk - Attri: City Council Members RETMayes Lot Split Page 1 From: "Jack Otten" <razrbakfan@gmail.com> To: <cityclerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 11/6/2006 10:04 PM Subject: Attn: City Council Members RE: Mayes Lot Split CC: <mayesji@msn.com> To Whom It May Concern: My name is Jack Otten and my wife (Lesa) and I live on Canvas Mountain, three lots down from Jim and Linda Mayes. It is our understanding that the Mayes wish to split their three acre lot. We also have a three acre lot and have no objection to their request for the lot split. Thank you for your consideration, Jack and Lesa Otten 4190 E. Canvas Rd. Fayetteville, AR 72701 479.521.6449 (11/3/2006) City Clerk_. Mayes split — __ _ �� _ T_ T— Page lii From: "Richard Keen" <richnlor@hotmail.com> To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 11/2/2006 8:25 PM Subject: Mayes split CC: <mayesji@msn.com> City council members, This e-mail is concerning the proposed lot split by Jimmy and Linda Mayes on Canvas Mt. Rd. Jimmy and Linda have had an existing drive accessing the 1.5 acres on the backside of their property for several years. I understand they are trying to make their house and property more marketable by splitting off the 1.5 acres on the backside of the lot. Several of the lots in this subdivision are 1.5 acres, so the splitting of the land would not be of much consequence cosmetically. I am not sure of the legal ramifications. I understand that, given the opportunity, Jim and Linda will sell the house and property in total, if a buyer should want the extra 1.5 acres. My name is Richard Keen, I live on Brushstroke Ln., and I approve of the split. Thank you Find a local pizza place, music store, museum and more... then map the best route! http://Iocal.live.com?FORM=MGA001 (1 1 /312 0 0 6) City Clerk - Mayes lot split �_ ____�_ �_ T Page 1a From: <saIcar@coxintemet,com> To: <city_clerk@ci:fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 11/2/2006 2:51 PM Subject: Mayes lot split Dear Ms. Smith, Per our phone conversation of November 2, 2006, I want to confirm that I support the Mayes lot split. My property is near the Mayes property, and I see no reason why this split would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Thank you for your time S. A. Carter 1 I V • Jim and Linda Mayes Mayes tandem lot split Dear Council Members, We have been trying to get our lot split through the city since July. I would like to give you some background on our situation. We bought our lot in 1978 from Jim Lindsey and at that time he told us that the covenants provided for lot splits if we should ever wish to do so. We have lived on Canvas Mt. since 1979.We raised our family here and love Canvas Mt. We would never want to do anything to compromise the value of the property. Our kids are almost grown and we have bought a farm in Huntsville and plan to retire there. Mary Bassett Broyles and Hank Broyles my brother are going to help us sell our property when we get ready to list it. We have noticed in the last year that the price of property has skyrocket in our area. The 4 -acre lot down the street just sold for 164,000.00. We also know that the property in our subdivision with homes on them are not selling well due to the high price of land and that the homes don't meet those high prices. The house to the south of us took over 18months to sell. The rest of the houses in the subdivision have been on the market a long time and keep dropping their prices, as did the house to the south of us. That's the only way they have been able to sell them. Hank and Mary advised us that the best way to market our property was to split off the backside of our lot because we already have some utilities, a separate drive and entryway. The main reason we want to split our lot is because it is 720ft long. The back I 1/2acres is on the other side of the mountain from our • home and is really of no use to our home. We can't see any of it. It does not protect us from our neighbors to the north or south. Those houses are very close but would not be close to a house on the back 11/2acre. Mr. Toothtaker's house at the back of our lot would be over the length of a football field from where someone would want to build a house. Mr. Toothtaker wanted to buy the tandem lot but we did not want to sell it that way. Our intent is to split the lot and try to sell it all together but if someone can't afford to buy • all of it, we would have the option to sell the house with I 1/2acres and then sell the 11/2 acres separately. This would give us options to move our property. It's not about trying to make a dollar as one of the neighbors said .We will make about the same amount of money. It's about being marketable and being able to move our property in a reasonable amount of time. We feel that we are within our rights as a property owner and because the covenants provide for it. in June I met with Andrew at the city planning office. I showed him everything that we wanted to do. I brought the covenants, pictures and the plat. I asked him if this was possible before we spend all this money. He told me that it would be a tandem lot and that they do those all the time but that I should have a perk test done first to make sure a septic system would be approved. So we hired a Washington County septic inspector and it was approved. (See enclosed) We then hired Blew and Assoc. to do the survey and they got the utilities approved by the city and then we went to the subdivision meeting. Blew &Assoc. told me that we meet the city codes for a tandem lot split and because we are not in the city we were not required to get a conditional use permit. They said it should pass with no problems. When we get to the meeting, unknown to both of us, Suzanne Morgan says she recommends denial of the lot split and that she has pictures and complaints from my neighbor down the hill. We were shock! One that she allow Mr. '.Toothtaker to come in and say that my lot was not suitable to build on and that we had caused water damage to his property. We didn't even know if the pictures that he gave her were even pictures of my lot! We feel the ethical thing for Suzanne to have done was to contact either Blew&Assoc. or myself and to hear both sides of the story before she made her decision. At the least, let me tell her if the pictures he provided were even of my lot. She has never been here. How would she know? When we were clearing our lot 4 years ago, Mr. Toothtaker came over and asked if we would leave a buffer in front of his house. He owns 7 acres below us but his house sits between our lot and lot 20. It is right next to the property lines. He said that he had drainage problems where he uses to live. We told him sure .We left trees and under brush at the bottom of our lot at his request. In 4 years he never I � Y mentioned drainage problems until the subdivision meeting. We know the water does not come from our property. We have a letter (enclosed) from our engineers that states the land slopes away from his house. You will be able see it when you tour on Monday. We all live on the side of a mountain. Everyone on Canvas Mt. has one or more retaining walls. We have them all over our property. It is the only way to have any flat ground. Mr. Toothtaker did not sign the petition against lot splits because he would like to split his 7 acres off at sometime in the future, but does not want us to have the same rights. We felt like we should not have had to go into the planning commission meeting with a denial. We felt that had Suzanne listen to both sides and realized that there are 4 tandem lots on Canvas Mt. and that the city has already split off two other lots. And had she also known that there was an easement through Mr. Carfagno lot dedicated to the city for a street to develop that 200 acres. I brought all this information up at the subdivision meeting and she told the commissioners " she didn't think there was an easement." The easement and one of the tandem lots is printed at the top of our plat. She did not know that because when I asked her why she said that at meeting? She showed me what she had worked with. It was not a plat of the subdivision; it was a map the she pulled up web site. She had not looked at the plat! She did not research our lot split. I told her with that easement they could build houses every I0,000sq. Ft. with a drip septic system. Mr. Carfagno could have 8 house on the north side of his property .. This could happen tomorrow. We don't see that our 2- 11/2 -acre lots on the south side of him as being a problem! Hank and I meet with Jeremy before the Planning Commission meeting and stated all the facts and ask him what we could do to fix this. We said we don't understand why you want the 75ft frontage. He said that they were afraid that the next person might try to split that 11/2 acres off again. Then it would need the 75ft. frontage. We said we would gladly put a restrictive deed for only one single family home on the lot. He made us feel that would make everything all right. We get to the planning commission meeting and Suzanne says that they still deny the lot split but if the commission were to pass it they would want to them to pass the tandem lot split! They wouldn't approve it before and wanted 75 frontage. So we redo everything and now they say they would rather the tandem lot be approved! That totally confused everyone. The planners kept asking what are we approving? Everyone was confused and it went downhill from there. You should see the video. The planners asked Jeremy about the tandem lots and the other lots split on Canvas Mt. He said that he was not sure they were done legally. More confusion! I gave Jeremy all the easement and lot splits file at the courthouse when we met with him .He could and should have looked up all that information before the meeting. I can only go back to 2004 on your web page or I would have done it. I don't feel I should have to confront my neighbors and ask, "did you split your lot legally or illegally." The planners ask him why they were denying this lot split and he said, "We don't split lots in platted subdivision." Where did that come from? That was the first time anyone had mentioned that! Well 1 got on the city's web page after the meeting and looked up the tandem lot splits in platted subdivision. They have passed all that I could find. That's 100%. Blew&Assoc. said they passed one for them just the other day. That is how we have been treated and why we are now before you! Please help us. We are legal in all aspects with the city's tandem lot requirements and with our covenants. It should not be a popularity contest with my neighbors. Since that seems to be the process let me state a few facts. We have a letter from the engineers that states that the drainage problems that Mr. Toothtaker had were not caused by clearing our lot or by development of our lot. Mr. Carfagno states that there are water pressure problems and that there is only a 2 -inch line. Enclosed is a letter from the city's engineering department. It states that the main line is 6 -inch line, not a 2 -inch line. In 27 years we have never had water pressure problems. We have a separate water line to the tandem lot that we can hardly attach a sprinkler to the garden hose because the water pressure pops it off. We have 19 signatures supporting our lot split and 4 that are neutral. Mr. Toothtaker's attorney has stated that some of our signatures were wrong. I got signatures back in Aug. and one piece of property has sold since this long process began. I can't help that .Lot 9, the people have moved and Southwest Energy has purchased their home because, like I said earlier, it has not sold in over a year. I spoke to Fred Shefte; he controls their re -locate property. I told him everything and he signed for Southwest Energy who owns the property. Signatures 3and 4 are homeowners that live in the middle of Canvas Mt. Their home is completely surrounded by Canvas Mt. addition and they live 3 lots from us. Signatures 5,14,16 and 19 live directly across the street from me and were split off the original plat and price list. (See enclosed) Signature 12 lives on lot I in his home which is in Canvas Mt. Subdivision. Signature 15 owns lot 5 on Mural Lane and has every right to his vote. The opposing petition has only 15 signatures instead of the 17 as stated in their letter. Signatures 8,9andl0 count as one because the all live on lotl3. Please pass this lot split because we are legal with the condition set by the city and with our covenants, not on emotion or popularity! Thank -you for your time, Jim and Linda Mayes Taye ARKANSAS 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 ENGINEERING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE Telephone: (479) 575-8206 Fax: (419) 575-8202 November 2, 2006 Mrs. Linda Mayes 445 N. Canvas Road Fayetteville, AR 72701 RE: Water Line Along Canvas Road Mrs. Mayes: According to our records, there is a 6 -inch water line along the western side of Canvas Road adjacent to your property located at Lot 21, Block 1, Canvas Mountain Addition as shown on the attached sketch. If you have any additional questions, you may contact me at 575-8206. CITY OF FAYEETTEVILLE Shannon W. Jones, .E. Water & Wastewater Staff Engineer II Hlv aaj OS4 006 0Sl SC 0 Oil SVANVO I, 1/i U OBl6 �s£ W LE 4 Hi] I/h 6Z4 tHJ■ L. l 3HIHS9O21 f sr t Lindsey Management Co., Inc. ii 1200 E. Joyce Boulevard' ■ P.O. Box 13000 ■ Fayetteville, AR 72703 Y (479) 521-6686 ■ Fax (479)_527-8840 August 24, 2006 To Whom It May Concern: -- I, James E.Lindsey, :was the developer of Canvas Mountain Subdivision. This subdivision was built outside the city limits of the City of Fayetteville, but was in the city's growth area_ When I developed -this subdivision the lots varied in size from 11/2 acres to 3 acres tracts. "I placed in the covenants the right for the developer to have -future lot splits. When I no.longer owned the lots that right was transferred to each individual lot owner as they were. given the right to split the lot to give them added value when they bought the lots from -me. It is my opinion that there is no question whatsoever.thatthe lots can be split under the existing covenants and of course'the covenants have been of record and stand as notice to every person who has bought .property in Canvas Mountain Subdivision. O Blew, Bates O Associates, Inc_ Engineering & Surveying 3561 No. College I Fayetteville, AR 72703 PH: 479-443-4506 * FAX: 479-582-1883 To Whom It May Concern: Linda Mayes is proposing a Tandem Lot Split in the City of Fayetteville Planning Area. She has been denied this split and is appealing this decision. Regulations for a tandem lot require a minimum of 25' access to a public street in which she is proposing 30. The minimum lot area for lots in the planning area is 10,000 square feet and she will have 65340 square feet and 70131.60 square feet respectively in the two lots that she is creating. She has also indicated that she has been informed that the city does not approve tandem lots in a platted subdivision this also can be disproved in that Lot 4 of this same subdivision has already been split resulting in a tandem lot. We feel that in light of Mrs. Mayes meeting the requirements for a tandem lot and the fact that Lot 4 has already been split resulting in a tandem lot that this matter deserves another chance. If there are any further questions regarding this matter please feel free to give me a call here at the office. Sincerely, Bryan T. Bunch Project Manager ji Bates O0 Blew, Bates Associates, Inc_ Engineering & Surveying 3561 No. College / Fayetteville, AR 72703 PH: 479-443-4506 / FAX: 479-582-1883 November 2, 2006 Linda Mayes 445 North Kansas Rd. Fayetteville, AR 72701 RE: Hillside Drainage Lot 21 Dear Mrs. Mayes, A site visit was made to your property (lot 21) on November 1, 2006. Per the site visit, it was determined that the majority of the storm water runoff will flow to the northwest corner of the property. If you require additional information, or a detailed drainage study, please contact us at your convenience. Sincerely, Blew, Bates & Associates, Inc. Geoffrey H. Bates, P.E. President of Engineering (Page 1 of 1) QUITCLAIM DEED' LAA® raSONS ca.vgyao AIL IIDNIl AND Dfl fl18 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: •: f .:nd an .. It, f..n • w ..1 1••. •n •1r 1..11• f 1• 11 n •I.Y .1 I.J IJ\.•... . 1 I.. f� I i11 :• I • .. 1 J I f ... r1Y •1• 1 Ld •1 eV1• 1 Lr'111• 1 Ifl '11 te. IJ 111:.- \�• V ♦ r Lesc tied 111 ' 1 . 11 1 �. 1^ •� r T. • 11.1 1 .I.r r • '.1\ "\ 1 P: I r. .p Ir •' rrl • 1 1 1 1111 rr . 11 11 1 II r 1 11•. rr r\ I rl• y•... 1. •1 a Yi .••r 1\ Ij 11 Yr Lii 1 • 3 1 1 IY a s 1 111 1i:4 1 !t41' 1• L 1 .• +I I • • 4 1 r 1. 11 •n If1I3M- rX11 1 1 J I� r I :.II -:r 1:11 .a .^ • 1 �. ..Ir A • 6 1 rrl y YI. u •• •. \ w • .ry. 11 • .• �. • r. 1.0 r .r I I f 11L. 1. r •1. 1111 `bOa =M . w,., I:uQ5 I. IL,•_-.-.11 __.Iw f'* IWI STATE OP ARKANSAS iii. COUNTY OP WASHINGTON) In mbuae wdafeof I hereunto err vy hard ad ofchd fed. M) fpOIDlBetell O IMd:�_ -_1 oar i eR .L0N0RA AOOODNIOIR w COUNTY - IYUM���WI�d1�IlY�I���®��WI 6I/.0amiv- fl__ 0b1b2_ 000 tCi 0D% 77 '.j o :&e::t? v++ ewordd:rt27S&0F of t Malt In itftenlCltit te:P.0 E1" t.ansl lAck Of Artemae V ihindtton_Wusrm tR P b, „ ° ',n;, • pit. 004- 0000682 L°� I 1 z.; ` . o - , Qa . � W m c o ,o —. '.G O 1 --(0 v O 0 k1lII!DGt4t __ f -� 081.18838'000 C° b 6' s: ❑' El ❑ ❑ 2 L ❑' it ❑ © © fd © ❑ El B © i E3 ❑' © El ❑ 0 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 00 > > CD fl fn m m p 3 2° c cc c c. o oa v c Q c oo c. �1 m Oa IULPJI O O O O D m m O O O O 0 N N - . Lnn 0 N ou Client Name: DR: Will Jones Address: 41T S. (MnJk5 5455 MAD 3375 Huntsville, AR 72740 479-790-2784 Phone#: Name of Subdivision: CANV AA Mt. A four foot pit was located on each lot. The soils were evaluated based on the most current suitability guidelines made available by the ADH. Pit Number Acreage Adjusted SWT Type of System Loading rate 8Ft.on Center Loading rate (.OFt on Center Information contained in this report is no guarantee that permits will be issued on any of the lots. Individual lot owners will be required to obtain a septic system permit from the local health unit before initiating construction on any lot. I would like to assist you agair process Thaankk you, 14 NV Will H Jones owners are 0 O O.Q4gtrl bA Op zz= S n ° zxo t k bJ d a N ° aT �o o j o ° r. n Cl) is o tl aD a . e^ C/1 S • O a o° m ° o. o ° c c oo v b b n' �t ,..,, a n•n co ° .O o .— C r 'at a '•r C. N aD �' ❑C❑ N ryy CC N Than aD a^D 4 co ^+ n w t'' C C. •o w O p m o �. o (IDnE a y o a G 0 3 y. T r. Y C N<? O y O ... C'. p O '. a9 C- as �• O .+ CJ fD ��' a° `�' a, a' ". pD ~ w r. ate. N• �> C .. ° St n 0 cOD a s n° ≤D o °°y a o a w< Ct y F o '� O. + .+ t .t o ?•D O (D F w ..' C) y a °wi vCOi N �• °• o ? aD a: vi' CDD "�D o ^<'. < m L=7 (DOO 0. < = gn vw. aaD .ca ° Uj m �1 A t/� O N rt M '• .r r-• O. aD pD -4) {y, p, , y 'd y G•a'' C ,�i w N A '-� ,rT' G O' C- - Oq w !� C n• ° C{ aD b aD N D N w ^ o » O < aD A N C "• W f•h �'i �''' (10 N �3• Gt a ° oa o w O C�•t 0 0 N O 0'CDCD'5 G N0� Coo o Ga^yp d CD O » as f p » CD p a CO a O O C d CD -�a�p -. —° rv. t3 0 CCDD O tv '- d •� C` E CD O B' 0, rr� CD C O a D. rn rah' w 'C O•• C In y p` CD < ao . q o w c <aa em < C 0. n w • m tno p •• a m n Q u o. O ^ CD ow CI)- ,CPB�ay C — 'J CD — v. C 2 Er n SI ro 0 N 00 a '�� Y b 7yr-i pEcD rE ap�' 'On a: P. p� �. `° �' n "' -• `'� a C a �• p = `< 00 a O N Q ,� y 'Z7 .... OQ -. O'i• '7 O 0 -. p0. N .0. 'O 'l3 rwn �n�.'C 07p () O �..II �. �p - O '0 off- 0 CD 0 Lam*. ,�C6..- N r to n y ay •J m cD •0,�. C a N Fy to n ,.s C r'O �• CL O n C •^'II .yT•r y. Yn O� O ��. M C CD O �• y W' 0 ro Q oo a = a c y 0 a a a o [D s gy S t" n C. a, ^J' H. G VCi ^ N ,rte• 'i-E, fa (�Gq '7r' �p LL r -v �'' ry RN N r O o F r 0 n `D N O 5 d 00 a" N y O 0 :n ion C O C 2 n cD n o o f w u w o. a. ,J w m a rn O y` c .. r R. y a p a 'C co a a G C' w I I CANVAS MOUNTAIN DECEMBER 1, 1984 BLOCK I 1 - $12,000 2 - $12,000 3 - $12,000 4 - $12,000 5 - $30,OOb 6 - $37,209 7 - $13,200 8 - $13,200 9 - $13,200 10- $13,200 11-..$13,200 12- $13,200 13- $13,200 14- $13,200 15- $13,200 16- $13,200 17- acres $91,200 24- $19,200 25- $19,200 26- $19,200 BLOCK II 1 - $31,200 2 - $31,200 6 - $3,0,200 PRICES SUBJECT TO CHANGE -- - 1 ' _(11/7/2006)'City Clerk - lotsplit for Canvas Mountain Ti iIiii1 Page 1 J From: Angela Evans <aevans@fayar.net> To: <city_clerk@ci.fayetteville.ar.us> Date: 11/7/2006 3:21 PM Subject: lot split for Canvas Mountain My husband and I have lived in Canvas Mountain subdivsion for over 10 years. We have no objection at all to the proposed split of the Mayes' property. Please allow them to split their lot. Angie Evans Jim Wetheringon F. II I I I I I I Feet County Disclaimer: 0 475 950 y 1,900 This map was created by Washington County using data created or acquired by its Assessor's office, Dept. of Emergency Managment, and Road Department and in accordance with Arkansas Code 15-21-502 (2) (B), which states The digital cadastre manages and provides access to cadastral information. Digital cadastre does not represent legal property boundary descriptions, nor is it suitable for boundary determination of the individual parcels included in the cadastre.' and Arkansas Code 15-21-502(6) which indicates that "Digital cadastre' means the storage and manipulation of computerized representations of parcel maps and linked databases.' This map has been developed from the best available sources. No guarantee of accuracy is granted, nor is any responsibility for reliance thereon assumed. In no event shall said Washington County be liable for direct, indirect, incidental, consequential or special damages of any kind, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits or benefits arising out of use of or reliance on the map. The parcel lines shown are considered a graphical representation of the actual boundaries. Washington County is in no way responsible for or liable for any misrepresentation or re -use of this map. Distribution of this map is intended for informational purposes and should not be considered authoritative for engineering, legal and other site -specific uses. Li - r) n C N. on U! - p i - rl C C rl 0 LU r O P ml^ 000015 ®r ® u — 5 0000.15 W SOUTH 150.0' (R) Q CR. -L - ___ -___ 4m y NORTHCANVASROAD 9 wLw.A T D C O a a n Y M 4 1 n 01 J N' II^ a rim O c p L. x' ry w C Of •'W . w 5OV0015 W . '. yn 150.0' (R) - 3 "' NORTH CANVASROAD ANtl• muW.AevIuxr- ¢. 4 1-U %1 h T. From: Amber Wood To: Pate, Jeremy Date: 11/13/2006 3:46 PM Subject: Res. 188-06 Attachments: 188-06 Mayes Appeal.pdf CC: Bell, Peggy; Deaton, Vicki; Pearman, Clarice Jeremy, Attached is a copy of Res. 188-06 passed by the City Council on November 7, 2006. If you have any questions please feel free to give me a call at the number listed below. Have a great day! Thanks, Amber Wood Deputy City Clerk City of Fayetteville City Clerk Division Phone: (479) 575-8323 Fax: (479) 718-7695 awood@ci.fayetteville.ar.us /K .s, CTN0:. M 11K L1, [JR & MELODY ' 1) Iy 1=p=� „"�p.'`�i`�.ry1=k)�9 �I,/ i, 11` 1 1 A k N RL C. pP {C� FAY Lt d 1-,I I277.. t:u7/'"YR t P`r 4 4.,:i.,0(_) l02-000 ,P,h~--k..L� R.I 1'°�Q]\4 I lC)ii�f %�1R.[7) N `L K..1: I') 1 L k / y !"k ,4 t('₹(/r5 I�'`i C' n`. NI.LI/.JI5 R.[/.fiFy j t A L OA II. L.I/. AR AR (\r{ t !477 _5 . {0 {1.: }}L 1' A f 1. F 1 '' 44,..0() l0 , (/,..t. t7(.) 000 11 lll,'4,}r\''11'`ryI'A.N L_; ..1h,, A e`S PD' Lr'`fCrF"Ik/`lJ1P1}fiAfiR"7:-":1C1 -!7t/r 4) J A NI) E Lv/• ,n 1 �/LV/1 ! Q.:s 0 P"C'A 11 4q' S 1Ia; p 1 /kA, }}1: ..1/1712.. e k`vV/ L L I L A''1•,.L\I () i. I • P.A.• I ;', ,.L I_..{11 4)( i)vI(}0 ri-, v{CT. Ti A 1 L t\ k4,F F.1- . U.A. ,/ L i,-,/ I\ � A,7N .[ k r - € LJ 1 1 L : 1 A . 128 1. I [11RR.Al DR I%A7 'I'l; r'II L F. AR 72701 7901 € I L 1 € 1 7i1.,1' 1. z,. 2..(:(5; EY .rv.2 \.-)k B.I A. 1 �1\t_). { ry I I I \"'.' r. 1r Il hi A4 L BY F 6`x,A.iNNK BL1: I1 s1 F k. . 1: :5f• 5 �t'V, 17 E-, 9I /0.5/ (C)7 C) 1 { y 1... 4 . N + / A. L'„" P\k. 017.1 N r AI'. I``x' E N A L... Pt A F BY FRANK fHL_rL\ L f 'r`5fl 111) A I n::. 01/0S/Ic) f,) Lti t {F (( j:l" l/v : { S i`10 ii/li Wh d4„ 1 $: fits A3 4 1�'l�r i 11\NOR II1 C,/'1! \11 ,AS P kI [,'A V FT 1. ). `x'11..11.. ,A.& 17}70.. f 4 T' .12.R. P171. P. F 'I-' V F Jy r Lai S AOIi. `I �lT •L 12.C).' R TI. I[:S AR .13. Will fIN T'i 13 PL AN Ni NO AR LA -Y; n:.� yFr-r< .may. nttarm: rtyAvla;rS'f, I$§}Ifirs!"iFY'nt"{'3yr!�`. '`,4'+IIilYnivx4"hxpb ]-r�. ^y2'd£`R7₹.r 1(ryr "('t LiI. Txr,A 5yYdSta57,1 h,44�¢'f vc':k. �k � fi `t�+^: � �t t s3 1 ih•ry N,�. 1; �jY j rh. r Fr "x ((v l.'. )rl 1t1 r)k4 ) t.:°. }. t. nwr 07 .(i: I){•. jf,. S'7n l 4f' } {{ih. L h{'I j 1 ,. '7'1 1) n, ii key .r. { i+i. nzY.6vftaY,.,. ,xn awllxua. {{ '! Si! t}..Fx ..:. ,..l� ,rvnninV,.Vr{11J.14t`fihd% .m kJ $$$$$${{{{++M1��M1' ,l jI)r1hl ,,'}' '•t,a i•, Yti"nneP.a! ,x„atA/ iht'x:•.. Y. tt5f(NikElf nxnA,`i�l}u'3mvr ��U %n t.. n«r�)Vl..il)ilun rnbt )Vtf)Ynr: `,:I.M1:'k`1��3iFripiTII5ii!(tY•4 r".r�/iGYA!fb,PAia(�{�I ,.xn3��x,: nL:d(t.✓eiVlSf+m.,. '.YntV/Yi �:.!!illd5VA..1.1.FtLI Yr,A....ilt %f P 1,0(7) €`4 F: 17.1 1 7t:• y k y� !..l§ 4�6,,,F'4"�.iil L4 �!r`pl (_)rl• l ( ]: ..R. �``"P.11.. `?F S A I:`"Y kVt_• )4C f`4. 1 1 L...11 f�i 1 z 1_.fI Ni I' L0011._�+' tf `, Tr'[ i\2. [ �R. "AL" P Al t =1 AS DETERMINEDtBY 4 F' }€', "`r A t t O1 x,. / I 1 (7 (70 �l 0 l INS_ A INC, [•L nti N4 E 1_/1? C! [VY" L F NET ]r RATE /1 L i 1� FOR L. 4 ANCE 1 ) t Yt,v`. I 1. I INSURA AI. 4 k 2'A._ § 1 a' t '1`�(W LL€1°41s ( l'INNf (`1 r1 111'rv. A"§k71 `A.k` � ,r `. ay,1 E100) L 144 00 PARCEL# - 701-000 " LOT 21 10 3.11 ACRES LOT 22 4r ,. O ` n.I aeurclarYi!iwµ!n ( f F. A : ar munrn ✓nm�n. ram .n I / r. t FQ19ttY"I^. IeJ,VStWu),AI'r 8 •. 33 `. I „ Ufi46:4).VJPIIIRRxIVV,YIVY IR4l �rr// 1\,. 1 11—: fie 6 '.n t,/h4 '!.9J6 FWAM Ir4 LII�L "m r uniF;^,nen}.S:Aa1v9Lr rcr P `n9£ EY n " ' r bbYwv!.NYrrfinibSlxlrvrd.. YWti. 1 " •. ,n amaAl"rflbirvcttE5mmrd r. R ']t -F -•-' ^-14 '^. d^^ 2 v'i",snvCR'. / AlsHnd%lr .h , "'"N.. u(rtiN]Si+],f.NAA:IkAYll n%\ -,�!: } y .rz �4ss¢aul�kdrnlin:nrr}b.r " le[I nynAlfU%fi YF1i3, (oI. FIVAFVFM1 r nY1aZµ,YMY"i.YM1I1rhW'4Vvi%Y]!Y!'r{llr»1rvirv{pWy'yAryiPAP.hI'nfa`Tt1YY+{ji!llfilal4ifi!'Yt}nA'.,'Pil,-In]IVV('fY+S+S<Yid.4L*'YIWIY3Rvl1-4✓!VNe.,aruny[N`F`vlhln4519MYi\\tW,Wfilnpitl:l",N':nriMM?'ni'IIF`.YlVInrT.Ju.^ILlfifin/MJnri:r,fiC, Vlr•:u n:AFYxfi'iA ill. ei {.., it "/"h ` Fl:uminsnalmmnRmwAclfi7,mv=+.JnIIZ�Pa..rTnmeilnnr tm, kry . rv<.. a,i ».,< ca( p 1 ,r P.O_B. .•vry .,,.n r. �+=.. TRACT 21 EW�Y •�_.. ..... ..V,.n...,._..F.,,._,... .._ ._....__, III a.. LOT 20 a 50I X00 X50 L �tl)i �At 11iAIDI 1^= t 1'�a1k1 1.kL1 CHORD i Pt/� CHORD k)I I,ruik:t; t, q ° ( F (. 1 � WA1/,L..�1)r t.€€�=hu` 4 Y :� IY ��.{� i .d A t,h fl i k,. Lr4 N : .., ,.. ... 'v .._,-,+ Y11 ? Y (,.-` nl( ii r ,._}e, v/E4V� AV I WASHING `"t IY VON ,(1- I'VIF'y/ ARK i`', }-'YL"if Y/n//V1rS %:, fi�} T F.•, : A , I V \ V 11 Y f A S , It hl 4 I .7 k)t �.. .. / < ('ANVAS n k i.�' ISION ,1� d "tr_LC I � r ,, 1/ r k 1 f 4 X � I .. ".. : A - tit L,. ci :., 1, s _,+. _� --, 007€' .ra ,..r. OF ,.• : !''''p. "y ) -€-` CLERK "} r ,F..I } .ti r €ri „p "� 1`1 l: "h ,[}I} "R (--el. ,Y PL r r -. 'h+: [ --, t , ,.. ( y ,,., l I P Y I II. 7 [ r L A 1}'l., AND n;, a-) t 1 k 1.. A 1_a° :.l" !. _ .. 4 .-R. , F i `t.. ,. 1 PLR , .-7 : !'. i a , f ', pp \ :4. L c L k ., 1. , r. 1. _. 4 .' l.. 1', r 1., f Y _.,-i t.l i,. ,. l - E. 1 [ ON Fl= -l_, } f J 1 c. C.. l_ _ }F, 7 .i l 5 1 I n t A%.1 (`)4 Wr3 )}.EJ. `'r'!l1 ( �.../•; A S, xl, }l.J i''4 4 � .: }4u LO,.J ky 4.. `I/i.= ,YJ.. L'1« I_. s,-: 1. 1 ._ _ S r1 FA. Z i COI / 1 of F I _ PART s LOT .) C' a' CANVAS ! l�r,l " z N. sCa, ;, E i J I ,``t 1. . ) '+[ 1. V '1�\ . �. } L e l�'v i r } E..-). °. 4:� 1...."`k € 7' rv. � 5 t t )(_.1,, I . MOLD 41 A"= .L r,. I,..,l_ r_..0,1 n-. IN it ( /.. 7 1 '_r x : i g r b} r t v Y.. P f4' �0,. es! OCR) .. f f ClQ CLERK J 4.. /r f ARKANSAS. ^�..�; HER _ L �, PEA € 1.) , ,! L ; �, f L1 � [. L } 1 OFFILL L- L > (._?, / 1 r. L_: _ p r, t } y/ 1T 1 F f. ARK x 5 7 I P y l A. /_ 4.4. I )' iLai L. f 4Y , � {I�}E�tl. 3l F I} ,.} E. 1 ,Y' BEING MORE . - 1..' !4. ry E n w. V � 1, , �v COUNTY. I h 1. 4 .. r 4, Y n.`Y,-, t , j-1 r1,1, 1"S. t_ L... i ..... ..r. '..., _ ... < r. , ,:., ,., Y.r ` ROM r, q } ," , g T ( 4:-'o- t r F ` 1 '...:' 1t:` -€.. FOLLOWS. r-.Y.-e ) F., ,. ]`. '4 r�.. AT A :I:,• _ WHICH i, IF., 1'nt4'�44F44Er..-.,S.i, 9/G�•'1 1`f ik.`14 �1):rF E117'r,`ktl `,.. }L/9.C1 Btl�l l_._'SY E_ L,1.E \Yirf: J. C' )„lt.= l l . L 1 .�tl!v�! IINJ Ci k € HL 1 I.k 1 !L1- 1 I CORNER -1..-� SAID -, , „'r AND [ RUNNING .li'1`Iffi Y. Yr `f,°I /J)i. =+v=Y, 'L-'• Ynl ..Lr)A IP_.': I`\1� f„A€(INC 111 tVf } 1 kILL.. ( 'L' r ti i ) I e } Arl17 ,) L•,L_ AN` I1t (3 1 1 14 �. _` _, 1 ( L PH , }} V „ ABC %"� I ( :f ` y_.l I Or `\[... q'r .' I } Il` +. q l* kx,1.. `t000'. p l Y l lI. M ,_� f � {1 AND +} i—v rF L Z/i f )=1L 11 /` l`'! Jtd l4V wl t A,��'y`C,l k €h / lk `9 l'Y.lsf / 1°n. .114,1" OF �1 ,)�� A tit...ry A . LL4_ ILk BLARING /l:El_ i. d'k La� F-4 ".. 1. OF 526A0'41 1 n ) I } .41e~ SAID 4' "e. i/!L 1.�. r 1`IT LC).'44V )flr 11 t,f Y 372.37t L 'k._i /1 i` } I IDCURVE,C`': tl( tm THENCE _[..., ,1₹ . 4 1 I1 ENCF E tJ/ S 144i'l e£,.x , F .'.„ 1 �'\, r`tli. i � e,, l /l vl,`.1VL£ , I i�t. £ l,,y}. /:.I,k ``t1 C �I€nW LAS t'.7. '` 1 r['I.11?°'11�0.r',� NiOO`E,..rv5iI I`W L{',":r,rt l[, IU Ltll� i't,_7g1"I%1 =.-! 11l Ail�,,li`�{,, I_t.A ,.e fr}I, ik./4Y_'.,.1 ACRES. l\ .. p [ r , AND l l ) 9 F ` ,"r ITS `r /.: V fi WI ACCESS (y4 AND 1 d , A {a 1 .1 4... L 11, NORTH 1 1 k 4 t LA } k 11\ 1 I I °� 4I . l I [ SUBJECT 1-�; , ,.I�1 € k ),f�� I I�=._r lelCl, f'l t€ f (.} < k zE,. `€ (+k, , � } . � €€ ..ryryrv} t}t \V ,...-,. CORNER . ,1 n ,- £}. I t' }„R p,tt `1`M1r, b p%i .ry, TRACT] 't1l ,xfi,w AND 1 Y41Al111N ]'1 I} I If [ 1Fvlilrk Cl `)ri $._ ..)}i 1 �; I`\l. t`t t I I. 4`Y'L_:`i f �._f,-�R l`` _'vj 1 11 E"L L,1�`fi.L�1.i'•.. I.-;i.-.. .'_,`,. l`,.11S L., L�1' 1 k4l1t. N. E �,i ,L3 n�.h il. ': EI ^'{�$. H k. ii'_./!°<V.. 1 t _7.... 1J ti:y .. / € )- 1'11 'I L`IiE:I[L IL OF 3 WAY OF I>I(:1?}al I'I k CANVAS ROAD !'; [`I l.`} 11111' 1'1?1!w'1` CE i'L 1e't=Ilk} 111, 1` ;w,1 JBJLCT„lfil::_} LF,/A`7I14/E0.T41 I``Y lyNT) RIGS r[.. c' I4)#` C71 C 0 1-I`, L k , L °,.,._ PAR ...ft l / y CANVAS '�: /F !.. Ei 4t�,r ` AT "I Ik 4,1 )B = J SI 4. =V £rl ,r n` €'Y Itv t`... IAi COUNTY, I Y A I' OF' I,€.._ l 11, 131 'i t0. k,� ) 1 }I liti AJ \.'r+3tAf 4,+I I`§\ i f1141A+ /.S St "'A) t S l.,n`if v IN '`� 6-i T.) ki �fi'4I lA, t!/11v "n '4 «. r 7 ARKANSAS. �,€"r PER 1`[..� I.. �a;`�! l`kl-.1 r IN THE I1' OFFICE F It.'k- OF TI -IF. � I=t,C'I'k"1 CLERK AND ,i,Y EXOF l ll. 1 � I {( n O'ER WASHINGTON Y° ^.r..,.. .l -1 alt COUNTY. '"a...i `Y '.. `v..l ARKANSAS t.`v lf-.. kµr BEING MOP ,i}k t�AF{. [..k. .r/r I y 1 t !..�'14 kl\f i+` /`h �4t�. )'. ;, ]'. },E L_ , /., a. ' V,tL1f!u`,I i!,✓`}.-.){.._'7§"il F, /\1'%°.lh,/1eW4/`Y. ;.-%, 11`1 :Ii. `v r,r .t6,_))k}� ) 5. 1"^.1 k, .-. L_/M1 P k 1. 1. 2 / , TO— / , a , ] " '_, 'NO Y e. :— „ WEST CORNER ( ) [ `a j SAID `a, f— A 'i''4 A 4 \,.I ( 0 , INNING WIT: e rr ( r' t t j � M1 1 it / ( ,n f €l(}L t. t L; *, `t L� I t , j A k'tr S L (11 A�, 11 LOT �} pp ) 4 I ] r 4 1 1 1: L E 1"w L."E.IL.i.�)is ry. 1'1P"'1.'F i 1 1:�1 `, �, SII4, '. r o,.,l A I THE ,.�.J'r ti.. I� (,•. k _ r Y, r .4 ..) I .-, ,,,: .,. ( }..f i.-. £k.. (` 1 ¢ -, ':... M1 V' +.I.... }-,rl=*I1 § /_'1 r '. ,) ,' ., i t ltd i r3 cI EI.11 "f i„` d} Pl "I t, -k(k Ll 1 14., I'FIi r t 1 h. CI\ 14`3. / 4 { .),. , it 4 { It 1 i k ) 1J , 4 343F7'. _I r 11',11 _. 1 ),,1 .vl� 1, L, /�.�,)/., fLLt,l£r .i .lt{� t}t I[ (,) ?i1r 1[iE `(}..rti. _.. r.., r` _ ..IN 41F- 4( ACRES. V V J.f tl.(1`,A11E.? 1"t11.{11 -I ai TI) .A. 3 Y f TO iLf:1 t"f.:Ii'` l 0 BEGINNING, t, t ll� l It 1.- k�1_.4n I�(�},43 1� LESS, .r , i x ,,.a I. PITY / , = x , " -} a " , 'i`..,: , r ,rte f FYI t MORE / PAR ! € iA..ze� i [ � i 1 � Y 4 / , l- fPi7b,.' ( 1. 1,I',,,a,yi .i[_.)L.II(k,[t 1 {,.At1L,/4/}E::'( 1li€ )k 11,.k,1 Ixi:tilfik-ll 1€k{ 1t 1, 1`11,1 L�.E' 4i .I k.,1 -„ AS l r..-, 1= f` , -1'tl `L 4 1, t = /x1 I II 1 "Ny.-"1 )" n' i p r S i` 7 k. FOLLOWS, I� ) Y f l i t 10-WII 4 � °1. 1 {. ka LLi 1 1 rI 4r r tL:: 1 , I3 €x // 1 'e` F M1°< 1 -di, 0135(1 RUTH 1}�) t 4.�i,{,C)`t)� :/ pa r ,O L. tIr , C: a y 1. } Il n." 411 '° a i! t i WEST i i gg t OF �{ h ryy +_ p[ �` y }} r 11 1 1 Y 4 I, ry TA) 1L—) L. <Y.k 40ir]F 11 l 4 FhI"..,'�1"!' "4, tt i` 1k 7``.11 IC, k ( x+. ��'Y. by = fk,`r,,, IRA 1,. F. A. h`rJ." f`t.k CNN !1111 1 k 1L. i"`".fC. t. L'�t9 ) .)<h'[ l [352,317 , I ( 4 .! 1 "a 1 ! / , . i,.a ,rfi , :^5 ' 7 ,1 11 ` 1 SUBJECT "" 1t i fi`₹ t k d-`' AND R ' \!,Y 'Al U+. 1 ROAD AND ll, POINT 'l O "1`i !_" Az1 ,I e C [Q, � a"9�IJl.€1. ; 11.h I ,1 .r€,'� 1t.., 41 . �x RICH rr k 4 J LI_AAkK'3I.11 2. „✓A�7 m 4J/ 15(I`€T}Ivl= 1^,'111 BOOK 8 INA€J I 33 EXISTING GARAGE. F 4 �y h_ , kk tt L r�� y-, t" ��„„ Fa ± '_-` 1 k ) 1121.12. ? 11 ! Y 1 S i 1 1 r9 ." ti!l , 4, nv ER. : "- 1. ^IIy h �' 6 (D.L' 7 TI? 1 Y Iti 121.131 1 ! C b �. i 1 1 , { / & ,~.. / s. i .. 1 1 , €5I1:r>�1�itL_ 1 E t -, �„ �fi, ,rF l I rF 1 pY { k�,`�I_kl/1�.rlirin4E,Ll4}'<'1*1�1.1`1Aw/ 41t.I -? _ ^ i )1 i rk/:� sL°l.l I i"!_4',, Lek ,v}t'/,`Jri,l��rn rot. I::fir. k }?.' Ffi,�.y: J _"-1_, y7, J%I '.` p }„14:: .I 'o 1 t k:-+�fZ. 1_M1 1) lE .: [ / I f. 1_: LATE SHOWN IIII rV tnsl �ib't.t) 0103€RIB L�d-s" HEREIN. , }1 E ....1 dW J , 1 L.. l ,krtk .. (100%1 DOHEREBY. .:)\ ,1 / --r..._% �1J ./ Y / C' i �`} 1 )11 �.A}ry x L_: 1 1,11}. 1 1 Ls.ML IC.- / G )`t) �i , r y 4 d r =. t�le !^{ 11 �", ALL STREETS AND Alf l...L. ,, 1;(1 �_,. kV. f.{ / .`Y. PUBLIC 1l tl'/I L 1 L. i' I_,; 1.3i 1 i (. `r.i r�.. V* {{x(•f �4 I i' {. l",. E k n4 I s. kk3l.fsx• 4 ,j ,r ;: } -Y 1fIL-/€",)\`�.'�rv1:,E`'.:.,,�L„_,1_Ji51.I��c�.'=l°I/;_ ... SY ALSO I ` ' �\ k r. CITY OWNERS DEDICATE C,. I 1 L, LAN 4 n 4 f !„ Y'/If"€ AND r_,1 w. E°/ PUBLIC _I! ` , Y , 1 � i \j�} L li:. �1 i i M1l t (( .1.L�11W� { COMPANIES UTILITY pp I y f r } i x. A 14 I = tlli.__ . COMPANY , . y Y�r \.€€%1 r. FRANCHISE GRANTED k 1,. DING '•rvl 1ti 1 r . [_ *. WASHING ,..^r1l, ,a..r Y v .I < (.. '~./(+ 6-,r. 4 \ ,� ).... 1€ . r C" _`.,I f^Y. -,—,., t Q.` 'h -.j ` A)c '""e,I ON'.4 I - THIS: 4 k� '..s ! `� 4 i �� EASEMENTS FLAT .) I !vl }; =` PURPOSE ''P4 fSE OF S• �If�f/, THE . .f4 1 ₹L Y 4 i 1:_, 1 4... [ALAN I1°,ic�1�,1 1� �/1 x t' w, - LION e"' T ! d n T. / P ... F UPS t..'�1}1)� OF I�,k, h� ! :^�Y._.lr.l I �L,I� AND r)]�L. € 11E� REPAIR : F` k L_',.N. 1 ,`Y L INC �; "` (,16.11It�w, r' Era, A "`.(' I,4,.,/ BETH TED Lr1_L, L. ALLY l LLII`/RRIC!"i1 Oh. Ii' Cf ItL`.`."*,I`rlq,o)D I� ' RE tsLs ,,) L, l r1L rir� _,. -,_,. -, y ...... y ._' F ''44 11 [[11 pp FF-` L q MEN "�4 h 1 {{ {} l 'r r - SAID LI_�:ry Llty.": y 1, �- 5 e f IC . ,,-, PRv __t - [ ERECTION Y }' Y! t i( t1 Y4 1j f P ,4�L l/'rA 1111E>1} Ilrl...: ,._. ::`. � .: , pf 4Lia`. I',..AA.₹Wl fi 14L 14._)§r.)ii1,�F i. l�w161.IVft A. t tM11VV 'r\ R �. fti )nx ., F .x f L tt i ` 1'e` `1 LANCES 'k;L LLe.L h. �/:.=r OR I �I,: k Y l UN Vrq /� FL) d L. -r f Y 'M1 L. I I/t t it"ti 1 \ n l'f', jl. 1, I I i1 1 i }-_, ZILDI f7 -t. .. 16 I ," :w°'T I J (-`i T 174 b 4e r ✓-'4 1212. i' ( iI" 'I t, f4I S. l)i l3 . k.(\l " s.131, r13/NL 'iS' l /t A. . PA AA 1 4 H Yr YI Y� P 1 � le L-a.ns tyy �, .1 1 . N L y� TIE. J, F+ € "1 , A b s 2 A ", t ' C" s t .. I } 1 NOT f � u' v I L /,RL'- r�l, A- DOE W ,. „1f... ,t 1-g r pp pp pp �� Ar 1 1 A a€x CC L nl h� d �,n {, I l i3 rJ , 1 n. k I S 'LFF12ti h . 1-1.01.75171. k7E'I. i _i,r,.,_ rco ,)rn xrnxarf:..rm:mnow rxvmnrc tn-x w I y =I ) Y {{ y 4 "'4tIP 4k ) f .... r y mmw5ii^ i O1. k4Yl°4C/`\k .k HEREBY C; Rlh ° L(lhtl "i) pp i1f , r4p ('C}!)' E.: BES I ;i[' /1`Y` [ Chi)>1'dl l s)f tw AND BE! IE ON: i -JI ( —J � ,J)AY ,.. ,�IAY O . + _,_,.,._ 006. rk ' <4.k %`y ' ;i tiro 0.f J '}�'i^ " 'aV ALfgnp/� aHp N"�FL�flLWNi Q7' A` i�NAr ra S w z e OF pr ,rr ti ar' A kryA^ A SA.S wn ( l'.rf @rd' i 0. ', AY"f+ I�,1 arf vy�".' uo b'.';. m:m la#r �v YI 2w F y o¢ 3 4 'rt nmx ,nY Nf F m,.r nnA Wh��r), Hk` ry yTG p Y1 �l Y_ ....., "•r mee ry? :".F"w,I. §:'1 i}rtR9'A�{6M1tA M•'AdIJ �n s 7 \ 0 Je fl ((9 n m d e lmq: /rr f JN } uC a � G A err N t� 6r ~s 6 SEAL. C. hhi Ii ufl" r L 1 t f I I C l .. l.lfli C1A THIS F,11.. FS ORIL I:Nt//I,L. AAL4ti NO BL U1C N C011_>12 HEN 11 SHOULD BC AS`'UMU U "t'h l ,l 1 VHS '!.A! h'f L 1 } , r ! L { J —6 i Al f, ] p Ar HOANON 1\ l I .. 4 ( Itlt[ It t i.E�1 r` �r I), 1. t[* r . 6 , A 1..Ir f l,\ La F L ki y Y. IM1 5 OI ,r+.. ANY COPY 1 DC )F I\1i1,.'. .✓klrtL�., Ilix.'I ASP Itr 4=t.xl 1 IFft,l C. BEAR AN t';RIGiNAL.. SEAL.. API) SIC NAI LIRE. , r r r I C L t t C. y \ } t V / yry { y YL // {� r.-..,, I. 9,. N Y/ "r"e+E. n . :: Y - a . px f , 4r l� F • �7 I „ h fAN 1 f = Ir... Iu lIft41/fi Y E.f 7 rLfi ( r Lw, - j�FfIC:. 1\d{YFi i' I: l r I` r i C1rJ -'` IN II I Ar. r stn. r- r ry , �� 1. ✓+YL 1, : Ir'(l r :lL; f ti r t's .. 1 itrrnl n .ri I'm �t. -I- e k t M1/ 1 (n y,IL C)1/ , U. U1 4 v / rtxx, •, nli/ Iv,0. : •r. I r, ,p c` ) t„ € y Ir) 1a. I Ill L` lK x C: IxrI1iIIS: 'J ( ,r 4 j > YJ k4 it if da 44YlA 4f. _�'. E J �( �€'€E ° IlY ra 41 III } t } .I t„ r'; t i♦ :?K2. 1 I ff�', Ltill f YAI Yl} Y �+1 L { di4( I e• , v 1.. r•,. s ids 1I7 c wp:r, l;t:`. M I C Y r X rr m' . t PrOrrr rv•, Arv., al.. x 'Ll� :y {ia > . 1.. '. . pFy h+ . dS. KF I R i Vx' r, I `�:A L 1 ,.....: fl t�+ r:.1 of ( f p .k"\14`;6 °-V k`w€,.F'O6-?2fl ,\1_)JA(IF14"T:" I_,AT\'ll) O\VNERS I ) c:AR. F'AGN0, NIIK.E 13 JR 7ti N1Iii ,GDY. 463 N CANVAS N4O IN'TAIN1 RI) FA YI,T 1I",VII,IJI',, AR 72701 PA.R.C"'I?L I(144.t?Q? 74)1?m()1)0 {y` 0)jMV"rrr WP I WF�i D E tO'T ,cSx IT"P «« w's rvur ',mrPI � "�' i!Pyy r.srsH Xl.r aw;Y+ lov.d�'1 YrvN °LMnpV✓lYi wv. tv,=+"'iv"�"—.� 1� r+fuCnm e 2) N1ORYISC)N, I1O`v . RAD X1-91-11 & I.,YNN (I`, 160 N CAN VX11,, RI- NO I"O1w 1"1( )N OF TI IS PROPERTY IS I3)CAT'1'>~) W1'i"I IIN [1, 001) 7 I'11Y l /T",Y e >w .1..T4)ION "r1" OR "AFT" AS DETI .TMINED 13`rr "9'1-Ih NA.11f�i ,1.1:., I I O(II) l IF�,1rIC.4.11,1, , 1 Tm117.,3'! 471.8 t'11. #IfT111M0'7f)T?"OOO INSIIHAN( 'F 1 ROGRAM 1,S)O9:) INSIJ1L.ANC`.N RATT., N'IAP FOR. WAS114N(I T O I CO N 11"., ARKANSAS, 3) WONIA(I'll SEAN(FIRM: PANEL Y#05143(.01 15 U, DATED 12/ 20 /2000) PARCEL# 1 44-00701 --000 1. LOT 21 433 N (n11INIVAS 134) �.1 1 ACRES 1" `T I, I"'1 T�.)III,1 E, AR '7270.1,_473 T I"E1.TCC`41s#tl4tl..l)Oi0i tiC1fJ LOT 22> t"'A%'nr n,'.,I "Nf'l' /\ 4) J!°ANDIK, TOM.AS 1129 N CANVAS RD LAY1El IIIVII,1,YId, AR 172701 PAHC,F I. 7#114119.»00701)1-00(.) 5 ) 9C, VIII II\I It[ , PA\j1 .� (C 7� 91,E /11;1 1,h; r. 4128 IT MI IRA!. DR PAY C VII/I11-. AR'72'701-7961 PAR. C I:?; L, ft.144_LOOt686 000 1]T/lxl) 1VOT1(.. JU l_,'rl i 4, 2006 B.A.SIS O1' BEA1 INN: • CANVAS—tv1()I IN FAIN FINAL. E'1: A'F H')' FRANK UI LW I'.l._I,SJ1 56„ DATE: 01/05/179 RF.1: ERi',NCE 1)(1)('L1N 1",NT" 1. CAN VAS> —Mt )I 111rI`111N I'INAI_,` I'll 11"Iv BY FRANK 131,4Ya1111, Pt, DATE: r 01/05/1979 ()11+'1N11'R/I)I:V9"1 ()PT H.: 1ANJ(I F'c I„[t'r1IA P A,`VFC 4191`7 NO I I'I CAN1/!1 `3 RD T AYI.I I I,VII.JIi, AR, 72701 PA R C::`FL I/Ill ll"00'70! 000 01044 1. 73I i S ( J F. (IT 'i" IP .R(. )1'T TR.'1'Y & ADJACENT F`RO)PF1:RI II'S 1?R 11 'II 1>4 r]'41F' •F11,.A'Ntc IN(Ii ARE. .A.r M1n'a"4nAaRNrflTafMIMpY}ryl1`,(•)4!('p.ry%gVIPW^ANrI'rIRT4%agMrplM1M.ryn4p"V+pM+n++b!M541rFIYH#Pf!'.4NfliT4MlmnpYATYMIIY'FNIkM"lrygpggqp%ay+p{ix'NySrc11nYA'll.'MmggFTrFn+O rnco M1.TM!IftiHlgMq^F@TYrt4<r gWM`RgRRPrV N^'.!`Lbpag5f.Tp."f{#pP'yld}'paF1YC1iW. ^(flfl, JA'13IpMSl`iM1iWY1C4'YCIIIM`.JT. $4X(gaNATSCp1{}ry4kryVNA%MyMpi'Pry{Jl%b//p Xin+�!X��tµNFpu�lryWr^yTXF5%r'� S 8')59109 W ,'16,.34' (M) WEST 716.06 (R) t^ H,M LOT 20 U' c (*?, 1 \.I l.le 1 '..%' CURV! I"t \i AI ,��l ARCi NG!i•'i CI..IO llD LENGTH Fy"(T�!1�1 ,,...,, ORAPI HC SCALE (IN FEET) I Inch _r: 5013, S19{\.I)I?` tt;I 11P11C")Ni: a � -"if �Y ^_. i. .,. VISION .-, .,. yr.l __ ._, .. .. _. . .y.P "r A .Y 9,01 21 1,1A)C., J. CANVAS .. S N (+)1,"i 1 ) " ( WA 511 TI(b; 1/ , F4 , , _ �, C V .A+. _ Y_ 9 N T 119 (°0, A �; 11..1.. E. I "� T "� I ;T"J T 1 J `��l1.,...111, ti ., I ( ) i� d,., (,)1,1 N 1 � A IA ;� ) � � `� PER FLAT _I .�� * ...,. .-, TI ... .,r „ n. ..�. ICE .. .., Y. Y _.i ..a . -., i Y d 1 1 1 ! e q♦\Q P7 S 1 I } `�{ F ) N Y 5 1 I F I 1T.1,,1T11T [11114.9,11` 1111.., E ( T (. 3f ( I � ) ( � l I I I 11 ., IT T 11 I T „aT, .11 1T. 4 C 1() RECORDER � .I4 I , IBT.< I T 9.1� (Al < Y Y '1 'Y` Y \ 4 f .1 } %i' b / J 1 , / t i v ( } O1 NSAS, 1 1 � 1'C /1, 11111A I T°1 C N1 "� e .%1I�I�/110, I�, , I,9 IBr 1,(_ 11t>.11f1.F IC01tT)1A li°1 "�,, T,}"1S1:N4C.IN 95, 11N1) 9I9,S1T�1(.. I I(,t0" (.,)11 RF(.''OElli I_,4i1 'IN,A 7 "r. I 7 , t , v »3 4 e 1 I�) 1 f _1 3 1 I, I 3 .,. , e\ C T 1 9 4 1 s <,1 T LOCK 1 1 tJ 1 t1 . 1 1 � ), J 1 ri11°�I, r'1, 4 E,. I . T � 1 ". I v 10 T �( �"� � ;">11 I T'� , I O I („ C) 11,:1'0 I "r n NSA C! , i '1 I r@T3T�,.1ii1;�A, !)�`� 11 .,1C T 1.1\ T ( )1�1 E 11_,4 r 111 I ITI, OI FIC, I., OF T IlI_ C 413(`.°..1.111 ( 1,1 E(1� 14F1T) 4„^,_C)l I I4, 1t) 1�1. 1rE ) 1 IC,A,1 IN -"1 N I;IIYY R A t1i.A I31_IINCINIIO.I.4A1 TI(,t1I,11I1,4_,1'DESC_1wII1E':.) (. I i) / ti A. WIT: 1 �1 ( Y I I '(1 )T W f. 1 , CI 9 15 i%I f u _� '/ 3 1" , l FROM I v ., ." �+ . � "I 7 r 1 _9.,."815.%1_. vVTT.T_1. "TC�NIh"Ca/'1I,�1 .ENT e1T11CaTISlw�),�1._. E.34.�.)7 TLIT.,,1(.)I:,..E1iN1.^, I +,..C>I N1';11 OF ,t"A11) T.:UT AN)) 4 4)hr!1'li1C" Ti IC.,r4; iwiEi!>1 . E:Y 1, 352.3T, IT 4I [ENtl Al,( N(i A ('I JRr/E', 1() TI IF LEFT r. ., f\ •. ARC a .. y r + ,.. y .. ,.. r _ " y _ .\ ,„u P a ,S REAR ..Y .. DISTANCE �, 1.. a. r ., ,I IA"1 1 111 I II AN ARC I I1JN(311I (.?T' 46.4.71 A RA1)it) ()T "0.(,iU AND d, di. n 1 INfl ) < C A II 441 T3I. A I 1 1'AN1) I IM1. 11eNC I.. )1 S.26°1t) 91,1 4<l ")J',, 4 11T;N('E.1,1'IeVlt1(.1 `3/ II ) ( I_)T'.V1', 50000015 I"19c)1", '141T1I("F? 58(;)"„5il)'09"W 3723 7!, FN( 1E N0()"05'11"Al Itw9.91' 11) TI IN l t"11tr1'1' (11' 93Ir:C1TNN N(1. C()N`I"/1IP NI NC T,411 AC"13ES, M()RE OR I,I"' 3Ir. 'tI133t`('"1 Il"O ll't IJANINt"I I%4(311'1` "1'O Al :30' 1')1440^4 ACCT',) AIN ) I0II.,11"i I'ASF'.kII<I`•;IT''1`I11 N()I3"1'41 ialt(4 011 11/11TC"II BEING MOP I'a, PA RR'19(411 ARJ 1Y 1)I"YI C 1141pE!) AS I'^S)I.1LOWS, Tft WIT: 13IXIIN d1NU A"TT'I",I II≤ 011()4 11111 I'll (N )R'N FR OF 111'rI1.I.,I N I)I; C..'I.IIBI'11 TRACT ANI) R.11Ni`!11'J(A'HI EE,NC1;N39O58'/r1[b"[73523 T TO TTI IF '134 14 0rIl I(T1I1lI4) 13 01 L , C')( I' NC RTC)11C'`A d SAS R()A4) ANI,.)1]-111'Y PC) INT OF'T'1_'RNIINAIUl NI SMWi"I(InrI,10 AN .1 T I 1 WAYS 1 R4. (.. RE" , I,C)'I" '1I w.11: A PAR.1' O1' ILIC.')'1` 2I, L3I/OC"aril 1, (TA' JV11"3 :M(>IJ I'I`I IN, A. 5)1JI3L)I1r1 1ON TN 1VI JHJ.IN(I'I'(.)11 COUNTY, ARKANSAS., AS El 1'1,0,1' ON Hit IN '1'I IF OFFICT'. OF Ti IN ("Il2C'Ei1 I" t.'1_,1'I K AN F) EX -OF R FC(RPI'R OF WAS111NCTT.(.)N (.1011N"FYI ARK.AtdC3AS, 111"INO MORE PA RTI( t 1 A RI /Y lY1Ia19(_'1).1I34 T_) AS WIT: d Y .�.. INC.. -Y Il.. D' t %+.a r,, .. .,, e.., INN .. �{ v r .., FN( 'F 1 OI LOWS,It_) 1)141. 1BIJt"T;0NF1C_, 101 TI IF [IOI�a1I4th-T.;L�I ( C)I�C11,IL O S 3 .( I ? I 1^d93cat>C;fl l "I; 31:3.1) Jim' .1 (FN("I S00'05 11 "E, 18(311) 9'1 I1/;N("'1, 589°59'09"W 343 97! 'Er1T9";1° t`I'; N0005 1 I "1N' 189.94' 1"(:) 111F PC O1' 1 1"iG4NNIN0, CONTAIN! NC 1,50 AC"I3PS, MORE OR ITISS. IIAV1NC1 RI( ";I'IFS "i'i) f1 "0' W"II)i A(S'I,S AND UT! LIT Y ItASIa,MI`..N l' TI IF N()R I'lI 111° 1, OF 1V141("{T 13FING MOR F PAR IC11)I_AR.I.,'t' I)1:1AC1'TI11'I) A S 4 t)L_I ,O1 S, IC)I,?6:C"INN IN(i AT 11ET,NO 1911'0 T CC IFI .OF lI[PH1N DID` C'RU 'C») 'I RACT A t<JI)1(11NNI:t0C1 '4`114'=N(`1. T'08Y5 8'45"E 35237 '1F(I'L I IF. W!"IIS RI( III'1" OFa—WAY OF NC )RTI I (,'ANVAS ROAD /1 1'1"1I'. 1PC)1Ni' OF Ti h;I CTI1`! N'9+467 0. 514)43.43"/(;Tr TO I .ASE',MFINTS AND Ul(H 11 OF WAYS OF I(.E 011.4:), C,I1() RU) El 1J\R I NC S 26"50"41" Ew DELTA TA ANGL ,3°24,7,"..__ 1cs1 ym41, 9 11,1"ILI h (1,Tu14E IC 11 1 T; C)I` (.))F114I,1t.Si II1' S. T.)I;I 1C + 1 40Nr W1"s IE`IIT:'J11.1N1)4'544.,I(INFI) ) X19' :,)4.; 1 i YO ': ) 1, �..I ., (' . F, ER %., I E. I C( I,+,� EN I IJ�C I i l 1. 1 II1N9 1 I,T,)1 1,W"I.N I (100�) OWNER S11IF O1;' "1T!E REAL 1."N]'!1"I"@ SIlOW'N ANE) DESC I II>R IN, DO I ...1.. �. .w.... Y r.r. ,y ., _ ,,, ".. ER Sir..y .-w .ar ,+y r t 1� s ». NJ) 1 1 ALLEYS IT4 134,4, � I I,L�1( 1 ( 3 OWN "� !i I. 1 F(9 11,4 �� t FIli1 111 1F1 � �, 1°� I ALL . 41 9 ,E . I �1, 4 x S AS FOR 411134,1(,' 131'1noNF'EWIr A`9 I^IC1'5(.'13TIBI'"1) BY 4 MV, 4 IC.) �111I�0 ON 1111 `� I'I"„� 1 HIFOWNERS ALSO 1)09)4('\YITs 11) CITY OF6FAY 11E.,'v'44,1a1,AND'TOTIIi, PI,'T3LIC" I1111,.Ir:E`Y" CON1PA,NiiE (INC:_IIDINU ANY ('A.1BI_;E, I"1?T.rFVI iON COMM NY IIOI_./1.)1Nsi A FRANC! US GRANI IIII) 9-3 ' WASI IINGx 1 ON C"O? 1N'_Y) TI I F F",ASF N11'Nll"S AS SII1()"Af1N ON TT -11S Fl_A AT 9'C)R [I IF P1JICI P( )S OF . 'i 1. ", r ,. ". ,i ..4. ,, ,,,4. _( Y .. ., .,. , _ IN5.RhIrI.:A "lION OF I'N,I!W IIACll IT! 9,J /\ NE) 1'I IE REPAIR OF EXI5'I'IN(I [AC T1:IT] I".S, Al SO ES LAW. III I) IIEI1I,BY IS lHC: RUHI] OF IN( "IB[5 AN!) 1J(,l#1^,`x`13 TO SAiT_)11,lST, tIIFNTS, TIIl.RICH IT TO Pitt)! IDlE 'U IF MITI':(."'T1()NOF 4°)iJ1T I)ET0(r S. SIR I ICTElRIYl , OR FENCI I 1v'TI TI UN 1191.) IA`ASFM"I'Lnd"JS AN!)'Hi RIG,111 I'0 REM Ii OR 1 RI.NMT: "4 4 9°,1_ E, 1V4 4"I IIN SAID 13A. SEMEN• I?A 11; ()11!NE:P. TI).A.. 1 I:3 (I)1VNI...It l'lOjI"?� "1C.(. EP 4 010( E', OF 1 I llS 10,11 1 .DO. NE f GE 1111irN,111"1;1"1, SI.1i I IC"' `r STEM P.. , r1T T 4(()1/1111. 9 "1I ' 1'l.fe 'I PA( .E: I HERESY CERTIFY TAIL TO E3E TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF ON1 ' v"..,,.,.r...,.,.,».r...,...,.,—.....Dr i OF' .,,,,..,m...,..»..._,...,.....»w.,,...e 200$ I $ C , :' STATE OF / ARKANSAS �y 1 q q2 (9 ��b NO. 14 p m" -ewtl Qf 1. W1„y mm % - C�� ,. <I,e"�a" ,* ^"ale:' /{/ 1� �' Y T .+ (�r..i bl.lJ m { life11111111101 IF THE SIGNATURE ON THIS r"EPL. i',`i NOT AN ORIGINAL. AND NOT BLUE IN COLOR THEN ' SHOULD ASSUMED THAI r Ii BE 1L;A7 THIS €^LAT MAY l' 4 f NA1 BEEN ALTClAF �,T i A' F C .,D (FI. r, t�\F � F,I7LilC"� TJ ION THE � Y7 SHALL. NOT APPLY TO ANY COPY YHA,'L DOES NOT f,- rY A AND SIG NATURE. 4 DEAF? AN ORIGINAL SEAL 1. AiY � .it, �A . Irr L L. Li 4 C T E, 0 .rmm.wm.v,mrc i i ..mmm. i i .mn,Nmxr.rvmm4,av ,m.,nv rvvnur.rvv. �_ [ [ < T}IES!E STANDARD SYAMDl)I 5 WILL BE FOUND IN 1T9F DRAWING, 4.. Ft Ya, v.. t � Irl :.. LI I,'' a ,..� .. n♦ \" C 1 l:ti I.�J U� mil !Y l4Y '.xY \", l.. ILI I;j 11!1 ti rv"y Lt" L�'1 f„ u7 "Le "-r r7 xH 1.1 •'.,) rYr r)r Yn 41re 4V •,y, l .r P r , i.`,, lY� C,.) 1 ^ rr,: E,r,7 C I� 4r, ,fll^^1 rItI rs' ,x. � U! '4„11 a (N r 1..,. ry 6xi ^ 7.y cn r„ r' lti ti r r 1 .p. l,� 4 V' bhVY N '. . IYi ^� r w7 T. "t fI lr7 P, I. rrvt 1 l �u IyY t.;p LY r 1 f VUN %rrl l i e l#,V '4 4% y tr w L tr id >.; ' 1... t. n Cl)('17, ),,a f".; �+� va ;f2 In Yaa Icl ., K1Ia „'@( ) C .vs I CSI I E I I I E F., Jr l.,.a �.T nN W 11a ('.1 re ,7 w :t4aa, brA V1 J 4ta r`. lE,,'.. ";T fM U7 Cl Y17 to ILI 4xJ !fi fr QM „M 4J `"l ttt X11 l u Sx'i v i a.) L) TIT „u u 1 J r Yd ',1 i.`,x �,.^ ' s rM r--� �^,� ,ra t:l'l �w .c14, .r'f `i {i. ),Y I I Lt )l l I j x i I I i I I ri i W r I I I I 1 I I I j I I i j 01 .. r r I✓ Y } � TT nia + '�1 TI U4• Y 1i „e " G, <C lug ; C, r.l 411 ^ rT, ," 1 117 �1A Yl1 .fJ tw C 1 u. ':3.rn ` (( ^�) Id ' al nl ^)C%1iµ �» Yom; t%' I,1 1Y"1 ir+Nr fYr fml C\ Id' /I fX ,Ifx I.LYi llllra i I ,I M1, f 1 . ' l5 4}'t, r rai. (,; wa Cl, rvCv n, M)+, 1.»/ F"' iZ o { IZ.->C±_•W C) 'C N ,n p y J. b: ^e Y 1 1 C. a :"] ' a T µ M } n ei A YY CI? ie .{Y r n `. MA eM1 1., ..` �✓� CV U ctl . r T yt l• "�' C Iww ":4 �pp n rderal" , _ ,. NVJ 0 ` 4 r i m W +' fyp, 1' w rt K, P"`f Ir)' rs m r, e• G3 <Y i4 ./ In t % y 11 MM �n, 9 rt r n, .. rm 3p 11} k , r ce .c t .1 b, - ry x1. U: y, � LY 1�1 1« r IW . iL 1,77 c; G sl rr at iJ 1. r., 1ii' c I J. 4 1 4 Y 1 Ifi. Y1 S Y [ x ll rxawra toi 'ryY C� .n} `•'' n I...i' 7 a"t Pr^ i...b .> +, ; Fg9A •• .„ v� �lfi 4r' fi'� J,fi F, iCr Gi5 '�' di � to H.Iv 1 y 1' .P'm 1, �' A. n ie, IJ 7 ;Iry' 1 yh 7 to t " t r 7 ' S, 111 CI V1 Ian xT � e1 3 ' iy I. I 1 ry`� Y'„ a c" t C, (1, kMl s'•":'•'•'•"C0 ��` • Yom! t. ;) rd ua 4aa P. C n» .<,c C) /x all vna4 La;.� Li� in ", 1.111 a"'i Fw N y: TM ��. fS7lM1"p C f (f1 alb c^ ra'-a I;eJ Cxi wl e'.- 44 CY u�' ' • 1 O i <A tw C;;- "0 00 1 `E) BRA W N(A"# 0-'729 �rq�" rcrtkIC0.RAWM1InR n.mrnm.r:n:,rsahrtaamm�alym�y„rvm.em w�"rmnmsvvrnmn�mwmnv [In,,.^' 'y ''N1t p nunxp smryr " �xg "'Nf�y}/lM1" '^a?Ill� J.f �� fl�, N.mIVI A'(4/VniYo-✓