Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout157-14 RESOLUTIONRESOLUTION NO. 157-14 A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT IN WHICH THE CITY AGREES TO PURCHASE ABOUT 11 ACRES OF LAND INCLUDING TWO HOUSES AND ANY OUTBUILDINGS FROM MARY L. DUNN FOR THE AMOUNT OF ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,100,000.00), TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR JORDAN TO SIGN ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR THIS PURCHASE AND TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WHEREAS, Mayor Jordan has signed the attached Offer and Acceptance Contract which is expressly contingent upon approval of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the owner, Mary L. Dunn has also signed the attached Offer and Acceptance Contract. NOW, THEREFORE 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 approves and agrees to the attached Offer and Acceptance Contract in the amount of One Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,100,000.00) to be paid as specified therein to Mary L. Dunn for the purchase of her property (about I 1 acres) and authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign all necessary documents to carry out this purchase including a contract with the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. Section 2: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the attached budget adjustment for this purchase. PASSED and APPROVED this 19'h day of August, 2014. APPROVED: By: ATTEST: By: SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerkfl'`e aW: lV' 1',.!r1 i.,(f��, - • •tip City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2014-0361 Legistar File ID 8/19/2014 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item Alison Jumper 8/11/2014 Parks & Recreation / Parks & Recreation Department Submitted By Submitted Date Division Department Action Recommendation: Approval of the purchase of approximately 10.95 acres of land including two single family residences adjacent to Gulley Park for $1,100,000 and approval of a Budget Adjustment. 2250.9255.5805.00 Account Number 14017. 1 Project Number Budgeted Item? No Does item have a cost? Yes Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes Budget Impact: Parks Development Fund Gulley Park Land Acquisition Current Budget Funds Obligated Current Balance Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Project Title $ - $ 700,000.00 $ 700,000.00 V20140710 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # j ED Original Contract Number: / ( Approval Date: — a - Comments: Funds proposed in the 2015 Capital Improvement plan for 2015 and 2016 will be utilized to fund this project. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association has committed to raise the remaining $130,000. $270,000 will be paid in 2016. CITY OF I Takee IeARKANAS TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: Alison Jumper, Park Planning Superintendent DATE: August 8, 2014 SUBJECT: Gulley Land Purchase Agenda Item Mayor and City Council, STAFF MEMO The City has been negotiating an offer to purchase approximately 10.95 acres adjacent to Gulley Park from the Dunn family. The family has been very gracious during this process and has allowed the City time to prepare an offer contingent upon City Council approval. The family has always envisioned this land becoming an extension of Gulley Park and offered the City the first chance to purchase the land. An offer has been accepted by the seller and we are submitting this for your approval for the August 19th City Council meeting. The contract negotiation required to bring a proposal to the City Council was not finalized until after the City Council agenda deadline. We are requesting this item be walked on at the August 12th City Council agenda session in order to keep the process moving forward and not delay closing on the property. Expediting the decision on the offer and placing this item on the August 19th meeting would be helpful for the family to move forward with their plans. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 CITY OF RY04-lie ANSAS MEETING OF AUGUST 19, 2014 TO: Mayor and City Council CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO THRU: Justin Tenant, City Council Alderman, Ward 3, Position 1 Don Marr, Chief of Staff Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: Alison Jumper, Park Planning Superintendent DATE: August 8, 2014 SUBJECT: Approval to Purchase approximately 10.95 acres of land adjacent to Gulley Park RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the purchase of approximately 10.95 acres of land including two single family residences adjacent to Gulley Park for $1,100,000. BACKGROUND: Gulley Park is a 27 acre community park that was created in 1988 when the Fred Gulley family sold the land to the City of Fayetteville. Its walking trail, playgrounds, pavilion and open space are very highly used by citizens city wide. Fayetteville is fortunate to have many parks, however Gulley is one of the few parks that still retains a somewhat pastoral atmosphere due to the nature of the land, open, non -programmed usable green space. As many are aware, people do not have to be actively engaged in any particular outdoor sport or recreation activity to reap the benefits of being in nature. Often it just takes 'being' in nature to reset. The addition of the land to the north is a natural expansion of what the City currently provides and will preserve that pastoral setting to which people appear to flock. Gulley Park is one of the City's most popular parks. It is home to the Gulley Park Concert Series, which has completed its 18th consecutive year. The concerts draw an average crowd of 1,000 people per show. In 2013, citizens reserved the Gulley Park pavilions over 400 times. In additions, many events are held at Gulley Park such as the annual Dogwood Walk, Cow Paddy Run and our own drama camp. The property adjacent to the park has been offered for sale. A group of citizens formed the Friends of Gulley Park group in support of purchasing the property and they are currenity raising funds to assist in the purchase. An offer and acceptance contract has been signed by the seller (attached). DISCUSSION: The City of Fayetteville solicited bids to conduct an appraisal of the land. Reed and Associates, Inc. was the low bid. According to the attached appraisal, the land and two homes are worth $970,000. Staff is requesting approval to make an offer to purchase the land and two residences Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 for $1,100,000 The offer includes an initial payment of $700,000, a second payment $270,000 to be made on February 1, 2016 and a final payment of $130,000 on February 1, 2017. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA) has committed to raise $130,000 above the appraised value. The efforts of the "Friends of Gulley Park" group have already raised a substantial amount of the $130,000 to go towards FNHA's commitment. The opportunity to preserve greenspace in the center of the city does not present itself often. This property acquisition would add important land to the City's parks system, improving upon our Green Infrastructure. A public meeting will be held at some point in the future to determine the citizen's desires for development of the approximate 9.7 acres addition to Gulley Park. A master plan will be designed and presented to the public and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board for approval. BUDGETISTAFF IMPACT: Funding for the purchase would come from the Parks Development Funds proposed in 2015 of the Capital Improvement Plan ($700,000), and 2016 ($270,000). The original proposal for the 2015 capital project included the renovation of the trail, lighting, and additional parking at Gulley Park. These Gulley Park improvements would be delayed until the next five year Capital Improvement Plan. The current proposed 2016 capital project is to make improvements at Wilson Park to the rock house, restroom, basketball court and playground. if the purchase of the land adjacent to Gulley is approved, it is anticipated that the two lots with homes fronting Old Wire Road would be sold. The revenue from the sale of these houses will go towards the second payment of $270,000 in 2016 and will help replenish the funding planned for the improvements to Wilson Park. This land purchase would increase maintenance costs minimally as it will be incorporated into the existing maintenance plan for Gulley Park. Attachments: Offer and Acceptance Contract Letter of Commitment from FNHA Appraisal Staff Review Form CITY OF lFa%yrle AS TO: Connie Edmonston, Parks & Recreation Director THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff FROM: Connie Edmonston, Parks & Recreation Director DATE: August 11, 2014 STAFF MEMO SUBJECT: Change of CIP if Gulley Park Land Expansion Purchase is approved RECOMMENDATION: If the Gulley Park land expansion is approved, there will be a couple of changes to our CIP as follows: 1. Gulley Park land expansion purchase: $1,100,000 2015: $700,000 2016: $270,000 2017: $130,000 — Contracted to be funded by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association. 2. In 2015, the original proposal of $700,000 to renovate the trail and lighting, and providing additional parking at Gulley Park will be delayed until the next five year Capital Improvement Plan. 3. The current proposed 2016 capital project is to make improvements at Wilson Park to the rock house, restroom, basketball court and playground. It is anticipated that the two lots with homes fronting Old Wire Road would be sold. The revenue from the sale of these houses will go towards the second payment of $270,000 in 2016 and will help replenish the funding planned for the improvements to Wilson Park Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street www.fayetteville-ar.gov Fayetteville, AR 72701 RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT IN WHICH THE CITY AGREES TO PURCHASE ABOUT I ACRES OF LAND INCLUDING TWO HOUSES AND ANY OUTBUILDINGS FROM MARY L. DUNN FOR THE AMOUNT OF ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,100,000.00), TO AUTHORIZE MAYOR JORDAN TO SIGN ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR THIS PURCHASE AND TO APPROVE THE ATTACHED BUDGET ADJUSTMENT WHEREAS, Mayor Jordan has signed the attached Offer and Acceptance Contract which is expressly contingent upon approval of the City Council; and WHEREAS, the owner, Mary L. Dunn has also signed the attached Offer and Acceptance Contract. NOW, THEREFORE 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 approves and agrees to the attached Offer and Acceptance Contract in the amount of One Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,100,000.00) to be paid as specified therein to Mary L. Dunn for the purchase of her property (about 11 acres) and authorizes Mayor Jordan to sign all necessary documents to carry out this purchase including a contract with the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. Section l: That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby approves the attached budget adjustment for this purchase. PASSED and APPROVED this 19th day of August, 2014. APPROVED: By: By: ATTEST: LIONELD JORDAN, Mayor SONDRA E. SMITH, City Clerk/Treasurer CONTRACT Comes now on this — -I day of August, 2014, the City of Fayetteville and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. which agree as follows: • The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. is a nonprofit corporation which seeks to preserve beautiful and important natural areas and parkland in and near Fayetteville, Arkansas. • The City of Fayetteville and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. have worked cooperatively over the last several years in joint projects to preserve the Mount Sequoyah Woods, the Brooks -Hummel natural area, and most recently the Mt. Kessler Preserve. a In order to encourage, enable and assist the City of Fayetteville to meet the acquisition costs of about 10 acres of open space owned by Mary L. Dunn, the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. pledges to raise One Hundred and Thirty Thousand Dollars ($130,000.00) by January 1, 2017 and pay this amount to the City as the last portion of the costs of this million dollar acquisition. • The City of Fayetteville agrees that because of this promise by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc., it will purchase the Mary L. Dunn property at a price that is $130,000.00 more than the appraisal obtained by the City. IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROMISES above, we sign below: FAYETTEVILLE NATURAL CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE ASSOCIATION, INC. 1 JOHN COLEMAN CHAIRMAN 8 MAYOR JORDAN ATTEST:1)4 Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment Form (I,egistar) Budget Year Division: Parks & Recreation Adjustment Number 2014 Dept.: Parks & Recreation Requestor: Connie Edmonston BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION: Staff is requesting approval to make an offer to purchase the land and two residences for $1,100,000 The offer includes an initial payment of $700,000, a second payment $270,000 to be made on February 1, 2016 and a final payment of $130,000 on February 1, 2017. $130,000 will be paid by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA). COUNCIL DATE: LEGISTAR FILE ID#: 8/19/201A 2014-0361 xeASpringer 8/11/2014 4:22 PM Budget Director Date TYPE: DESCRIPTION: I GLDATE: RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE POSTED: % TOTAL 700,000 700,000 v.20140716 Increase / (Decrease) Project.Sub# Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub AT Account Name 2250.9255.5805.00 700,000 - 14017 1 EX Land Acquisition 2250.0925.4999.99 - 700,000 RE Use of Fund Balance C:\Users\cdjones\AppDato\Roaming\L5\Temp\f287cc75-ead7-4b74-a81d-616c42d69db1 1 of 1 OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT 1. The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation, offers to buy, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein (especially Paragraph 18), the following described property: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" FOR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2. Purchase Price: Subject to the following conditions, the City of Fayetteville shall pay for the property at closing the initial payment of $700,000.00, with the second payment of $270,000.00 to be made on February 1, 2016, and a final payment of $130,000.00 on February 1, 2017 for a total purchase price amount of $1,100,000.000 (One Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars). 3. Contingent Earnest Money Deposit: The City of Fayetteville herewith tenders a check in the amount of $ 1,000.00 to Mary L. Dunn, surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn, as earnest money, which shall apply on the purchase price. This offer of purchase is contingent upon approval of the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and, it they do not so approve, the earnest money deposit will be returned to the City of Fayetteville by Mary L. Dunn. If title requirements are not fulfilled or Mary L, Dunn fails to fulfill any obligations under this contract, the earnest money shall be promptly refunded to Fayetteville, -4. Conveyance will be made to the City of Fayetteville by general Warranty Deed, except it shall be subject to recorded instruments and easements, if any, which do not materially affect the value of the property_ Such conveyance shall include mineral rights owned by Mary L. Dunn. 5, Mary L. Dunn shall furnish a policy of title insurance in the amount of the purchase price from a title insurance company as selected by the City of Fayetteville. The City of Fayetteville and Mary L. Dunn shall share equally in the cost of the title insurance 6. Mary L. Dunn agrees to allow the City of Fayetteville, if the City of Fayetteville so desires, at City of Fayettev 1 lie's expense, to survey the property. Mary L. Dunn agrees to cure any title problems which may result from any differences between the recorded legal descriptions of the property and the survey description. Said title problems, if any, must be solved prior to closing to the satisfaction of the City of Fayetteville. 7. Taxes and special assessments due on or before closing shall be paid by Mary L. Dunn_ Insurance, general taxes, ad valorem taxes, special assessments and rental payments shall be prorated as of closing. 8. The closing date shall be within one hundred and twenty (120_) days after approval of this offer by the City Council. If such date of closing fails on a weekend or holiday, it will be held the following working clay. g. Possession of the property shall be delivered to the City of Fayetteville on the date of closing except that Mary Dunn shall be allowed to retain possession of both houses and the outbuildings for 120 days rent free and will still have the risk of loss during this 120 day period and shall pay for and keep both houses and all outbuildings fully insured with the City being the insured. Property taxes for the entire property shall be prorated not to the date of closing, but to 120 days after closing. 10. Mary L. Dunn hereby grants permission for the City of Fayetteville or its employees or designates to enter the above described property and improvements for the purpose of inspection and/or surveying. 11. All fixtures, improvements and attached equipment are included in the purchase price. 12. Risk of loss or damage to the property by fire or other casualty occurring up to the time of closing and 120 days thereafter is assumed by Mary L. Dunn. 13, Mary L. Dunn shall disclose to the City of Fayetteville any and all environmental hazards of which Mary L. Dunn has actual knowledge. Should the existence of environmental hazards be known or determined, Mary L. Dunn shall cure such, at her expense; or, in the alternative, at the City of Fayetteville's discretion, the City of Fayetteville may cure such environmental hazard, and Mary L. Dunn shall indemnify the City of Fayetteville for all costs associated with said cure. OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT Page 2 of 4 14. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Arkansas. 15. This agreement, when executed by both the City of Fayetteville and Mary L. Dunn shall contain the entire understanding and agreement of the parties with respect to the matters referred to herein and shall supersede all price or contemporaneous agreements, representations and understanding with respect to such matters, and no oral representations or statements shall be considered a part hereof. 16. This contract expires, if not accepted by Mary L_ Dunn on or before the 41h. day of August, 2014. 17. The City of Fayetteville shall submit this fully executed Offer and Acceptance Contract to the City Council for their approval within twenty (20) days of acceptance by Mary L. Dunn. 18. NOTICE: THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ASSERTS AND MARY L. DUNN HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS OFFER IS EXPRESSLY CONTINGENT UPON THE APPROVAL OF THIS OFFER OF PURCHASE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FAYETTEVILLE AND THAT THE FAILURE OF THE COUNCIL. TO SO APPROVE WILL MAKE ALL PORTIONS OF THIS OFFER NULL AND VOID, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE RETURN TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE OF THE $1.000-00 EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT. Date: A- q-4- 5u4 Mary L. Ounn Date: r[t3z►its]3T,] CC,,t;-*3 e Date: :Amuni, ty of Fa , tteville, Arkans , I corporation !'G �' �L Date: r ` I in crrl .Inrri n Matrn � ��1111111111j", ,") atl c..k I`,i�4i fi err' i.:. �.,, Date: -1l i Sandra Smith, City ClerkEi ' r ''�<<!l11111'11151titi,`` OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Parcel No. 765-16080-000: Part of the East half of the Southwest Quarter and part of the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36. in Township 17 North, of Range 30 West, described as follows: Beginning at a point 1485 feet East and 805113 feet North of the South West corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, and running thence North 0°10' East 1185.2 feet; thence North 89" West 220 feet; thence South 33'36' West 486.6 feet; thence South 42'6' West 127.6 feet; thence South 30011' West 124 feet; thence South 47' East 861.6 feet to the pdntof beginning, containing 9.7 acres, more or less. AND Parcel No. 765-16092-000: Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest gtrarter of Section thirty six (36) in Township seventeen (17) North of Range lhirly (30) West, described cis follows: I tegir ruing two hunched for ty-five and uric tenth (245.1) feel West .Ind four hundred ninelyone (491) feet North of the South Fast corner of said forty arse tract, thence South 12'8'11" West fifty -mine acid seven-tentlis (59.7) feet for a plare, of beginning, and running, thence North 87'37'16" West one hundred ninety-eight and eighty-five Itundredlhs (198.85) feet, more or less, to Fast line of Old Wire Road; thence South 28055"19" West one and eight -[etill is (1.8) feet with East right of way line of said road; thence South 60°58'19" East two hundred five arid 5r.,venty-five Ititriclrcxillis (205.75) feet; thence North 1200811" East ninety-five and three -tenths (95.3) feet to the place of beginning. AND Parcel No. 765-16095-000: Part of the Northeast Quarter (NE%) of the Southwest Quarter (SW%) of Section Thirty-six (36) in Township Seventeen (17) North of Range Thirty (30) West, beginning two hundred forty-five and one -tenth (245.1) feet West and four hundred ninety-one (491) feet North of the Southeast comer of said forty (40) acre tract, and running, thence South 12 degrees 8'1 1"Westone hundred fifty-five (155) feet for a point of beginning to the land herein described, and running, thence North 60 degrees 58'19" West two hundred five and seventy-five (205.75) feet, more or less, to the East right-of-way line of the Old Wire Road; thence South 28 degrees 65'11"West with said East line one hundred (100) feet; thence South 60 degrees 58'19" East two hundred (200) feet; thence Northeasterly one hundred (100) feetto the point of beginning. Subject to easements, rights -of -way and restrictive covenants, If any. SIGNED FOR IDENTIFICATION: AU.. 'Ie Date: Mary L. Dunn - - field Jordan, M_aygr ��1.. 4f1 � 4���• Smith, City Clerk t�ti�ytt I rrrrrrr� \�\�,• �. Y�, 1, l �'i ' fr��i Date: Date. r Date: OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT Page 4 of 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this date, before the undersigned, a duly commissioned and acting Notary Public within and for said County and State, personally appeared Mary L. Dunn, surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn, to me well known as the persons who executed the foregoing document, and who stated and acknowledged that she had so signed, executed and delivered said instrument For the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. WITNESS my hand and seal on this -0_ day of Atjus , 20'14. N '_,,�1�, COIJNI Ia1ES MY C4MMISSIoi`i # 12366744 EXPIRES: July 28, 2018 "';��q'r^�� Washin on Coup ACKNOWLEDGMENT MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this.date, before the undersigned, a duly commissioned and acting Notary Public within and for said County and State, personally appeared Lioneld Jordan and Sondra Smith, to me well known as the persons who executed the foregoing document, and who stated and acknowledged that they are the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation, and are duly authorized in their respective capacities to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said municipal corporation, and further stated and acknowledged that they had so signed, executed and delivered said instrument for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. WITNESS my hand and seal on this day of �, .� , 2014. kVrtn4`i(;l��,No ry Public MY COMMISSION EXPIRES. �.`` v:,�; ; • �' ',,, Ile • wn „511r. the I ayett."010 Natural Heritage A000c ativn ig Acdieated to conaerring natural at -cog of Fayettedile arO Wit ermlrom Far thr lreneflt of ere®Eril and Future generaLione August 10, 2014 Lioneld Jordan, Mayor City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Dear Mayor Jordan, Gulley Park, a 27 acre community park, is one of the few parks that we have that still retains a somewhat pastoral atmosphere due to the nature of the land, open, non -programmed usable green space As you know, people do not have to be actively engaged in any particular outdoor sport or recreation activity to reap the benefits of being in nature Often it just takes 'being' in nature to reset The proposed addition of the Dunn property to the north of the current Park boundary is a natural expansion and will preserve that pastoral setting to which people are attracted Niokaska Creek, which runs through the Park, is an Important feature of the City's Enduring Green Network providing a green corridor from this area west to Scull Creek The Watershed Conservation Resource Center has done a significant streambank restoration in the Park and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association has sponsored a number of invasive plant removals along the Creek The City of Fayetteville Master Trail Plan calls for a multi -use trail to be built along Niokaska Creek The current target for building this trail is 2016 The Niokaska Creek Trail would go through Sweetbriar Park, also the site of a WCRC streambank restoration, and close to Butterfield School before joining Mud Creek Trail Butterfield School has the highest percentage of students that waWbike to school today The Niokaska Creek Trail is expected to increase the use of Gulley Park in two ways The Park will became an eastern access point to the Fayetteville Trail sys- tem with good parking and bathrooms, and the Trail will bring visitors to the Park from the west like Butterfield Trail Village residents The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, working with the Friends of Gulley Park and the Cow Paddy Foundation, has pledged to raise $130,000 toward the purchase of the Dunn property to be paid to the City on or before January 1, 2017 The Friends of Gulley Park have close to $35,000 raised and verbal pledges for another $30,000 The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association is working on another pledge to provide community support toward the purchase of the Kessler Mountain Reserve, but we felt it important to accept this additional challenge because opportunities to add to important Enduring Green Network features in urban areas are rare, and City staff is excited about expanding this very highly used park Sincerely John Coleman r L Chairman F 0 Boy 3635 Fayetteville, Arkarma5 72702-3635 W fayetteviIlenaturaI a-q APPRAISAL REPORT ON THE "GULLEY PARK EXPANSION" PROPERTY; TWO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS SITUATED ON 1.25j= ACRES, AND 9.7=L ACRES OF EXCESS LAND; LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF NORTH OLD WIRE ROAD, SOUTHWEST OF NORTH OLD MISSOURI ROAD, IN FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS; WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS HIM REED & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3739 N. STEELE BLVD., SUITE 220 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS Appraisal No. 5301 AS OF JULY 10, 2014 Real Estate Appraisers — Consultants 3739 N. Steele Blvd., Suire 220, r-ayetteville, AR 72703 • 479.521-6313 ` Fax: 479-521-6315 ' w�v�v.rredapplrri.cal.bi� Tom Reed, MAI s Brian Kell orthy • Barbara Rhoads • Shannon Mueller a Katie Hampton July 18, 2014 City of Fayetteville Attn: Ms. Connie Edmonston Director of Parks & Recreation 1455 South Happy Hollow Rd Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 RE: Appraisal Report on the "Gulley Park Expansion" property; two single-family residential dwellings situated on 1.25E acres (ACS), and approximately 9.7± ACS of excess land; located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. Dear Ms. Edmonston: In compliance with your request and for the purpose of estimating the market value of the above captioned property, I hereby certify that I have examined the subject property and have made a survey of matters pertinent to the estimation of its value. I further certify that I have no interest, present or contemplated, in the property appraised and that my fee was not contingent upon the value estimate reported. The following written real property appraisal report contains data gathered in my investigation, information from my files, and shows the method of appraisal in detail. This report has been prepared under the Appraisal Report option. Based upon an analysis of relevant data and contingent upon the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions which follow and appear later in this report, it is my opinion the market value of the fee simple estate of the subject property, as of July 10, 2014, was: NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS (S970,000) The preceding value reflects terms equivalent to cash to the owner, and represents that for real property only. No personal property has been included in this valuation assignment. The preceding value estimate is based upon the following Extraordinary Assumptions: L That the subject and adjacent properties are in compliance with all applicable EPA regulations; 2. That the subject excess acreage does not need a second point of ingress/egress; 3. That the subject dwellings are structurally sound, and are not adversely affected by the presence of mold or other environmental issues; 4. That the plumbing, electrical, and HVAC systems in the subject dwellings are in proper working order; and, 5. That the subject land and dwelling sizes are approximately as indicated. If any, or all, of these Extraordinary Assumptions prove to be untrue, the preceding value estimate could be influenced. The reader is referred to additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions appearing in the Introduction Section of this report. The estimated exposure time for the subject property is one± year or less. This was determined from an analysis of market conditions and comparable sales. At the request of the client, the contributory value of each of the subject parts to the market value of the subject whole property is broken down as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50f AC) = $111,500 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75± AC) = $218,500 9.71 ACS of Excess Laud = $640,000 Sincerely, Brian J. Kenworthy, CG3496 REED & ASSOCIATES, INC. `, ���L`•�E N I1F f���S�9 :, STATE •.v .o w: CERTIFIED GENERAL •" CG3496 KENW ��1trrltlll.�151ti5 3 PART I -INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page - - - - - - - - I Letter Of Transmittal - - - - - - - 2 PART I — INTRODUCTION Table Of Contents - - - - - - - 5 Subject Photographs - - - - _ _ _ 6 Certificate - - - - - _ _ _ _ 28 Assumptions And Limiting Conditions - - - - - - 29 Summary Of Important Conclusions - - - - - - 31 Qualifications of Brian Kenworthy - - - - - - - 34 PART II — FACTUAL DESCRIPTIONS Identification Of The Property - - - - - - - 36 Purpose Of The Appraisal - - - - - - - - 37 Definition of Market Value - - - - - - - 37 Intended UseJUser Of Report - - - - - - - 38 Property Rights Appraised- - - - - - - - 38 Scope Of The Appraisal - - - - - - - - 38 Ownership Of The Appraised Property - - - - - - 39 Date Of The Appraisal - - - - - - - - 39 Regional Map - - - - - - - - - 40 Area Data - - - - - - - - - 41 Market Area Map- - - - - - - 57 Market Area - - - - - - - - 58 Aerial - - - _ _ _ - 61 Description Of Site - - - - - - - 62 Zoning - - - - _ _ _ - 64 Assessment And Tax - - - - - - 64 Dwelling Sketches - - - - - - - 66 Description of Improvements - - - - - - 68 History - - - - _ _ _ _ - 69 PART III — ANALYSIS OF DATA AND OPINIONS OF THE APPRAISERS Highest And Best Use Analysis - - - - - - 72 Land Value - - - - - - - - - 78 Cost Approach - - - - _ _ _ _ _ 89 Sales Comparison Approach - - - - - - 93 Income Capitalization Approach - - - - - - - 119 Reconciliation - - - - - - - _ _ 119 Exposure Time - - - - - - - - - 122 PART IV — ADDENDA Assessment Records Deed Records Flood Zone Map Topography Map MLS Listing Profile Offer Letter to the City Comparable Land Listings Engagement Letter 5 _ �Il ;1.-"' f r-�s "�� 1. r !• I �I !� t� t �46, Dwellings K; Air -771 "Y —FIDE 7 �,` '��_'___ -rh �. .�\l h w " i+�(v.'� �� ��,a `• � 'mot-� NORTHWESTERN AND SOUTHWESTERN ELEVATIONS OF 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD LOOKING NORTHERLY SOUTHWESTERN ELEVATION OF 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD LOOKING NORTHEASTERLY NORTHWESTERN AND SOUTHWESTERN ELEVATIONS OF 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD LOOKING SOUTHWESTERLY SOUTHEASTERN ELEVATION OF 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD LOOKING NORTHWESTERLY LIVING ROOM IN 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD BEDROOM IN 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD BEDROOM IN 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD KITCHEN IN 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD 10 1 1 l�r f L. % l A of ~ I ` P_ low A.- LAUNDRY ROOM IN 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD GARAGE AT 2648 OLD WIRE ROAD 12 � rnrnI mI 044 Q 966r. - 'vf<- .MONO ILI I IF RL TL 4 .^ .1_rr�r t J 1 , i i 4or 4 _ � y r .aim him-& L ' w� ` �T•�k . `1� .ef � a. 2 R 1^t %,fir STREET SCENE LOOKING NORTHEASTERLY ALONG NORTH OLD WIRE ROAD VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING SOUTHWESTERLY FROM THE HOMESUES 20 VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING SOUTHERLY FROM THE HOMESITES VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE HOMESITES 21 VIEW OF THE SUBJECT SITE LOOKING SOUTHWESTERLY FROM MAGNOLIA DRIVE STREET SCENE LOOKING NORTHEASTERLY ALONG MAGNOLIA DRIVE FROM THE SUBJECT SITE 22 � ''.ate-!w'���..■y,�•�. .� ��_r�.�' .. .' � ice'" ��.`o it , • +MrrrM-�� '�� �.� �• .� r �L,ir'•�r� ��x.e a� - � rt • I VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING SOUTHERLY FROM THE NORTHERN PART OF THE SITE VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING SOUTHWESTERLY TOWARDS THE HOMESITE FROM THE NORTHERN PART OF THE SITE 24 limp , Y " �.11 ... r. :w %1-., 'JillIlk- .. _ r' L' -qj VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING NORTHEASTERLY FROM THE WESTERN PART OF THE SITE VIEW OF EXCESS ACREAGE LOOKING SOUTHEASTERLY FROM THE WESTERN PART OF THE SITE 27 CERTIFICATE I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief • The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. • I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. • I have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. • My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. • My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event. The appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan. • My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. • I, Brian Kenworthy, have not previously performed services, as an appraiser, or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. • Brian Kenworthy has examined the property that is subject of this report. • No one provided significant professional assistance to the persons signing this report. • I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. • I certify that the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. • As of the date of this report, I, Brian Kenworthy, have completed the Standards and Ethics Education Requirement of the Appraisal Institute for Associate Members. Sincerely, STATE s 4: CER11FIED Brian J. Kenworthy, CG3496 = G F w E R n t - REED & ASSOCIATES, INC. CC,34Or, 28 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS This Appraisal Report has been made with the following general assumptions: 1. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title consideration. Title to the property is assumed to be good and merchantable unless otherwise stated. 2. The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances unless otherwise stated. 3. Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. 4. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable. However, no warranty is given for its accuracy. 5. All engineering is assumed to be correct, The plot plans and illustrative material in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them. 7. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 8. It is assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless a nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 9. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. 10. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report. 11. "Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous materials which may or may not be present on the property was not observed by the appraiser. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions or any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert if desired." PQ This Appraisal Report has been made with the following general limiting conditions: The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. 2. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event only with proper written qualification and only in its entirety. The appraiser herein by reason of this appraisal is not required to give further consultation, testimony, or be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been previously made. 4. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser, or the firm with which the appraiser is connected) shall be disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations news, sales, or other media without the prior written consent and approval of the appraiser. 5. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. I (we) have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to determine whether or not it is in conformity with the various detailed requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey of the property together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the ADA could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property. Since I (we) have no direct evidence relating to this issue, I (we) did not consider possible noncompliance with the requirements of ADA in estimating the value of the property. 30 SUMMARY OF IMPORTANT CONCLUSIONS Client: City of Fayetteville, Parks & Recreation Department — Fayetteville, Arkansas Property Location: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. Purpose Of The Appraisal: Market value estimate Property Rights Appraised: Fee simple estate Ownership Of The Appraised Property: Allen & Mary L. Dunn Dates Of Value Estimate: July 10, 2014 Description Of Site: The subject site consists of approximately 10.95E acres (ACS), or 476,982E square feet (SF), of land area. The subject land area is allocated as follows: 2634 North Old Wire Road- 0.50:1: acre (AC); 2648 North Old Wire- 0.75f AC; and, excess land- 9.70E ACS_ The shape of the subject acreage is irregular, overall; each of the subject homesites is near rectangular in shape. The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. The subject acreage is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. The subject site has vehicular access/frontage along the southeast right-of-way of North Old Wire Road in the northwest part of the site (homesites); this frontage is considered near road grade. There is a drainage ditch located along the North Old Wire Road frontage. The subject site has additional frontage along the west right-of-way of the Magnolia Drive cul-de-sac in the southeast part of the site (excess land); this frontage is also considered near road grade. As of the effective date of this report, vehicular access to the subject site is not available via Magnolia Drive. The southwestern boundary of the subject site has frontage along Gulley Park. Approximately 0.3E AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site (excess land) is located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". All typical city utilities are located atinear the subject site. The subject acreage is located within the Fayetteville City Limits, and is zoned RSF-4 (Residential Single -Family- Four Units Per Acre). Please see Description of Site section later in this report for further details. Description Of Improvements: The subject property is improved with two single- family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316t square feet (SF) of living 31 area. In addition, this homesite includes a 372f SF attached garage, 460f SF attached shop, and 210f SF enclosed porch. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, laundry room, and storage closet. Kitchen appliances include an oven, range, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood and carpet floor cover; painted gypsum board and wood panel wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963f. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551± square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 580f SF attached garage, 340f SF enclosed porch, and 152f SF attached greenhouse. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, one half bathroom, a living room, den, kitchen, and storage closet. The laundry room is located in the garage. Kitchen appliances include an oven/range combination, built-in microwave, dishwasher, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes; wood, carpet, and tile floor cover; painted and wall papered gypsum board wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1961f. Discussions with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. This dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road is accessed via an asphalt paved drive, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road is accessed via a gravel paved drive. A 1,200+ square foot (SF) metal shop building is located behind the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road. The shop building has concrete floors, two- 8' manual overhead doors, electricity/plumbing, and is insulated. The shop building includes a 2-fixture restroom, and has wall heat and air units. In addition, there is a built- in vacuum system in the shop building. Discussions with the property owner indicated the "shop" building was originally constructed 15t years ago; the shop building is considered to be in average condition. Other site improvements include: 238f SF wood storage building; 529f SF wood lean-to agricultural building; well house; landscaping; garden; water feature; agricultural, chain link, and PVC fencing; etc. Please see Description of Improvements section later in this report for further details. Highest And Best Use: In my opinion, the ' iQhest and best use" of the su_ b_ieet is continued single-family residential use of the homesites, and to hold the subject excess land for future single-family residential or special-purpose development, within size/Flood Zone limitations, that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements, and in conformity to the Market Area, as demand dictates. 32 The agricultural improvements situated on the subject excess land are older and in poor condition. These improvements, in my opinion, do not provide any contributory value to the subject excess land. Final Value: Indicated Land Value "As Vacant": $765,000 Indicated Value by Cost Approach: Not Utilized Indicated Value by Sales Comparison Approach: $974,000 Indicated Value by Income Capitalization Approach: $969,000 INDICATED FINAL VALUE $970,000 The preceding value reflects terms equivalent to cash to the owner, and represents that for real property only. No personal property has been included in this valuation assignment. The preceding value estimate is based upon the following Extraordinary Assumptions: 1. That the subject and adjacent properties are in compliance with all applicable EPA regulations; 2. That the subject excess acreage does not need a second point of ingress/egress; 3. That the subject dwellings are structurally sound, and are not adversely affected by the presence of mold or other environmental issues; 4. That the plumbing, electrical, and HVAC systems in the subject dwellings are in proper working order; and, 5. That the subject land and dwelling sizes are approximately as indicated. If any, or all, of these Extraordinary Assumptions prove to be untrue, the preceding value estimate could be influenced. The reader is referred to additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions appearing in the Introduction Section of this report. The estimated exposure time for the subject property is one+ year or less. This was determined from an analysis of market conditions and comparable sales. At the request of the client, the contributory value of each of the subject parts to the market value of the subject whole property is broken down as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50f AC) = $111,500 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.751 AC) = $218,500 9.7f ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 33 QUALIFICATIONS OF BRIAN J. KENWORTHY EDUCATION B.S. Finance (Real Estate Concentration) — Clemson University — 2008 Master of Science, Real Estate (M,S.R.E.) — Georgia State University —2010 PROFESSIONAL COURSES COMPLETED Basic Appraisal Principles, 30-Hr. Course- Career Webschool — July 2009 Basic Appraisal Procedures, 30-Hr. Course- Career Webschool — July 2009 Residential Report Writing and Case Studies, 15-Hr. Course- Career Webschool — July 2009 Business Practices and Ethics- 7-Hr. Course — The Appraisal Institute, Atlanta Chapter — June 2010 National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 15-Hr. Course- Appraisal Institute — October 2011 General Appraiser Sales Comparison Approach, 30-14r. Course, Appraisal Institute — December 2011 General Demonstration Report Writing, 7-Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute- August 2013 Evaluating Commercial Construction, 15-Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute- October 2013 Appraisal of Real Estate 14a' Edition Webinar, 2- Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute- November 2013 National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 7-Hr. Course- Appraisal Institute — March 2013 OTHER RELAVENT COURSES COMPLETED Clemson University — Fall 2007 — Real Estate Finance Clemson University — Spring 2008 — Real Estate Investment Analysis Clemson University — Spring 2008 — Real Estate Valuation Georgia State University — Fall 2008 — Real Estate Development Georgia State University — Fall 2008 — Legal and Regulatory Environment of Real Estate Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Advanced Real Estate Investment Analysis Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Real Estate Case Analysis Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Strategic Management of Real Property in a Corporate Environment Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Real Property Project Planning and Development Georgia State University — Summer 2009 — Equity Real Estate Investment Trust Analysis Georgia State University — Fall 2009 — Applied Real Estate Market Analysis Georgia State University — Fall 2009 — Quantitative Analysis of Real Estate REAL ESTATE DESIGNATIONS/ASSOCIATIONS Arkansas Certified General Real Estate Appraiser No. CG3496 Associate Member of The Appraisal Institute Member, Ozark Mountain Appraisal Institute Chapter WORK EXPERIENCE August 2008 to August 2009 — Georgia State University Real Estate Department, Atlanta Georgia — Graduate Research Assistant August 2009 to August 2010 — Greystone Valuation Services, Inc., Atlanta Georgia — Assistant Appraiser August 2010 to Present —Reed & Associates, Inc., Fayetteville, Arkansas - Staff Appraiser/Consultant PART II -FACTUAL DESCRIPTIONS 35 IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the nortWnortheast of Gulley Park. The legal descriptions of the subject property are as follows: Part of the fast half of the Southwest Quarter and part of the West half of the' Southeast Quarter of Section 36, in Township 17 North, of Range 30 West, described as follows; Beginning at a point 1485 feet East and 805 1/3 feet North of the South West corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, and runningithetfce North•0'1D' East 1185.2 feet; thenci North 89• West 220 feet.; thence South 33.'36' feet t - ���, tilence Scum 4ZU ° west 127.6 feet;1i thence.4outh 30.11111 West '124 feet;'Hence South 47' E29-t 861.6 feet to the, point of,f+eginning, containing 9.y7 acres; more dr Less. !� r� K110,01� Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section thirty six (36) in ramship seventeen (17) North of Range thirty (30) best, described as follozise Beginning two hundred forty five and one -tenth (245.1) feet West and four hundred ninety one (491) feet North of the South East corner of said forty acre tract, thdnce South 1206'11" Kest fiftyL-nine and'sdkFen tenths(M 7)feet for o place of beginning, and running, thence North 67037'15" West one hundred ninety eight and eighty five hundredths (198.85) feet, more or less, to East line of Old Wire Road; thence South 26055' 19" Test one and eight -tenths (1.6) feet with East right of way line of said road; thence South 600580 19" East two hundred five and seventy five hundredths (205.75) feet; thence North 12009'11" East ninety five and three -tenths (95.3) feet to the place of beginning, -AND- Part of the Northeast Quarter (WA) of the Southwest Quarter (Swk) of Section Thirty-si (36) in Township seventeen (17) North of Range 'Thirty (30) west, beginning two hundred forty -Five and one -tenth (245.1) feet west and four hundred ninety-one (491) feet North of the Southeast corner of said forty (40) acre tract, and running, thence South 12 degrees 8'11" West one hundred fifty-five (155) feet for a point of beginning to the lands herein described, and running, thence North 60 degrees 58119" West two hundred five and seventy-five hundredths (205.75) feet, more or less to the East right of way line of the Old Wire road; thence South 23 degrees 65'11" west with said Tast line one hundred (100) feet; thence South 60 degrees 58'19" fast two hundred (200) feet; thence Northeasterly one hundred (100) feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easnimnts, rights -of -way and restrictive covenants, if any. 36 Based on Assessment Records, the total land area is indicated to be 10.95± acres (ACS). The first legal description presented (excess land) does not appear to close, and as written, appears to be closer to 10.2-L ACS; however, the legal description states a land area of 9.7f ACS and Assessment Records also indicate a land size of 9.7f ACS. In addition, the second legal description presented (2648 North Old Wire Road homesite) as written appears to be near triangular in shape and supports a land size of approximately 0.22f AC. Assessment Records for this homesite indicate a land area of 0.75±_ AC, which appears to be more accurate. The third legal description presented (2634 North Old Wire Road homesite) indicates a land area of 0.5f AC, and is also supported by Assessment Records. The land sizes indicated by Assessment Records appear to be a more accurate representation of the actual subject land size, and are relied upon for the purposes of this report. An Extraordinary Assumption of this report is that the land sizes are as indicated. A Survey Plat of the subject property is recommended to confirm the reasonableness of this Assumption. The subject property is improved with two single-family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316t square feet (SF) of living area, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551t square feet (SF) of living area. PURPOSE OF THE APPRAISAL The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, as of the effective date. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE Market value is defined as follows: "The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: a. buyer and seller are typically motivated; b. both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what they considers their best interest; c. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market: d. payment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto, and: e. the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale. "t Appraisal Institute. The Dictionauv ofReat Estate Appraisal — Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010). P. 123. 37 INTENDED USE/USER OF REPORT The intended use of this report is to assist the client with internal decisions regarding a potential acquisition of the subject property. The intended user of this report is the City of Fayetteville — Parks & Recreation Department. PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED In this appraisal, I am concerned with the valuation of the fee simple estate of the subject property. Fee simple estate is defined as follows; "Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the limitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power, and escheat. " z SCOPE OF THE WORK The scope of work in this appraisal involves the application of the "Valuation Process" in estimating the market value of the subject property. This real property appraisal report has been prepared under the Appraisal Report option. Subject was last inspected in July 2014. Pertinent locational and physical data was obtained on the property inspections. Photographs were taken on a July 10, 2014, and a July 11, 2014, inspection, by Brian Kenworthy. General data pertinent to the appraisal assignment was obtained from local sources. The legal description of the subject property was obtained from public records. Building measurements were taken by the appraiser on the July 10, 2014, inspection. Certain information pertaining to the subject property (marketing information, property history, offer letter, etc.) were provided by property owner and listing broker. Property tax data and the history of the property were researched through Washington County Assessment Records. The highest and best use of the property was projected based upon location, physical characteristics, zoning, past, present, and potential use, etc. The Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches to Value have been utilized in this report. The Income Capitalization Approach was not utilized, as this is not typically the basis upon which buy/sell decisions are being made in this market on properties of the subject's nature. Application of the Income Capitalization Approach to Value was not considered necessary to produce credible appraisal results for the subject property. The "Approaches to Value' appear later in the report. In the Land Value Section, the estimated value of the subject site "as vacant" was established first utilizing comparable land sales in Fayetteville. The unit of comparison was price per acre (AC) of land area. The sales were compared to subject and adjustments made for differences 2 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary oiReal Estate Appraisal — Fijih Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 78. 38 with respect to the subject. The per AC value of the subject was estimated from within the adjusted range of the comparables, and was multiplied by the subject whole property acreage to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject site "as vacant". The estimated market value of the subject site "as vacant" was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. In the Cost Approach, the Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements were estimated, utilizing Marshall Valuation Service (national cost service) and a market derived entrepreneurial incentive. Accrued Depreciation attributable to the improvements was then estimated based upon the Economic Age -Life Method, and was subtracted from Replacement Cost New to arrive at Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements. The estimated land value was then added to the Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the improvements to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject property by the Cost Approach. The estimated market value of the subject whole property was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. In the Sales Comparison Approach, comparable improved sales were examined and analyzed for comparison purposes to the respective dwelling improvements. The unit of comparison was whole property. Adjustments were made to the sales based upon differences with respect to the respective subject dwellings. The market value of the respective subject dwellings was then estimated from within the adjusted range of the comparables. Finally, the contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) was added to the value of the subject dwellings to arrive at the estimated market value of the whole subject property by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount could be supported to the sum of the values of the improved subject homesites and the excess land. The two approaches utilized were reconciled to a final market value conclusion for the subject based on the appraisers' evaluation of the appropriateness, the accuracy, and the quantity of the evidence in the entire appraisal. OR'NERSHIP OF THE APPRAISED PROPERTY As of the effective date of this report, the subject property was under the ownership of Allen & Mary L. Dunn. DATE OF THE APPRAISAL The effective date of this report is July 10, 2014; this represents one of the dates of inspection. The date of this appraisal report is July 18, 2014. 39 Y7Cy� �.r 1'W 1 t ,Lo {L.+ tL W z ,1. CC QI �c 9� 00 xPC O P z JC W a ar;.. y � CL ° 4 0 t °o w Z p� m U zU ?� L LL N Q e U Y C ° CD v z kLD [1 c w = x a Q Z N O 4 fNA cr C Y m � m UP d in E 2 a W CD m D a 0 n W a O a z O +. z O p{0 C 6 a O°0 0 Jii��s 0 O J 10 C UN W CC O_ .� LL M. LA 2 m ° W L J9 � W b a° l� O N d �^ CD 2 ii c Q y Z O o _ g oOro—) Z (7 c O N z } 7 C7 U N o = QLD } c oc� CL C1 c N U c, •- V4 of-• W U LL (71 Ln m h o- C7 p Lo (7 J ❑ Cn 'M C a rn °Z J ° :3 H ��• 3 ya u ° S to �+ o a Q W ¢ U o 7P � o �C d m ti� O pO O m O t Q n d cn m C7 crs P m CD a m C Vi } Q c ur b W = U a N N C _c � m ll- P a LLU AREA DATA The Trade Area includes Washington and Benton Counties in Arkansas, as well as Madison County, Arkansas, and McDonald County, Missouri. The four counties are located in the extreme northwestern part of Arkansas and extreme southwestern part of Missouri, respectively, and make up the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), This area is bordered by the Oklahoma State line on the west, Newton County (Missouri) on the north, Carroll, Newton and Barry (Missouri) Counties on the east, and Crawford, Franklin and Johnson Counties on the south. The total land area of Benton County is indicated to be 847.361 square miles, Washington County 941.97f square miles, Madison County 834.26f square miles, and McDonald County 539.48L square miles. It should be noted that near 92%t of the population of the MSA is located in Washington and Benton Counties. As a result, this Area Data analysis primarily pertains to Washington and Benton Counties in Arkansas. The value of real property reflects and is influenced by the interaction of basic forces that motivate human activity. These forces are divided into four major categories: Social trends; Economic circumstances; Governmental controls and regulations; and, environmental conditions. These forces exert pressure on human activities and are also affected by these activities. The interaction of all the forces influences the value of every parcel of real estate in the market. Social Farces: Social forces are exerted primarily through population characteristics. The demographic composition of the population reveals the potential, basic demand for real estate services. The 1980 Census showed population figures of 78,115 and 100,494, respectively, for the two counties. This totals 178,609 for the two -county area. The population of Benton County in 1990 was 97,499, while Washington County indicated a population 113,409. The combined population of the two counties in 1990 was 210,909, representing an 18.1%f increase over 1980, or 1.81%f per year. The 2000 Census indicated populations for Benton and Washington Counties of 153,406 and 157,715, respectively. The total for the two counties, 311,121, represents a 47.5%f increase over 1990, or 4.75%f per year. Based on data released by the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of the two -county area as of 2010 was 424,404, with Benton County reflecting a total of 221,339 and Washington County a total of 203,065. The growth between 2000 and 2010 is indicated to be 36.4%±, or 3.64%± per year. The estimated 2012 populations of Benton and Washington Counties, based on State & County QuickFacts, were 232,268± and 211,411f, respectively, or a total of 443,679�. The U.S. Census Bureau data reflected the population of the MSA as of 2010 to be 465,780. The estimated 2012 population of the MSA, based on State & County QuickFacts, was 482,200�. The following chart reflects the population trend in the four -county MSA since 1990: 500,000 425,000 360,000 275,000 200,000 Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA Population Source: U.S. Census Bentonville is the County Seat of Benton County. This city is located in the north part of the county. Bentonville had a population of 11,257 in 1990, a 28.60/0f increase since 1980. The 2000 population of Bentonville was approximately 19,730. This represents a 75.30/Df increase since 1990. The 2010 population was indicated to be 35,301, a 78.90/0f increase from 2000. Rogers is the largest city in the county. Its 1990 population of 24,692 reflects a 41.7%-:1: increase since 1980. The 2000 population was indicated to be 38,829. This represents a 57.3%± increase since 1990. The 2010 population was indicated to be 55,964, a 44.1 %± increase from 2000, Siloam Springs, located on the Oklahoma line in the southwest part of the county, is the third major city in Benton County. It grew from a population of 8,151 in 1980 to 10,843 in 2000, a 33%f increase. The 2010 population was indicated to be 15,039, a 38.7%1 increase from 2000. Some of the smaller cities and towns in Benton County include Gentry, Gravette, Pea Ridge, Lowell, Centerton, Decatur, Cave Springs, Bella Vista, etc. It should be noted that the City of Centerton, located just west of the Bentonville City Limits, reflected an increase in population from 491 in 1990 to 2,146 in 2000, and to 9,515 in 2010. The indicated increase was 343.4%±% from 2000 to 2010, or 34.340/of per year. Within the county, there are a total of 18f incorporated towns and cities. It should also be noted that Lowell, lying between Springdale and Rogers, experienced an increase in population between 1990 and 2000 of 309.E1/o�. The 2000 population of Lowell was indicated to be 5,013:L, while the 2010 population was 7,327. The indicated increase was 46.2%±, or 4.62%± per year, between 2000 and 2010. Fayetteville is the County Seat of Washington County. This city is located in the north central part of the county. Fayetteville had a population of 42,099 in 1990. This represented a 15%� increase since 1980, The 2000 population of Fayetteville was indicated to be 58,047. This represents a 37.9%f increase since 1990. The 2010 population was indicated to be 73,590, an increase of 26.8%± from 2000. Fayetteville is also the largest city in the county. Springdale is the second largest city in Washington County. Its 1990 population of 29,941 showed a 27.60/0=L increase since 1980. The 2000 population of Springdale was indicated to be 45,798. This represents a 53%f increase since 1990. The 2000 population figure for Springdale includes an indicated 2,011 people living in that part of Springdale located in Benton County. The 2010 population of Springdale was indicated to be 69,797, an increase of 52.4%+ from 2000. Some of the smaller cities in Washington County include Prairie Grove, Lincoln, Farmington, West Fork, Johnson, Elm Springs, etc. There are a total of 13f incorporated cities and towns within Washington County. A small part of Elm Springs is also located in Benton County. The following table reflects population changes for major cities in the MSA since 2000: City 2000 2005 2007 2008 2010 2000-2010 % Increase 2012 Estimate Fayetteville 58,047 66,656 72,208 73,372 73,580 26.8°% 76,899 Springdale 45.798 62.459 66,881 68,180 69,797 62.4% 73,123 Rogers 38,829 48,353 54,959 56,726 55,954 44.1°% 58,895 Bentonville 19,730 1 29,530 33,744 35,526 35,301 1 78.9% 38,284 Lowell 5,013 7,042 7,044 7.173 7.327 46.2% 7,714 Centerton 2,146 5,477 8,162 8,593 9,515 343.4% 10,170 Siloam Springs 10,843 13.604 14,480 14,825 15,039 38.7% 15,680 Source: U.S. Census The increased population trend is expected to continue in the Benton -Washington County area. This should have a positive effect on real property values. However, it should be noted that the rate of growth has declined from what appears to have been the peak period between July 1, 2004, and July 1, 2005. The net monthly population growth in the Benton -Washington County area between July 1, 2004, and July 1, 2005, was estimated to be 1,2561 people. Between July 1, 2008 and July 1, 2009, the net monthly population growth was estimated to be 748t people. This reflects a 40.5%f decline. Between 2000 and 2010, census data supports net monthly population growth of 944f people. The estimated net monthly population growth between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2012, was 695f people. This reflects a decline of 26.40/0-4:. Oversupply issues in the real estate market and slow improvement in overall economic conditions have had an adverse impact on population growth. The country officially went into a recession in December 2007. The recession officially ended in June 2009; however, consumer sentiment doesn't necessarily support this. Economic Forces: Economic forces are also significant to real property values. It is necessary to analyze the fundamental relationships between current and anticipated supply and demand and the economic ability of the population to satisfy its wants, needs, and demands through its purchasing power. For 2003, the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA ranked I" nationally in Forbes/Milken Institute's "Best Performing Cities: Where America's Jobs are Created" measuring economic vibrancy and potential. For 2004, the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) was listed as the 51" `Best Small Metro for Business" by Forbes. This publication also listed the MSA as 41 in job growth. For 2005, The Milken Institute named Northwest Arkansas to the Top Ten in Job Growth. For 2013, Milken ranked the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA second in the nation in Short - Term Job Growth. Milken defines short-term job growth as the percentage of job growth between July 2012 and July 2013. Only Santa Cruz, California, ranked higher in creating more short-term jobs among the nation's largest 200 metropolitan areas. Northwest Arkansas also ranks high in Milken's review of job creation over longer periods of time, rating 18`h nationally in 1-year Job Growth and 341h in 5-year Job Growth. As a region, Northwest Arkansas is ranked as the nation's 57th Best Performing City, the highest ranked MSA in the State of Arkansas. The Job Growth USA website of Arizona State University's W.P. Carey School of Business ranked 383 of 428 Metropolitan Statistical Areas for 2013 on the basis of non -farm job growth over a 12-month moving average. The Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA ranked Number 87 nationwide for 2013. This is down from 2012 when the region ranked Number 67 nationwide in non -farm job growth. The following chart represents Non -Farm Employment Growth for the MSA since 2000: Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA Non -Farm Payroll Jobs Annual Averages 225,000 - 705,40 2Da,2oa 193,5Uu 199.500 200,300 70,300 178,60D 1s1,euD'ea.ano 175,004 125,000 75,000 25,000 61C 8,50 0,9D 5,D0 6,5D 2,80 800 3,90 8,00 30Q _ 1, oa 77D -25,000 - $ --g- 4- - nr $ l _ R ■No. Employed ■Annual Growth Source: Arkansas Department of Workforce Services As previously indicated, the country was officially in a recession between December 2007 and June 2009. This recession, referred to as the "Great Recession", lasted 18 months. The previous longest recorded recessions since the Great Depression, the 1973-75 recession and the 1981-82 recession, each lasted 16 months. The Great Depression lasted 43 months. The recessions in 1991 and 2001 each lasted 8 months. The recession obviously impacted the rate of job growth in the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA. While the United States as a whole experienced negative year on year non -farm employment growth through all of 2008, the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA remained positive through part of the year. However, non -farm employment numbers (year on year) did turn negative in this MSA in 2008 and remained negative throughout 2009. Obviously, local economic activity was affected by the national recession. In May 2010, non -farm employment numbers (year on year) turned positive and have remained positive year over year through the latest recorded data researched, which was November 2013. Employment gains for the MSA between November 2012 and November 2013 were in the following sectors: trade, transportation, and utilities; professional and business services; education and health services; leisure and hospitality services; and natural resources, mining, and construction. The civilian labor force in Benton County averaged 111,200 for the year 2012. Washington County averaged 105,300 for the same time period, The average civilian labor force for January- November 2013 was reported at 112,786 for Benton County and 107,005 for Washington County. In 2012, Benton County's unemployment rate averaged 5.7% while Washington County's rate averaged 5.4%. The 2012 average, annual unemployment rates for the State of Arkansas and the United States were 73% and 8.1%, respectively. The average unemployment rates for Benton and Washington Counties for the January —November 2013 time period were indicated to be 5.5%f and 4,8%f, respectively. All of the preceding rates represent non - seasonally adjusted rates. U.S. Census data reflect the following income figures for the Benton -Washington County area: Benton County 2000 2010 Change 2013 Median Household Income $40,276 $54.592 35.5% $51,977 Average Household Income $50,556 $66,147 30.8% $69,676 Per Capita Income $19,377 $24,912 28.6% $26,885 Washington County 2000 2010 Change 2013 Median Household Income $34,683 $45,544 31.3% $44,056 Average Household Income $44.747 $56,617 26.5% $59,789 Per Capita Income $17,347 $21,840 25.9% $23,137 Combined Counties 2000 2010 Change 2013 Median Household Income $37,483 $50,588 35.0% $48,687 Average Household Income $47,604 $61,551 29.3% $64,937 Per Capita Income $18.348 $23,441 27.8% $24,850 The real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties expanded at a rapid rate between 2003 and mid-2006. Oversupply issues in the residential sector became very visible in 2006, particularly in the latter half of the year. There were definite indicators in 2005 that this sector of the market was headed in this direction. As of the second Quarter of 2013, Benton County totaled approximately 7,399 empty, single-family and duplex lots with Final Plat filed and/or receiving final approval. The total for Washington County was approximately 5,436. Based on lot sales to end users in 2012 in the two -county area, the total empty lot supply could constitute near a 9f year inventory. This likely overstates the situation as near 1501of of the empty lot inventory represents not yet active lots. Regardless, the current lot supply in the two -county area remains significant; however, it should be noted that the supply of empty lots in Benton and Washington Counties has decreased substantially over the past couple of years. The decrease from Quarter Four 2012 to Quarter Two 2013 was approximately 7.5%f. Housing starts and residential construction activity in both Benton and Washington Counties have increased significantly since 2011. Interest rates remain low, which is a positive for the housing market; however, have increased somewhat as of late. Rates are expected to continue to slowly move upward, with the Federal Reserve cutting back on monthly bond purchases. However, rates are still projected to remain in an affordable range. This, along with continued improvement in non- farm employment should sustain the downward movement in the number of empty residential lots in the two -county area. Problems in the housing market are viewed by many as what led us into the recession, and there is a belief that continued improvement in this sector is necessary for the country to completely rebound from this last economic downturn. Obviously, the decrease in home values and the high rates of residential foreclosures across the country as a result of the "Great Recession" negatively impacted consumer sentiment. Many economists feel that the housing market bottomed in the Fourth Quarter of 2011, with an average decline in value from peak to trough of 30% to 35%f. There is definite evidence that home values are rebounding. In Benton County, Multiple Listing Service (MLS) data reflects the median home price for the first half of 2013 to be $152,000, as compared to $140,500 for the first half of 2012. This indicates an 8.2% increase. In Washington County, the median home price for the first half of 2013 was indicated by MLS data to be $149,900. This compares to $135,000 for the first half of 2012. The increase calculates to 11.04%. As homeowners experience increased equity, consumer confidence should improve. Through November 2013, home sales in Arkansas were up near 12% compared to the first 11 months of 2012. The year 2013 appears to be the best year for home sales in Arkansas since 2009 and 2010, when the government's homebuyer tax credit gave consumers extra incentive to buy a house. The multi -family residential sector of the real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties was the first sector to rebound from the recent "Great Recession". In the multi -family sector, the two -county area indicated an overall vacancy rate of 2.73% in the Third Quarter of 2013_ The Fayetteville multi -family market has a good history of strength, due to the University of Arkansas, and reflected a Third Quarter 2013 vacancy rate of 2.47%. However, it should be noted that a substantial amount of new product has been added over the past 1-21 years in the Fayetteville multi -family market, and more units are in the planning stage. The Rogers, Bentonville, Siloam Springs, and Springdale multi -family markets also appear to each be in good shape with a range of vacancy rates between 2.56% and 3.54% as of the Third Quarter 2013. The Rogers and Bentonville markets in particular are doing well with vacancy rates of 2.56% and 2.67%, respectively. With respect to the commercial market in Benton and Washington Counties, the primary concerns arc the professional office, retail, and development land sectors. The professional office sector of the market, Class "A" and "B" properties, has been oversupplied for some time in the two -county area. The overall vacancy rate for Class "A" and "B" professional office space for the First Quarter of 2013 was slightly above 15%. The rate for Class "A" space alone was reported at 13.2%. These rates are for investment grade, non -owner occupied space. Obviously, job creation is critical to the absorption of office space. It should be noted that the overall professional office vacancy rate was thought to have peaked in mid/late 2010, with vacancy slowly decreasing since that time. The retail sector of the commercial market had been the strength of the market through the first half of 2008; however, in the second half of the year vacancy began to rise. In the Fourth Quarter of 2009 the overall vacancy rate in this sector of the market was estimated between 15% and 16%. Obviously, problems in the national economy impacted the local retail community. The overall vacancy rate in the retail sector has slowly declined since 2010 and was near 10% (Class "A" and `B" combined) in the First Quarter of 2013. This, too, is for investment grade, non -owner occupied space. It should be noted that the reported vacancy rate for Class "A" retail space in the First Quarter of 2013 was 6.5%. Commercial development land must also be considered. The two areas of concern are in the north part of Fayetteville and the southwest part of Rogers. Land that was acquired at the peak of prices in 2005/2006 continues to periodically face refinancing. With a decline in values in this sector, in order to refmance and keep loan to value ratios within bank guidelines, the borrower may have to bring funds to the closing table. This is the mark to market issue that has been discussed nationally over the past several years. The service sector of the commercial market had been a concern in Benton and Washington Counties; however, has shown improvement since 2011. This pertains to hotels/motels and restaurants. With respect to hotels/motels, the following increases in tax receipts collected between Quarter One 2012 and Quarter One 2013 were indicated: Bentonville +9.5%t Fayetteville +10.5%i Rogers +4.8%± Siloam Springs +7.4%t Springdale +6.6%f Restaurant tax receipts collected reflected the following increases between Quarter One 2012 and Quarter One 2013: Bentonville +1.6%t Fayetteville +.25%t Springdale and Rogers do not collect restaurant tax receipts. The service sector, locally and nationally, appears to have rebounded from the "Great Recession'' sooner than originally expected. It should be noted that a new full -service hotel facility is being considered for the University of Arkansas Campus in Fayetteville. This hotel is expected to feature 125-150 beds, with 13,000± square feet of conference space. It should also be noted that the recent construction of the 21C Museum Hotel in Bentonville, just off the "square" in the Central Business District, has proven to be a success. Following is a listing of building permit values for cities in Benton and Washington Counties, as indicated by the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission: NWA BUILDING PERMITS city 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Johnson $12,894,627,0 $11.480.561.00 $2.201,298 $3,139,035 $4,815.32 Elkins $1.448.865.0 $2,992,700.00 $1,669,256 $1.217,567 $395,100 Bentonville $175.179,387.00 $841042,846.00 $166,253.077 $92,641,213 $151.852,75 Tontitown $9,117,183.0 $12,317,817.00 $5,943,915 $4.000,663 $4,178,08 Rogers $364,610.284.0 $221.417.100.00 $66.680,186 $84.916.060 $77.350.756 Lowell $23,018,357.0 $10,507.847.00 $5,156,363 $10,2130,864 $9,320,710 Siloam S rin s $26,571.074.0 $8,369.852.00 $51,494,178 $16,604,723 $33,626,432 Fayetteville $282,642,878.00 $301.388.827.00 $90.2571059 $111.4701014 $140,148,788 Pea Ride $10,613,632.00 $11,617,647.00 $1,701,901 $1,316,208 $7,731,042 Little Flock $1,997,419.0 $1,801,420.00 $1.807,373 $751.034 $1.675.19 Bella Vista $39,336,280.0 $19,235.786.00 $12.059.939 $8,437.960 $7,379,000 Prairie Grove $9,276,304,0 $7,929,728.00 $3,298,300 $8,230,109 $5,208,052 Greenland $1,411,691.66 $173,470.00 $707.300 $576,269 $135.000 Cave Springs $9,715.915.0 $4.835,350.00 S6,622,764 $7,666,117 $10,281,180 West Fork $2,412,200.00 $1,568,000.00 $414,100 $713,000 $1,381,350 Goshen $4,246,683.80 $2,824,327.43 $2,104,269 $3.245,078 $1.738.686. Lincoln $2,507,545.00 $0.00 $191,944 $1,219,120 $13,256,610 Elm Springs $500,000.00 $150,000.00 $1.056.647 $870,696 $1,488,00 Farmington $11,793,393.00 $10.730,420.00 $8.577.800 $11.185,15 S6,256,61 S rin dale $114,491,652.00 $111.956,457.00 $59,871,046 $46,904,14 $85,993,770 Gent $2,034,963.9 $1,705,248.20 $526,450 $2,793,00 $2,283,500 Bethel Hei hts $5.582,958.00 $702,967.00 $675,967 $686,050 $570.721 Centerton $18,033,067.0 $9,928,847.00 $5.712,560 $15,359,184 $15,033,136 Decatur $1,150,000.00 $252.000.00 $9.471.500 $348,500 $3,097,660 Gravette $2,149,440.00 $840.115.00 $5.726,000 $1,848,34 [Fatal $1,132 735,699.3 $839,769,332.63 1 $510171,191 $433,470,77 $587 045,81 WASHINGTON COUNTY PERMITS ciltv 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Johnson $12.894,627.00 511,480,561.00 $2,201,298 $3,139,035 $4,815,327 Elkins $1,448,865.00 $2,992,700.00 $1.659,255 $1,217,56 $395,101) Tontitown $9.117.183.00 $12.317.817.00 $5,943:91. $4,000,663 $42178,08" Fa etteville $282,642,878.00 $301,388,827.00 $90.257,059 $111,470,014 $140,148,7881 Prairie Grove $9,276,304.00 $7,929,728.00 $3,298,300 $8,230,109 $5,208 052 Greenland $1,411,691.66 $173.470.00 $707.300 $576,269 $135,000 West Fork $2,412,200.00 $1,568,000.00 $414,100 $713,000 $1,381.350 Goshen $4,246,683.80 $2,824,327.43 $2,104,269 $3.245.078 $1,738.686 Lincoln $2.507,545.00 $0.00 $191,944 $1,219,120 $13,256,610 Elm Springs $500,000.00 $150.000.00 $1,056,647 $870,696 $1.488,000 Farmington $11,793,393.00 $10,730,420.00 $8,577,800 $11,185,157 $6,256,61 Springdale $114,491,552.00 $111,956,467.00 1 $59,871.046 $46,904.148 $85.993,770 Total I $452,742,922.46 I $463,512,307.43 176,282,93 $192,77!1,85 $264 995,38 BENTON COUNTY PERMITS City 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Bentonville $175,179,387.00 $84,042,846.00 $166.253,077 $92,641.21 $151.8,92.7,9 Ro ers $364.610.284.00 $221,417,100.00 $6,668.0186 $84,916,060 $77,350,75 Lowell $23,018,357.00 $10.507.847.00 $5,156,36� $10,280,864 $9.320.71 Siloam Springs. $26.571,074.00 $8,369,852.00 $51,494,178 $15,504,723 $33.626,432 Pea Ride $10,613,632.00 $11,617,647.00 $1.701,901 $1,315,208 $7,731,042 Little Flock $1,997,419.00 $1,801,420.00 $1,807.37. $751,034 $1.675,19 Bella Vista $39,336.280.00 $19,235,786.00 $12.059,939 $8,437,960 $7,379,O0 Cave S rin s $9,715,915.00 $4.835.350.00 $6,622.764 $7,666,117 $10,281,180 Gent $2,034,963.90 $1,705,248.20 $526,450 $2,793,005 $2,283,500 Bethel Heights $5.582.958.00 $702,967.00 $675,967 $686,050 $570,721 Centerton $18,033,067,00 $9,928,847.00 $5,712.560 $15.359.184 $15,033,136 Decatur $1,150.000.00 $252,000.00 $9,471,500 $348,50 $3:097,66t Gravette $2,149,440.00 $840115,00 $5,726,000 $1,848,34 Total 1 $679,992,776.90 $375,257,025.20 $333,888,258 $240,699,918 $322,050,43 The economic base of the region consists of four basic areas: First, agricultural production with the primary commodities being beef cattle, dairy cattle, and poultry. The general offices of Tyson Foods, Inc., the largest poultry producer in the world, are located in Springdale in Washington County. Benton and Washington Counties have a considerable amount of rural acreage and, therefore, it would stand to reason that agriculture would be important to the area. There is also some cropland in the area, primarily green bean and orchard production (grapes). According to the USDA, Benton and Washington counties had total agricultural sales in 2007 of $433,957,000 and 417,965,000, respectively. Second, influence from the University of Arkansas located in Fayetteville. Total enrollment for Fall 2013 at the University was 24,537, an increase of 5.8% since the Fall 2012. The University provides considerable employment opportunities for area residents. It is not uncommon for residents of the outlying areas of Benton and Washington Counties to work at the University. A second public academic institution, the Northwest Arkansas Community College, is located in Bentonville. Fall 2013 enrollment for the school was indicated to be 8,020, a decrease of 3.8% from the Fall 2012. In addition to the main campus, the NWACC also has branch campuses located in Springdale, Rogers, and Farmington. NWACC is considering the purchase of an acreage site located in the southwest part of Springdale for the construction of a new Washington County Campus. Third, recreational usage primarily in the northeast part of Washington County, and the southeast, east, and northeast parts of Benton County. This recreational usage is primarily provided by Beaver Lake, a Corps of Engineer Reservoir on the White River. Beaver Lake affords typical fresh water sports such as boating, fishing, skiing, swimming, etc. Each of the major cities in the two -county area also has recreational amenities. It should be noted that Arvest Baseball Park opened in the Spring of 2008 in the southwest part of Springdale. This baseball park is the home of the Northwest Arkansas Naturals (Minor League AA Affiliate of the Kansas City Royals). The location is at the southwest corner of Watkins Avenue and 56lb Street, just west of I- 540. Completion of the Don Tyson Parkway/I-49 Interchange, just southeast of the baseball park, is expected in 2014. Fourth, the large number of manufacturing businesses and industries located within the two counties. Again, residents of outlying areas of the two counties will commute to Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, Bentonville, etc. to work at these facilities. The general offices of Wal- Mart, Inc., the world's largest retailer, are located in Bentonville. Wal-Mart has had a tremendous impact on the area, particularly Benton County. Over the past several years, Wal- Mart vendors have been locating branch offices in the Benton County area in order to better service their account with Wal-Mart. Both professional office and residential construction increased significantly due to the influx of these suppliers. The general offices of J.B. Hunt, Inc., a major trucking company, are located in Lowell. As previously indicated, the general offices of Tyson Foods, Inc., the world's largest poultry processor, are located in Springdale. Wal-Mart, J.B. Hunt, and Tyson Foods are each Fortune 500 Companies. The presence of these companies drives demand for lawyers, accountants, architects, hotels, restaurants, retailers, etc. Most of the major industries are located in the larger cities in the counties. According to the 2002 Economic Census, total value of shipments by manufacturers in Benton County was $2,615,524,000. According to State & County QuickFacts, total value of shipments by manufacturers in Washington County in 2007 was $3,497,554,000. Retail sales estimates for Benton and Washington Counties for 2007, based on State & County QuickFacts, were $2,390,591,000 and $2,723,279,000, respectively. The following table represents major employers in the MSA (as of 2012): Employer # of Em to eest SectorlProduct Main Location Wal-Mart Stores (Home Office, DC's & Stores 28,000+ Retail Bentonville Tyson Foods 12,000+ Protein Processin 1Marketin Springdale University of Arkansas 4.000+ Education Fayetteville Simmons Foods, Inc. 3.900+ Poultry Processing Siloam Springs J.B. Hunt Transport Services 2,600+ Transportation Lowell Washington Regional 2,100+ Health Fayetteville Geor e's Inc. 2,000+ Poultry Springdale Northwest Health Systems 1,900+ Health Bentonville/S rin dale Mercy Health Systems 1,500+ Health Multiple Arvest Bank 1.500+ Finance Bentonville Source: Employers; Local Chambers of Commerce In addition, Northwest Arkansas is the home of several satellite offices of Fortune 500 companies supplying products to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. These Fortune 500 companies with a presence in Northwest Arkansas include: IBM, Coca-Cola, Proctor & Gamble, Pfizer, Gillette, Mattel, Hershey, Sara Lee, Kimberly Clark, Heinz, Colgate, Clorox, Ball Corp., Disney, General Mills, Kellogg, Hormel, Newell Rubbermaid, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsico, Philip Morris, etc. Construction of the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville has been a plus for the Northwest Arkansas economy, particularly the City of Bentonville. This museum opened in November 2011, and was a project of the Walton family. Crystal Bridges is located near the Central Business District of Bentonville, and, along with the "Downtown Bentonville' program, has been instrumental in the revitalization of the Central Business District. There are many financial institutions in Benton and Washington Counties. These institutions have typically provided an adequate supply of funds for residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural growth. It should be noted that credit conditions tightened in 2008 as financial institutions dealt with problem real estate loans, and deteriorating economic conditions. The Federal Government infused funds into the financial market in an attempt to provide liquidity and ease credit. The major financial institutions in the area are located in Bentonville, Fayetteville, Rogers, Siloam Springs, and Springdale, with smaller banks and branches situated in many of the smaller communities. Currently, interest rates on long-term (15-30 years) residential first mortgages are generally in the 3.50% - 4.50% range. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) data indicate there are a total of 58 financial institutions in the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA. Deposits as of June 30, 2013, totaled $8,277,239± based on the FDIC data. Real estate development in the area has primarily been centered in the major cities, and in such smaller communities as Centerton, Farmington, Lowell, and Prairie Grove. However, rural development is also occurring with small acreage homesites visible throughout the two counties. Economic conditions at the present time are improving in the two -county area; however, the local economy has not yet fully rebounded from the recent "Great Recession." A plus for the area is continued year over year increases in non -farm employment numbers. Sustained growth in non -farm employment will go a long way to absorb vacant commercial space. The long-term outlook is that economic forces will have a positive effect on real estate values in Benton and Washington Counties; however, at the present time the two -county area continues in a correction period, particularly with respect to the commercial sector. Governmental Forces: Governmental, political, and legal actions at all levels have a great impact on property values. The county seats of Benton and Washington Counties, as previously discussed, are Bentonville and Fayetteville, respectively. These two cities are some 20f minutes apart via I-49. County government in each county is under the direction of the County Judge and Quorum Court. Other elected county officials include the County Clerk, Circuit Clerk, Collector, Assessor, Treasurer, Sheriff, Coroner, etc. Property taxes in Arkansas are collected at the county level and distributed to the counties, cities, and school districts. In Arkansas, all real property, except agricultural land, is to be appraised at market value. Agricultural land is valued based upon soil class productivity. The appraised value is multiplied by a 20% assessment ratio to arrive at the assessed value. The assessed value is then multiplied by the appropriate millage rate to arrive at the annual property tax. However, in 2001, a tax relief act was passed in Arkansas, which limits the annual increase in property tax from the base year. A new term was created, called Taxable Value. Taxable Value is now multiplied by the applicable millage rate to arrive at the annual real estate tax. The annual property tax is due by October 15th in the year after it is levied. Individual property taxes in Benton and Washington Counties have generally increased over the last several years due to continuing reappraisal; however, it should be noted that both Benton and Washington Counties made adjustments in real estate appraised values for property tax purposes due to the recent "Great Recession." Benton County does not have county zoning at the present time. Washington County; however, passed an ordinance introducing zoning regulations to unincorporated parts of Washington County. This zoning ordinance became effective in December of 2007. This zoning is enforced by the Washington County Planning Board. The major cities in the area also have zoning regulations. There are no adverse legislative restrictions on the use and development of real property in the area. However, it should be noted that some of the cities in Benton and Washington Counties have established Overlay Districts which place limitations on development of lands within the established districts. Benton and Washington Counties are considered to have adequate medical, school, lodging, and religious facilities to service the Trade Area. The following table reflects area schools' enrollments for the previous years: SchoolArea Fayetteville Public Schools 009 8.566 8.838 9,017 9,142 9,421 Springdale Public Schools 18,188 18,810 19,381 20,141 20,547 Rogers Public Schools 13,774 14,145 14,145 14.454 14.757 Bentonville Public Schools 13,701 14,147 14,144 14,893 15,114 University of Arkansas — Fayetteville 19,849 23,199 23,199 23.199 24,537 Northwest Arkansas Community College Rogers/Bentonville 1 8,006 1 8.365 8,528 8,341 8.020 John Brown University — Siloam Springs 1 2,073 1 2,130 2,130 1 2,130 1 2,183 Source: Schools Administration Offices There are also private church schools in operation in the two -county area, as well as charter schools. There are a total of five charter schools in Benton and Washington Counties, with additional schools planned. Fall 2013 enrollment at the area charter schools was reported at 2358. Public utilities available in the rural areas of Benton and Washington Counties include electricity and telephone service. Natural gas and public water are also available in certain areas. Public sewer is available in the major cities and in some of the smaller communities. Overall, governmental forces in the area provide a positive effect on real property values. Lack of public water and sewer in certain rural areas is a drawback. However, the Two Ton Water Project and Benton -Washington County Water Authorities are addressing rural water needs in the two counties. Environmental Forces: Both natural and man-made environmental forces influence real property values. Environmental forces include climatic conditions, topography and soil, natural barriers to future development, primary transportation systems, and the nature and desirability of the immediate area surrounding a property. The two -county area has relatively warm summers and mild winters. High temperatures in summer are often accompanied by high humidity. The average daily temperature is about 57 degrees. Each year there are about 58± days when temperatures go above 90 degrees and typically only a few days when temperatures drop to freezing or below; however, the past few years have seen cold extremes where the temperature has dropped below freezing on several days. The area has an average of 4 to 5± inches of snow annually, although the past few years have also exceeded this. Rainfall averages around 45:L inches annually. The following map illustrates the relationship between the cities and counties of the MSA (the four -county MSA is outlined in black): The area is part of the Ozark Highlands. In Benton County, topography ranges from broad plains and rolling hills in the western and central parts to rocky, rough, steeper hills in the east. Much of the eastern one-third of the county is covered by Beaver Reservoir. The elevation increases from west to east and ranges from 1,000± to 1,700+ feet above sea level. The elevation of Washington County also varies from 1,000-L to 1,700+ feet. In general, the topography of Washington County is rough along the western, eastern, southern, and northwestern boundaries. Extending through the heart of the county, from the Oklahoma line to the City of Springdale, is a plateau -like area consisting of rolling, reasonably level land. The City of Fayetteville, located in the edge of the Boston Mountain Range, is quite hilly. Soil and subsoil conditions within the two counties range from fair to good for agricultural purposes. There are natural barriers to real property development in the area. These consist primarily of mountainous regions, rivers, etc. However, many of these barriers have a positive effect on agricultural usage. The primary transportation routes in the two counties are I-49 and U.S. 71B (north -south) and U.S. 412 (east -west). From Fayetteville north to Bella Vista, I-49 provides divided highway access. South from Fayetteville, 1-49 provides divided highway access to Interstate 40 at Alma. U.S. 71 south from Fayetteville was made a Scenic Byway in 1998. Divided highway access is now available from the region to Fort Smith to the south via I-49/40 and to Little Rock to the southeast via I-49/40. Also, U.S. 412 provides divided highway access from Tontitown westerly to Siloam Springs near the Oklahoma State Line. Divided highway access is available westerly from the region to Tulsa, Oklahoma. U.S. 71B, I-49 and U.S. 412 are each heavily traveled traffic arteries. U.S. 71B traverses Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, Bentonville, and Bella Vista. U.S. 412 traverses Springdale, Tontitown, and Siloam Springs. Construction on a new phase of U.S. 412 east of Springdale was completed in 2001. U.S. 412 is now 5 lanes or divided highway from U.S. 71B east to just east of the small community of Hindsville. Construction is near complete for an extension of the U.S. 412 divided highway to the east to near Huntsville. U.S. Highway 62 and State Highway 16 in Washington County also provide east -west access, as do State Highways 12, 102, and 264 in Benton County. In addition, there are other state highways as well as county roads providing adequate access throughout the area. Proposed major highway construction in the two -county area includes a Bella Vista Bypass and a northern Springdale Bypass. With respect to the northern Springdale Bypass, it appears that the segment of the highway west of I-49 (between I-49 & U.S. 412) will be constructed prior to the segment east of I-49. The timing of completion of the Bella Vista Bypass and the west segment of the northern Springdale Bypass is not known. It should be noted that construction of additional lanes to I-49 is also proposed in Benton and Washington Counties. Finally, several of the cities in the region are in the process of improving/constructing new transportation routes within their municipalities. A new airport for the region opened in November 1998. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport (XNA) is located near the small community of Highfill in the northwest part of the region. Total construction cost was estimated near $109f million. Some 2,185f acres were involved. There are two runways, both 8,800f feet in length by 150'f in width. There is also a 75' x 8,800'1 taxiway. The terminal building was indicated initially near 69,000:E square feet in size; however, has been expanded adding a new terminal. The new terminal reportedly cost $20- 25 million, and allowed parking space for twelve additional planes. The addition reportedly added 51,000± SF of building area. Direct flights are now available to many of the major MSA's across the country. In 2012, the airport served some 1,135,0234: passengers. Through November 2013, the airport is reported to have served 1,069,198 passengers. A new transportation route to the airport is also projected. This new route is to run northwesterly from the west segment of the northern Springdale Bypass. The new route will likely intersect the northern Springdale Bypass near State Highway 112 (north -south route). State Highway 264 currently provides access to the south entrance to the airport, while State Highway 12 provides access to the north entrance. Growth has occurred toward the airport, especially along State Highway 12 from Bentonville. The airport has exceeded initial projections on the number of people utilizing the facility. The two -county area is reasonably well located and is within relatively short driving times of major metropolitan areas. Driving time to Tulsa is less than 2± hours, to Little Rock is 2.5-3f hours, and to Kansas City is 3-4f hours. Environmental forces, for the most part, are considered favorable for real property development in the area. CONCLUSIONS Each of the major forces affecting real property values has been discussed in this section. The conclusion is that these forces appear, basically, to favorably influence real property values in the area with the possible exception of current economic conditions. The trend in Benton and Washington Counties, overall, had been upward through 2005 and into 2006. The long-term outlook is still considered good; however, currently the real estate market in the two -county area, particularly the commercial sector, is in a correction period. This correction period is the result of excessive supply brought to the market in the 2003 to early 2006 time period, and has been prolonged by the slow improvement in overall economic conditions. Oversupply problems first became evident in the single-family and professional office sectors of the market. The professional office sector still faces oversupply issues; however, conditions have continued to improve since late 2011. The single-family residential sector also experienced improvement in 2012 and 2013, and appears now to be on the upswing, The Class "A" retail sector had been the strength of the commercial market through the first half of 2008; however, vacancy rates increased during the second half of the year and, as economic conditions continued to deteriorate, remained at higher than desired levels through 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012. It should be noted; however, that the retail sector has shown continued slow improvement since 2010. The multi -family residential sector had been very healthy in the Northwest Arkansas Area for several years. As a result of the introduction of substantial new product, the multi -family sector experienced increasing vacancy rates in 2007. Higher than norm vacancy levels continued through 2008, 2009, and 2010. However, significant improvement has occurred in the multi- family residential sector since mid 2010. This sector of the real estate market was the first to rebound from the "Great Recession". Finally, the majority of industrial growth has been limited to the expansion of existing industries. There is also substantial vacancy in the office/warehouse sector of the real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties at the present time; however, this sector of the market has also improved since late 2011. The Benton -Washington County Area continues to experience a favorable interest rate environment, which is a positive demand indicator. In addition, year on year non -farm employment numbers reflect good positive growth. Employment obviously impacts population growth. The latest census figures are through 2010. At that time the Fayetteville- Springdale - Rogers MSA reflected a total population of 465,780. The unemployment rate for the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA remains favorable relative to the national and state levels. The December 2013 unemployment rate for the MSA was reported at 4.9%, For December 2013, the State of Arkansas reported an unemployment rate of 7.2%. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported the United States unemployment rate at 6.5% for December 2013. These represent non -seasonally adjusted rates. The current correction period in the Benton -Washington County real estate market is expected to continue in 2014. As previously stated, the long-term outlook for the Northwest Arkansas Area is considered good. W —' � m 1!} i w d Pa uQIZ, Pusmso "' e N t1 ,ZOO Rd N N �H M N n � w ca P a ID y o t w v � _ lg lua j ~ p�C m Q, and IIen N� y}y mmo 5A M Ra A0 eels N n �! O I 3 � �a Ul 4 PU aanassOJO N � os4; � a O a w �~ a ,¢POOMU {fj lu O Q, w x c a v w w eny Itia4S ~ �s '�� V LU ELJ # CD W a m to P/O N O w � a,, wC r V 1-3 �m OAV AOSIOOM N U L _ Q e Zt (� QAy 140JOA81 N U I!�OW N r '• A P "!!rvf C aN � r N r S� -E12 E m o �Z U 4 Em .g yff L n 0i 3� �d N ate® v FW 5 N d 14 _ W O 6 W ps m OZ � OaK WO, e®Z mO O-O O . F ��a7a m v � W ro as ZE V HE n�v U U O MARKET AREA Market Area is defined as: 'The area associaled with a subject property dual contains its direct contpelilion. "3 The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. Fayetteville, the Washington County Seat, had a 2010 population of 73,580t, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The City of Springdale is located just to the north of Fayetteville and had a 2010 population of 70,747±. Fayetteville and Springdale lie within Washington County; the extreme northern portion of Springdale extends into Benton County. The indicated 2010 populations of Washington and Benton Counties were 203,065f and 221,339�, respectively. Washington, Benton, and Madison Counties, in Arkansas, and McDonald County, in Missouri, comprise the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA (FSR MSA). The 2010 population of the MSA was approximately 465,780+. The May 2014 unemployment rate for the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA was indicated to be 4.9% (preliminary, not seasonally adjusted). The Market Area appears to consist of properties located south of East Joyce Boulevard, west of North Crossover Road (State Highway 265), north of East Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), and east of North College Avenue (U.S. Highway 71B). The Market Area is considered to be near 80%± built-up. Each of the Market Area boundaries represents a primary roadway. East Joyce Boulevard represents a fivc-lane roadway that runs in an east -west direction in the northern part of the Market Area. East Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), also runs in a generally east -west direction in the southern part of the Market Area. East Mission Boulevard alternates between two and three lanes. North College Avenue (U.S. Highway 71B) and North Crossover Road (State Highway 265) represents four to five lane roadways in the western and eastern parts of the Market Area, respectively. Interstate 49 is the principle traffic artery serving the F-S-R MSA, and is situated just west of the Market Area. It should be noted that Interstate 49 was recently known as Interstate 540; however, I-540 was rededicated as 1-49. Access to I-49 is available in the northwest part of the Area. The City of Fayetteville recently completed construction of a "fly over' that connects North College Avenue to the Fulbright Expressway. Construction of this project began in 2013, and was completed in early July 2014. Plans have been submitted for development of a Whole Foods grocery store located along the west side of North College Avenue, just south of the "fly over." The plans call for a 35,500f SF grocery store, along with two other smaller retail buildings to be constructed on the 6.6t acre site. The site is currently improved with a former automobile dealership building that has been vacant for several years. The exact timeline for this project is unknown. 3 Appraisal Institute, The DictiotaEy ofReal Estate Appraisal - Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute. 2010), P. 121 58 The predominant property uses in the Market Area are residential and special-purpose in nature. Both uses are primarily situated along secondary roadways; however, are also situated along/near primary roadways, The majority of residential uses in the Market Area are older; however, there is some evidence of new residential development in the Market Area. A recently completed subdivision, known as "Cottages at Old Wire", is located along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of East Mission Boulevard. This subdivision addresses the $270,000 to mid $300,000's home price range. This subdivision is located adjacent to the north of Clarence Craft Park. Clarence Craft Park is a 4.75E acre park that includes a gazebo, picnic area, and water feature. There are also some multi -family residential uses in the Market Area. Special-purpose uses include religious facilities, schools, public parks, Paradise Valley Athletic Club, etc. Gulley Park is the largest public park in the Market Area. The park consists of 27f acres and includes a 1.5t mile multi -use trail, playgrounds, gazebo, pavilion, restrooms, picnic area, etc. Commercial development is situated along each of the primary roadways in the Market Area, especially North College Avenue and East Joyce Boulevard. The Northwest Arkansas Mall is located just northwest of the Market Area along the west side of North College Avenue, just North of East Joyce Boulevard. Commercial development located along East Joyce Boulevard in the Market Area includes professional and medical offices, retail strip centers, restaurants, bank branches, etc. North College Avenue has similar types of commercial development; however, this area of development is considered to be somewhat older. Another area of significant commercial development in the Market Area is the intersection of East Mission Boulevard and North Crossover Road. This area includes several commercial properties including: a Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market, Walgreens', First Federal Bank Branch, Arvest Bank Branch, Firestone Tire Center, Harp's Grocery Store, restaurant uses, c-stores, etc. The topography of the Market Area is undulating/near level to gently rolling/sloping, for the most part. Soil and subsoil conditions are not generally considered adverse to building construction. Portions of the Market Area are situated within the 100-Year Flood Zone. Overall, drainage is considered adequate. Utilities available in the Market Area include public water and sewer, electricity, natural gas, cable television/communications, and telephone service. The Market Area is in the growth stage of its life cycle; however, growth has slowed significantly since the late 2006/early 2007 time period. The Northwest Arkansas real estate market remains in a correction period, particularly the commercial sector, due to oversupply issues which occurred in the mid part of the past decade. The correction period was prolonged by slow improvement in overall economic conditions. New construction virtually came to a halt, with the exception of special-purpose projects, and this continued through the "Great Recession." Property values in every sector of the market started downward, and continued downward through mid-2010, and even into 2011 for some areas. It should be noted there are definite signs of improvement in overall economic conditions. Total non -farm employment in the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA is actually at a higher level as of the effective date of this report than in the 2006 time period. The Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA has the lowest unemployment rate of all MSA's in the State of Arkansas. The multi -family sector became the first sector to rebound, and is showing good strength at the present time. The single-family sector has slowly 59 followed, with significant improvement visible in 2012 and 2013. There have also been some positive signs in the commercial sector (declining vacancy rates and some new development); however, the commercial sector as a whole is still lagging. There is still a significant amount of Other Real Estate Owned (OREO) being held by financial institutions in Northwest Arkansas. With the on -going improvement in the residential sector in Northwest Arkansas, the commercial sector is expected to continue to slowly improve. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. The Market Area is considered well located in the eastern part of Fayetteville. The physical characteristics of the Market Area are considered adequate for development. Overall, the outlook for the Market Area is considered positive. 60 AERIAL VIEW OF SUBJECT 'Red lines represent approximate boundaries of the subject whole property. 61 DESCRIPTION OF SITE 1 AREAIDIMENSIONSISHAPE: The subject consists of approximately 10.95-+ acres (ACS), or 476,982± square feet (SF), of land area; this is based on Assessment Records. As discussed in the "Identification of Subject" section, the legal descriptions indicate different land sizes; however, there appears to be some discrepancies with the legal descriptions. The land sizes indicated by Assessment Records appear to be a more accurate representation of the actual subject land size, and are relied upon for the purposes of this report. An Extraordinary Assumption of this report is that the land sizes are as indicated. A Survey Plat of the subject property is recommended to confirm the reasonableness of this Assumption. The subject land area is allocated as follows: 2634 North Old Wire Road- 0.50-+ acre (AC); 2649 North Old Wire- 0.75f AC; and, excess land- 9.70± ACS. Dimensions of the subject site, starting in the southwest comer of the site and moving in a clock -wise direction, are approximately as follows: 244.9'f (NE) x 210.4'+ (NW) x 251.7± (NE) x 221.8'+ (SE) x 245.1'f (NE) x 217.7't (E) x 1,190.Y± (S) x 855.4'+ (NW). The dimensions were obtained from the Washington County GIS Parcel Map, and represent estimates of the subject boundaries. The subject site has an irregular "L" shape, overall. Each of the subject homesites is considered to be near rectangular in shape. An illustration of the subject site can be found on the Aerial presented on the preceding page. FRONTAGE/ACCESS: The subject site has approximately 251.7'-L of frontage along the southeast right-of-way of North Old Wire Road in the northwest part of the site (homesites); the frontage is considered near road grade. North Old Wire Road represents a two-lane, secondary roadway through the Market Area. There is a drainage ditch located along the North Old Wire Road frontage. The subject site has additional frontage along the west right-of-way of the Magnolia Drive cul-de-sac in the southeast part of the site (excess land); this frontagc is also considered near road grade. As of the effective date of this report, vehicular access to the subject site is not available via Magnolia Drive. Finally, the subject site has approximately 855.4'f of frontage along Gulley Park; this represents the southwest boundary of the site. Visibility of the subject site is considered average. TOPOGRAPHYISOILS/DRAINAGE: The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. Each of the homesites is undulating/near level near the dwellings; however, slope downward gently from east to west some 2-3't west of the dwellings towards North Old Wire Road. The subject excess land slopes downward gently generally in a north to south direction. The highest elevations in the northern part of the site are near 1,350'f and the lowest elevations are in southern part of the site are near 1,320't. The subject acreage is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. There is a former wet weather pond in the southern part of the site; however, the selling broker indicated the pond has been dry for a significant period of time. Approximately 0.3f AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site (excess land) is located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". Soil and subsoil conditions are assumed to be adequate 62 for building construction; however, a soil test report on the site has not been examined. Building improvements are located on the subject site, and nearby sites. Please see the Flood Zone Map appearing in the Addenda. Overall, site drainage is assumed to be adequate. STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Sidewalks Curbs Street Paving On -Site Parking Off -Site Parking UTILITIES: _Yes X No - _Yes X No _Concrete X Asphalt Asphalt/Gravel None Water System - X Public _Commercial ,Individual Sewer System - X Public _Commercial Individual Gas - X Yes No Electric - X Yes No DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC INADEQUACIES: As stated previously in this report, the real estate market in Northwest Arkansas remains in a correction period, particularly the commercial sector, due to oversupply issues that occurred in the mid -part of the past decade. Slow improvement in economic conditions prolonged the correction period; however, national and local economic conditions have improved over the recent past and continued improvement is expected. This has resulted in significant improvement in the overall residential sector. However, the commercial sector is still lagging. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. EASEMENTS OR ENCROACHMENTS ON SITE: Typical utility easements are believed to be situated along the boundaries of the subject site. The City of Fayetteville Utility Map indicates a 6" sewer line runs along the northwestern boundary of the subject excess land; this also represents the southeastern boundary of the homesites. No adverse easements or encroachments were noted on the property inspection; however, a Survey Plat of the subject site was not provided to the appraiser. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION/HAZARDS: There are many materials that can be considered as hazardous. When these materials are present at or near a property, a property can be categorized as contaminated. This can potentially affect the value and/or marketability. Some examples of hazardous materials include mold, asbestos, PCPs and radioactive waste. Hazardous conditions are often in the form of soil or water contamination, and are rarely detectable without testing by a qualified expert. The existence of potentially hazardous material or contaminated conditions present at the subject or adjoining properties was not observed by us; nor do I have knowledge of the existence of such materials or conditions on or near the property being appraised. 63 However, I am not professionally qualified to detect such substances or situations. I have made my appraisal subject to the assumption that there are no environmental problems or concerns related to the subject or nearby properties. An expert in this field may be required to confirm the reasonableness of this assumption. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. CONCLUSIONS: The subject site relates reasonably well to its surroundings and is considered to be functionally adequate for certain types of residential and/or special- purpose uses. ZONING The subject property is zoned RSF-4 (Residential Single -Family- Four Units Per Acre) by the City of Fayetteville. According to the Zoning Ordinances published by the City of Fayetteville: "The RSF-4 Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of low density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as well as to protect existing development of these types. " Permitted uses in the RSF-4 district include: city-wide uses by right; single-family dwellings; and, accessory dwellings. Various conditional uses, including utility facilities, cultural and recreational facilities, government facilities, etc. are outlined in the Zoning Ordinances. The indicated maximum density of the RSF-4 district is four units per acre; and, the minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet (0.18f acre). The minimum lot width is indicated to be 70 linear feet. Discussions with the City of Fayetteville Fire Marshal's office indicated that subdivisions with 30:L or more lots are required to have two points of ingress/egress. Based on the zoning requirements the subject excess acreage (9.7f ACS) could have a maximum of 38± lots; however, it would be difficult to achieve the maximum density allowance on the subject excess land. The City of Fayetteville Planning Department indicated subdivisions typically achieve just over 50% of the maximum density allowance, which would indicate approximately 20-25f lots for the subject excess acreage. Therefore, it is my opinion the subject excess land would not need a second point of ingress/egress. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The present use of the subject property is assumed to be legal and permissible. Possible future uses of the subject excess land include residential and special-purpose uses. ASSESSMENT AND TAX The subject consists of three parcels in Washington County. The following information was obtained through Washington County Assessment Records: 64 ] IL&7- 765-16080-000 9.70 $ 2,200 $ 440 $ 23.65 765-16092-000 0.75 $168,000 $19,403 $ 692.91* 765-16095-000 0.50 J 135 700 27 140 1 458.78 Totals 10.95 $30S 900 $46 983 $2 175.34 *Estimated taxes less the $350 homestead tax credit Based on Assessment Records, the total Appraised Value of the subject is $305,900; approximately $98,450 is attributable to land value. The total Taxable Value is $46,983. Based on the most recent Ad Valorem Millage Rates published by the Washington County Tax Assessor, the estimated 2014 taxes for the subject property, due by October 15, 2015, are $2,175.34, The 2013 real estate taxes, which are due by October 15, 2014, are also indicated to be $2,175.34. There are no known private use restrictions encumbering the subject property. To my knowledge, there are no special assessments in connection with the subject; the property is located in the Fayetteville School District. Gosl Properiy Address 2634 0id Wire Road City Fayetteville Borrower NIA Lender/Client City of Fayetteville Appraiser Name Reed & Associates, Inc. 2634 NORTH OLD WIRE SKETCH File No 6301 County Washington State Arkansas Zip 16P ass Scale. 1 = 13 AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN Code Description Size Net Totals Breakdown Subtotals GLAI First Floor 016,00 1316.00 rirat Floor P/P Porch 72.00 72.00 28.0 x 47.0 1316.00 GAR Garage 372,00 372,00 OTH Shop 460.00 Enclosed Porch 210.00 670.00 TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) 1316 1 Calculation Total (rounded) 1316 R-6-1 Assn 1- APEX SOFTWARE BOG aM 99}.. A..1-[1 wA •Q 2648 NORTH OLD WIRE SKETCH File No 5301 Property Address 2648 Old Wire Road City Fayetteville County Washington Slate Arkansas Zip Borrower NIA LenderlClient City of Fayetteville Appraiser Name Reed & Assaclates, Inc. Scale 1 - 13 AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN Code Description Size Net Totals Breakdown Subtotals GLA1 First Floor 1551.00 1551 00 First Floor P/P Porch 84.00 84.00 25.0 x 29.0 754.00 GAR Garage 580.00 590.00 16.0 x 42,0 672.OD DTH Enclosed Porch 340.00 5.0 x 25.0 125.OD Greenhouse 152,00 492 00 TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) 1551 3 Calculations Total (rounded) 1551 Reed — Ars.ii aln AFEx SOF nVAP. E 965 453 %58 Anc1106 n A-2 DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The subject property is improved with two single-family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316E square feet (SF) of living area, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551E square feet (SF) of living area. Each of the subject dwellings vary with respect to property characteristics and will, therefore, be discussed separately. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316E square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 372E SF attached garage, 460E SF attached shop, and 210t SF enclosed porch. Site work consists of excavation, fill, and preparation. The foundation is a reinforced concrete block perimeter crawl space, with a wood floor structure. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, laundry room, and storage closet. Kitchen appliances include an oven, range, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood and carpet floor cover; painted gypsum board and wood panel wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. The plumbing system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. The dwelling utilizes central heat/air conditioning systems. The electrical system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. Wall and ceiling insulation was noted throughout the dwelling. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963+. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. External obsolescence is indicated due to current market conditions in the Northwest Arkansas real estate market, as well as overall economic conditions. No functional obsolescence is indicated. The overall effective age of the dwelling, in my opinion, is approximately 40f years. This includes physical deterioration and external obsolescence. The remaining economic life is projected to be 15t years, based on a 55-year economic life. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551± square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 580± SF attached garage, 340+ SF enclosed porch, and 152± SF attached greenhouse. Site work consists of excavation, fill, and preparation. The foundation is a reinforced concrete block perimeter crawl space, with a wood floor structure. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, one half bathroom, a living room, den, kitchen, and storage closet. The laundry room is located in the garage. Kitchen appliances include an oven/range combination, built-in microwave, dishwasher, and refrigerator. The interior fmish includes; wood, carpet, and file floor cover; painted and wall papered gypsum board wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. The enclosed porch has aggregate flooring. The plumbing system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. The dwelling utilizes central heat/air conditioning systems. The enclosed porch is heated and cooled by a wall unit. The electrical system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. Wall and ceiling insulation was noted throughout the dwelling. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1961±. Discussions 68 with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. This dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. External obsolescence is indicated due to current market conditions in the Northwest Arkansas real estate market, as well as overall economic conditions. No functional obsolescence is indicated. The overall effective age of the dwelling, in my opinion, is approximately 28f years. This includes physical deterioration and external obsolescence. The remaining economic life is projected to be 27f years, based on a 55- year economic life. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road is accessed via an asphalt paved drive, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road is accessed via a gravel paved drive. A 1,200t square foot (SF) metal shop building is located behind the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road. The shop building has concrete floors, two- 8' manual overhead doors, electricity/plumbing, and is insulated. The shop building includes a 2-fixture restroom, and has wall heat and air units. In addition, there is a built-in vacuum system in the shop building. Discussions with the property owner indicated the "shop" building was originally constructed 15t years ago; the shop building is considered to be in average condition. Other site improvements include: 238L SF wood storage building; 529t SF wood lean-to agricultural building; well house; landscaping; garden; water feature; agricultural, chain link, and PVC fencing; etc. HISTORY As of the effective date of this report, subject property was under the ownership of Allen & Mary L. Dunn. The 9.7L acres (ACS) representing the subject excess land transferred to this ownership on April 27, 1973, via a Warranty Deed filed at Book 93/Page 19847 in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. Revenue stamps affixed to the deed are not entirely legible. The Grantors were Fred and Floy Gulley. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road transferred to this ownership on June 22, 1959, via a Warranty Deed filed at Book 526/Page 444 in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. Revenue stamps affixed to the deed are not entirely legible. The Grantors were also Fred and Floy Gulley. Finally, the dwelling situated at 2936 North Old Wire Road transferred to this ownership on May 20, 1993, via a Warranty Deed filed at Book 93/Page 27263 in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. No revenue stamps were affixed to the deed. The Grantor was Allen Dunn. The subject is currently listed for sale by Bassett Mix & Associates. The list price is indicated to be $1,200,000 for the whole property. The listing broker indicated the property owners are not interested in sub -dividing the property. Based on a document provided by the listing broker, the property owners offered to sell the property for $1,100,000 to the City of Fayetteville for expansion of Gulley Park. The terms of the offer were a down payment of $450,000, with the remaining $650,000 being paid over 5-years with 4.0% interest. A copy of the offer letter is presented in the Addenda. The listing broker indicated several local developers have expressed interest in purchasing the property; however, details pertaining to these discussions were not disclosed to the appraiser. The listing broker indicated an out of state developer has made a "full price" offcr to purchase the subject property; however, the listing broker declined to provide a written copy of this offer. The listing broker did indicate that each of the potential buyers has 69 expressed interest in razing the improvements situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road to provide better access to the subject excess land. No sales or transfers involving the subject property were noted in the three-year period of time preceding the effective date of this report. The subject is not under contract to sell, to my knowledge. Based on Assessment Records, the dwelling located at 2634 North Old Wire Road was originally constructed in 1963=1:. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. Based on Assessment Records, the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road was originally constructed in 1961�=. Discussions with the property owner indicated this dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. 70 PART III -ANALYSIS OF DATA AND OPINIONS OF THE APPRAISERS 71 HIGHEST AND BEST USE AND IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS The definition of highest and best use is as follows: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, that is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity.' 4 In estimating Highest and Best Use, the appraiser goes through essentially four stages of analysis: Physically Possible - To what uses is it physically possible to put the site in question? Legally Permissible - What uses are permitted by zoning and deed restrictions on the site in question? Financially Feasible - Which possible and permissible uses will produce any net return to the owner of the site? Maximally Productive - Among the financially feasible uses, which use will produce the highest net return or the highest present worth? Highest And Best Use "As Vacant" Physically Possible The subject site consists of approximately 10.95+ acres of land area. The shape of the subject site is irregular, overall. Dimensions are considered adequate for building development. The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. The subject site is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. The subject site has vehicular access/frontage along the southeast right-of-way of North Old Wire Road in the northwest part of the site; this frontage is considered near road grade. There is a drainage ditch located along the North Old Wire Road frontage. The subject site has additional frontage along the west right-of-way of the Magnolia Drive cul-de-sac in the southeast part of the site; this frontage is also considered near road grade. As of the effective date of this report, vehicular access to the subject site is not available via Magnolia Drive. The southwestern boundary of the subject site has frontage along Gulley Park. Approximately 0.3f AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site is located within the 100- Year Flood Zone "AE", All typical city utilities are located at/near the subject site. Physically possible uses of the subject site include those within size/Flood Zone limitations. Legally Permissible The subject site is zoned RSF-4 (Residential Single -Family- Four Units Per Acre) by the City of Fayetteville. Permitted uses in the RSF-4 district include: city-wide uses by right; single-family 4 Appraisal Institute, The DictionaaofReal Esiate Appraisal —Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal kstilute, 2010), R 93, 72 dwellings; and, accessory dwellings. Various conditional uses, including utility facilities, cultural and recreational facilities, government facilities, etc. are outlined in the Zoning Ordinances. The indicated maximum density of the RSF-4 district is four units per acre; and, the minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet (0.18f acre). The minimum lot width is indicated to be 70 linear feet. Discussions with the City of Fayetteville Fire Marshal's office indicated that subdivisions with 30f or more lots are required to have two points of ingress/egress. Based on the zoning requirements the subject excess acreage (9.7f ACS) could have a maximum of 38f lots; however, it would be difficult to achieve the maximum density allowance on the subject excess land. The City of Fayetteville Planning Department indicated subdivisions typically achieve just over 50% of the maximum density allowance, which would indicate approximately 20-25=L lots for the subject excess acreage. Therefore, it is my opinion the subject excess land would not need a second point of ingress/egress. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The physically possible and legally permissible uses of the subject property are those within size/Flood Zone limitations, and that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements. Financially Feasible The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Commercial uses were noted along primary roadways in the Market Area. Overall real estate market conditions in Northwest Arkansas have previously been discussed in this report. Basically, the multi -family residential sector was the first to rebound from the recent "Great Rccession". This sector is strong at the present time; however, due to new product added, vacancy rates in some cities are beginning to creep upward slightly. The single-family residential sector has seen significant improvement over the past couple of years, and economist are predicting continued improvement through 2014. The commercial sector is seeing some improvement; however, overall, is still lagging. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to continue through 2014, and possibly beyond. Despite improvement in the residential sector, the overall N.W. Arkansas market still faces an over -supply of single-family lots at the present time. There has been improvement in certain price points; however, supply still exceeds demand. Developers/builders over -addressed the demand for new lots/homes during the 2003-2007 time period. Streetsmart NWA (real estate research company located in Fayetteville) tracks the status of Active and Inactive Subdivisions in the N.W. Arkansas Area. Following is a breakdown of the lot status in Benton and Washington Counties, respectively, as of the recent past: 73 Benton County Active Subdivision SFD Lot Status Empty Starts Under Construction Complete Occupied Total Q4 2013 5.542 117 481 227 9352 16219 022013 6 010 101 514 160 9 321 16,106 04 2012 6 221 87 402 170 8 792 15.872 022012 6,600 95 322 119 8,357 15,493 Note The activity of Springdale lots are all reflected in the Washington County lot status totals If interested in the activity of Springdale lots located in Benton County, please see the Springdale active subdivision table located elsewhere in this report 0 Ouarter 2013 Market Insight report rinblished by Streetsmart NWA. LLC Washington County Active Subdivision SFD Lot Status Empty Starts Under Construction Complete Occupied Total 042013 4,204 fit 224 147 5,619 10.256 Q2 2013 4,350 77 251 95 5,773 10,546 Q4 2012 4,571 47 202 111 5,600 10,531 Q2 2012 4,777 67 197 84 5,429 10,554 Note The activity of Spnngdale lots are all reflected in the Washinglon County lot status totals If interested in the activity of Springdale lots located in Benlon County, please see the Spnngdale active subdivision table located elsewhere in this report Ounrter 2013 Mnrket ha.eiaht rennrt nahliehed by .StrEPt.vmnrt 1JW4 7.7.0 As can be seen from the preceding tables, the number of Empty Lots decreased from Q4 2012 to Q4 2013 in both Benton and Washington Counties. The most recent quarters researched also show a decrease in the number of empty lots in both counties. Dwelling starts increased in both Benton and Washington Counties, between Q4 2012 and Q4 2013. As of the most recent quarters researched, dwelling starts also increased in Benton County while dwelling starts in Washington County decreased somewhat. These factors represent positive indicators for the Northwest Arkansas residential sector. The number of complete (but unoccupied) dwellings increased year over year since Q4 2012 in both Benton and Washington Counties. There is some concern that new home construction in recent quarters has outpaced the demand for single- family residential dwellings; this would represent a negative indicator for the Northwest Arkansas residential sector. The figures presented in the preceding exhibits pertain to Active Subdivisions (subdivisions that have experienced at least some vertical building construction; these subdivisions are considered to primarily make the market at the present time). If lots in Inactive Subdivisions (S/D's with no vertical building construction) are considered, the overall lot supply would increase substantially. The Fayetteville market, like the rest of the Northwest Arkansas Area, faces an over -supply of single-family lots at the present time. There were 3,326f lots in Actives Subdivisions in Fayetteville in Q4 2013; only 2,147f (64.5%) of which were occupied. This also indicates that there were 1,179+ un-occupied lots in Active subdivisions as of Q4 2013. Gross lot absorption, or lot demand, over the past four quarters was 342f lots in Fayetteville; this is an average of approximately 85.5� lots/quarter in Fayetteville since Q4 2012. Based on Fayetteville's overall supply/demand over the latest year, a 3.5f year (1,179 - 342) absorption period is indicated. The indicated absorption period represents a significant decrease from previous quarters. It is not clear if the recent absorption rates will continue in the future at the high rates. Lot absorption 5 Subdivision that has experienced some vertical building construction 74 for Q3-Q4 of 2014 was 128± lots, while lot absorption for Q1-Q2 of 2014 was 214E lots; this obviously represents a significant decline over a short period of time. These statistics are for all of Fayetteville, and includes only those lots in Active Subdivisions. Including Inactive subdivisions would obviously increase the indicated absorption period. A breakdown of lot status with respect to subdivisions in Fayetteville as of the 4' Quarter 2013 has been retained in the appraisal file. Historical employment data provided by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) indicated that the FSR MSA experienced year -on -year declines in non -farm employment from May 2008 until January 2011. However, these estimates were revised in February 2011 and now show year -on - year employment growth from May 2010 to June 2011 in the MSA. There was a slight decline in year -on -year employment growth in the July -September 2011 time period; however, October 2011 through May 2014 reflected growth in year -on -year non -farm employment in comparison to October 2010 through May 2013. Overall, total non -farm employment in the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA was actually at a higher level as of the effective date of this report than in the 2006 time period. Area residential demand is much lower than what was experienced in the 2004 to mid-2006 time period; however, there has been some improvement in the recent past. Although supply still exceeds demand, there have been a few new residential subdivision projects started in the recent past. Most of the newer projects appear to address the $150,000-L to $200,000 home price range. A recent article published in the Northwest Arkansas Business Journal indicated there has been some improvement in demand for the high end single-family residential dwelling home price range, as well. The majority of residential uses in the Market Area are older; however, there is some evidence of new residential development in the Market Area. A recently completed subdivision, known as "Cottages at Old Wire", is located along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of East Mission Boulevard. This subdivision addresses the $270,000 to mid $300,000's home price range. This subdivision is located adjacent to the north of Clarence Craft Park. Clarence Craft Park is a 4.75+ acre park that includes a gazebo, picnic area, and water feature. The physically possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible use of the subject site is considered to be single-family residential or special-purpose development, as demand dictates, within size/Flood Zone limitations and that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements. Maximally Productive In my opinion, the highest and best use of the subject property "as a vacant site" is to hold for future mixed -use (residential, special-purpose, or a combination of these uses) development, as demand dictates, within sizc/Flood Zone limitations, that complies with the RSF-4 zoning requirements, and that conforms to the Market Area. 75 Highest And Best Use "As Improved" Again, the subject consists of approximately 10.95E acres (ACS), or 476,982± square feet (SF), of land area. The subject site is improved with two single-family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The subject land area is allocated as follows: 2634 North Old Wire Road- 0.50± acre (AC); 2648 North Old Wire- 0,75E AC; and, excess land- 9.70E ACS. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316E square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 372E SF attached garage, 460=L SF attached shop, and 210E SF enclosed porch. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, laundry room, and storage closet. Kitchen appliances include an oven, range, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood and carpet floor cover; painted gypsum board and wood panel wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963f. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551E square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 580E SF attached garage, 340:�: SF enclosed porch, and 152E SF attached greenhouse. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, one half bathroom, a living room, den, kitchen, and storage closet. The laundry room is located in the garage. Kitchen appliances include an oven/range combination, built-in microwave, dishwasher, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood, carpet, and tile floor cover; painted and wall papered gypsum board wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1961--L. Discussions with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. This dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road is accessed via an asphalt paved drive, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road is accessed via a gravel paved drive. A 1,200± square foot (SF) metal shop building is located behind the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road. The shop building has concrete floors, two- 8' manual overhead doors, electricity/plumbing, and is insulated. The shop building includes a 2-fixture restroom, and has wall heat and air units. In addition, there is a built-in vacuum system in the shop building. Discussions with the property owner indicated the "shop" building was originally constructed 15:L years ago; the shop building is considered to be in average condition. Other site improvements include: 238� SF wood storage building; 529+ SF wood lean-to agricultural building; well house; landscaping; garden; water feature; agricultural, chain link, and PVC fencing; etc. 76 The improvements do suffer from Accrued Depreciation including physical deterioration and external obsolescence (due to market conditions); however, in my opinion, there is still significant remaining economic life. In my opinion, the "highest and best use" of the subject is continued single-family residential use of the homesites, and to hold the subject excess land for future single-family residential or special-purpose development, within size/Flood Zone limitations, that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements, and in conformity to the Market Area, as demand dictates. The agricultural improvements situated on the subject excess land are older and in poor condition. These improvements, in my opinion, do not provide any contributory value to the subject excess land. 77 LAND VALUE In the valuation model, land value estimate is a separate step. Sales comparison is the most reliable way to estimate land value. When few sales are available, or when the value indication by sales comparison needs additional support, other procedures may be applied. The other procedures used to obtain land value indications are allocation, extraction, subdivision development, land residual, and ground rent capitalization. The techniques are defined as follows: 1. Sales Comparison Approach is the process of deriving a value indication for the subject property by comparing market information for similar properties with the property being appraised, identifying appropriate units of comparison, and making qualitative comparisons with or quantitative adjustments to the sale prices (or unit prices, as appropriate) of the comparable properties based on relevant, market -derived elements of comparison', I Allocation is a method of estimating land value in which sales of improved properties are analyzed to establish a typical ratio of land value to total property value and this ratio is applied to the property being appraised or the comparable sale being analyzed! 3. Extraction is a method of estimating land value in which the depreciated cost of the improvements on the improved property is calculated and deducted from the total sale price to arrive at an estimated sale price for the land.a 4. Subdivision Development is a method of estimating land value when subdivision development is the highest and best use of the parcel of land being appraised. When all direct and indirect costs and entrepreneurial incentive are deducted from an estimate of the anticipated gross sales price of the finished lots (or residences), the resultant net sales proceeds are then discounted to present value at a market -derived rate over the development and absorption period to indicate the value of the land! 5. Land Residual Technique is a method of estimating land value in which the net operating income attributable to the land is capitalized to produce an indication of the land 's contribution to the total property.10 b. Ground Rent Capitalization is a method of estimating land valise; applied by capitalizing ground rent at a market -derived rate. This method is useful when comparable rents, rates, and factors can be developed from an analysis of sales of leased land or other market sources. I 1 In this section of the report, the estimated value of the subject site "as vacant" is established first utilizing comparable land sales in Fayetteville. The subject site value "as vacant" is then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. The following comparables are 6 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary ofReal Estate Appraisal -Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal hlstitute, 2010), P. 175 7 Appraisal Instihde, The Dictionary ofReal Estate Appraisal -Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010). P. 7 9 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary ofReal Estate Appraisal - Filr Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 73 9 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary ofReal Estate Appraisal - Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 1010), P. 188 10 Appraisal Institute, The DiclionorLofReal Estate Appraisal - Fiflh Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 109 1 Appraisal Instihtle, The Dictionary ofReal Estate Appraisal -Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute. 2010), P. 92 78 utilized in estimating the market value of the subject site "as vacant" by the Sales Comparison Approach: 79 LAND SALE 1 GENERAL INFORMATION General/Specific Type: Residential Record #: 1106 Location: Northwest corner of Mission Boulevard and Winwood Book/Page: Drive City: Fayetteville County: Washington State: AR Parcels): 765-13375-000 S-T-R: 02-16-30 Lot/Block: NIA Subdivision: NIA Legal: PT SW SW_ 2_.33 A. SALE INFORMATION Sale Date: March 01, 2012 Financing: Believed to be Market Terms Sale Price: $215,000 Exposure Time: 636t Days Adjusted Sale Price: $215,000 Rights Conveyed: Fee simple Grantor: Pearson Family Trust Verification: NILS/Public Records Grantee: Penny Lane Construction, LLC PROPERTY INFORMATION Gross Land Size: 2.330t Acres or 101,494.8t SF Indicators Total Frontage: Mission Blvd. & Winwood Dr. Sale Price/Gross Acre: $92,275 Zoning: RSF-4, Residential Single Family- 4 units Sale Price/Gross SF: $2.12 per acre Topography: Gently sloping Adjusted Sale Price/Gross Acre: $92,275 Utilities: Typical City Adjusted Sale Price/Gross SF: $2.12 Remarks: This represents the sale of 2.33 acres located at the northwest corner of Mission Boulevard and Winwood Drive, in the east part of Fayetteville. Subsequent to the sale, the site was replatted into five single-family residential building lots. Real Estate Market Data, Inc. 479.521.6313 Property of Real Estate Market Data, Inc. Any selling, duplication, reproduction, or related unauthorized use of material is strictly prohibited. LAND SALE GENERAL INFORMATION General/Specific Type: Residential Record #: 1324 Location: East side of OId Wire Rd., north of E. Mission Blvd. Book/Page: See Remarks City: Fayetteville County: Washington State: AR P arcel(s): 765-14066-000/76 5-13428-000/765 -1343 2-000 S-T-R: 03-16-30 Lot/Block: N/A Subdivision: N/A Legal: PT. S/2 of SEA of Section 3, and PT NE/4 of NE/4 of Section 10, all in Township 16N, Range 30W, Washington County, Arkansas SALE INFORMATION Sale Date: See Remarks Financing: Market Terms Sale Price: $825,000 Exposure Time: N/A Adjusted Sale Price: $825,000 Rights Conveyed: Fee Simple Grantor: See Remarks Verification: Broker (Jackson Williams) Grantee: BCCL Bentonville, LLC PROPERTY INFORMATION Gross Land Size: 13.620f Acres or 593,287.2t SF Indicators Total Frontage: Old Wire Rd. Sale Price/Gross Acre: $60,573 Zoning: RSF-4, Residential Single Family- 4 units Sale Price/Gross SF: $1.39 per acre Topography: Undulating/near level to Gently Adjusted Sale Price/Gross Acre: $60,573 Sloping Utilities: Typical City Adjusted Sale Price/Gross SF: $1.39 Remarks: This represents the assemblage of approximately 13.62t acres (ACS) situated along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of East Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), in Fayetteville. The property is situated adjacent to the north of Clarence Craft Park. Clarence Craft Park is a 4.751 acre park that includes a gazebo, picnic area, and water feature. Approximately 4.9f ACS sold on August 23, 2012, in consideration of $200,000, or $40,5161AC. The Grantor in this transaction was Harry Jackson, Jr., and the transaction was recorded at Book 2012/Page 25506 in the Washington County Circuit Clerks office. This land area is encumbered by a 50' utility easement, and also has approximately 1.18t ACS located within the 100-Year Flood Zone aAE„ Real Estate Market Data, Inc. 479.521.6313 Property of Real Estate Market Data, Inc. Any selling, duplication, reproduction, or related unauthorized use of material is strictly prohibited, The halance of the site (8.72 ACS) sold on September 21, 2012, in consideration of $625,000, or $71,674/AC. The Grantor in this transaction was Janice Torbett, Trustee of the Torbett Family Revocable Trust, dated August 12, 2009, and the transaction was recorded at Book 20121Page 28645 in the Washington County Circuit Clerks office. This acreage was improved with a 2,056 square foot (SF) dwelling and barn, each of which were considered to be in average condition at the time of sale. Discussions with the broker indicated that no contributory value was allocated to the improvements in the purchase price. The acreage was purchased for development of "Cottages at Old Wire" residential subdivision. The subdivision consists of 53 buildable single-family residential lots. Dwellings in this subdivision are being constructed by Buffington Homes, and address the $270,000 to mid $300,000's home price range. Real Estate Market Data, Inc. 479.521.6313 Property of Real Estate Market Data, Inc. Any selling, duplication, reproduction, or related unauthorized use of material is strictly prohibited LAND SALE 3 GENERAL INFORMATION General/Specific Type: Residential Record ##: 1143 Location: North of East Township Street, east of North Crossover Book/Page: 2012/34939 Road City: Fayetteville County: Washington State: AR Parcel(s): 765-13292-001 S-T-R: 31-17-29 Lot/Block: NIA Subdivision: N/A Leal: PT E/2 SW 20.99 ACS SALE INFORMATION Sale Date: November 16, 2012 Financing: Market Terms Sale Price: $750,000 Exposure Time: 1,264 Days Adjusted Sale Price: $750,000 Rights Conveyed: Fee Simple Grantor: George B. and Mona Josephine Brown Verification: Buyer Trust Grantee: Emanuele and Diana Terminella PROPERTY INFORMATION Gross Land Size: 20.990+ Acres or 914,324.4f SF Indicators Total Frontage: Brookbury Crossing Sale Price/Gross Acre: $35,731 Zoning: R-A, Residential - Agricultural Sale Price/Gross SF: $0.82 Topography: Rolling/Sloping Adjusted Sale Price/Gross Acre: $35,731 Utilities: Typical Cites _ _ Aoiysted Sale Price/Gross SF: $0.82 Remarks: This represents the sale of 20.99 acres of land in the eastern part of Fayetteville. This location is between Savannah Estates Subdivision to the east and Candlewood Subdivision to the west. Access to the site is southerly from Brookbury Woods, or from Township Drive along a private drive. The site is primarily wooded. Approximately 1.61t ACS along the western boundary of the site is situated within the 100-Year Flood zone "AE". Real Estate Market Data, Inc. 479,521.6313 Property of Real Estate Market Data, Inc. Any selling, duplication, reproduction, or related unauthorized use ofmaterial is strictly prohibited. c V Al A$1pne N ti Ew ti 10: pJOPSH Z� N � //� vJ �tG W c 05 c LU o ° @nor No$ N PZI WO 09STO N E p r y V LU N '�G J a w 3 I y w uZ I N o a r Y OQMU �� JQ It'10 GA Af N LL�v Y L OAV uia4LM13 N Qfi W `° cro } w N ItL` OAV G'N LU M OAV BA N , � N it SIL Z eh SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE LAND SALES A summary of the comparable land sales is presented in the following exhibit: Ir Date Of Sale 09/21/2012 J 11/16/2012 03/01/2012 Sales Price $215,000 $825,000 $750,000 Land Size ACS± 2.33 13.62 20.99 Price/AC $92,275 $60,573 $35,731 Location Northwest corner of Mission Blvd. and Winwood Dr., Fayetteville East side of Old Wire Rd., north of E. Mission Blvd., Fayetteville North of E. Township St., east of N. Crossover Rd., Fa etteville ANALYSIS OF SALES The unit of comparison is price per acre (AC) of land area. The elements of comparison are property rights, financing, conditions of sale, market conditions, location/appeal, and physical characteristics. Property Rights: Each of the sales appears to have involved the transfer of the fee simple interest. No property rights adjustments can be supported. Financing: Each of the sales is believed to have involved typical market financing terms/cash to seller. No financing adjustments are indicated. Conditions Of Sale: Each of the sates is believed to have been an arm's-length transaction involving typical market financing terms/cash to seller. It should be noted that Sale Two represents an assemblage with two separate Grantors. No conditions of sale/financing adjustments can be supported. Market Conditions: The respective sale dates of the comparables appear in the table above; the sales occurred between March and November 2012. As previously discussed, the local real estate market is currently in a correction period that became evident in mid to late 2006; the correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. Raw land values have been impacted the most. Based on data available to the appraiser, each of the comparable sales is believed to be representative of current market conditions. No market conditions adjustments are warranted. Location/Appeal: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Sale One is located at the northwest corner of Mission Boulevard 85 (State Highway 45) and Winwood Drive, in Fayetteville. This location is approximately 0.85f mile south of the subject property. Sale One is located adjacent existing residential subdivisions, and was replatted into five single-family residential lots subsequent to its sale, Overall, Sale One is considered reasonably similar to the subject with respect to location/appeal. Sale Two is located along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), in Fayetteville. This location is approximately 1.2f miles south/southwest of the subject. Sale Two is located adjacent to the north of Clarance Craft Park. Sale Two was purchased for development of "Cottages at Old Wire" Subdivision. Overall, Sale Two is considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to location/appeal, Sale Three is located north of East Township Street and east of North Crossover Road, in Fayetteville. This location is approximately 1.0-L mile south of the subject. Sale Three is located between Savannah Estates Subdivision and Candlewood Subdivision. Access to Sale Three is southerly from Brookbury Woods Subdivision, or northerly from Township Street along a private drive. Overall, Sale Three is considered much inferior to subject with respect to location/appeal due to its limited road frontage/access. In summary, each of Sales One and Two is considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to location/appeal, while Sale Three is considered much inferior to subject. Paired Sales Analysis, matching Sales Two and Three indicates an upward adjustment of near 65% to Sale Three in comparison to Sale Two. Again, Sale Two is considered reasonably similar to subject while Sale Three is considered much inferior to subject. Therefore, Sale Three is adjusted upward by 65% in comparison to the subject. This adjustment appears to be somewhat excessive; however, is supported by Paired Sales Analysis. An argument could be made that the subject is somewhat superior to each of Sales One and Two as it is located adjacent to Gulley Park; however, no adjustment can be supported based on MLS data. In fact, the average per SF home sales price since January 2013 with 0.5� mile of each of Land Sales One and Two was slightly higher than the average per SF home sales price within 0.5+ mile of the subject. This will be considered in the reconciliation. Physical Characteristics: With respect to physical characteristics, the necessary categories of adjustment are land size, topography/composition, and Flood Zone. The subject site is considered reasonably similar to each of the comparables with respect to utility availability, zoning, ctc. • Land Size: The subject (10.95f ACS) is larger than Sale One (2.33f ACS), and smaller than each of Sales Two (13.63f ACS) and Three (20.99± ACS). The tendency in the market is that as a property's land size increases, its price per unit decreases, and vice versa; this is for otherwise similar properties. Sales Analysis supports that as a property's land area approximates doubling, its price/AC decreases about 10%±. Based on this premise, the following adjustments are applied: downward 22% to Sale One; upward 3% to Sale Two; and, upward 9% to Sale Three. • Topography/Composition: The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. The subject site is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. Each of Sales One and Two is considered undulating/near level to gently rolling in topography 86 and was primarily cleared at the time of sale. Sale Three is considered rolling/sloping in topography and was densely wooded at the time of sale. Overall, each of Sales One and Two is considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to topography/composition, while Sale Three is considered inferior to subject. Based on Sales Analysis, a 15% upward adjustment to Sale Three is warranted. No adjustments to Sales One and Two are warranted. Flood Zone: Approximately 0.3t AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site is located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". Sale One is not indicated to be located within the 100-Year Flood Zone. Approximately 1.18f acres of Sale Two are located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE", and approximately 1.61f ACS of Sale Three are located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". Overall, Sale One is considered slightly superior to the subject, and each of Sales Two and Three is considered inferior to subject with respect to the Flood Zone category. Paired Sales Analysis, matching Sales One and Two indicates an upward adjustment of 15% to Sale Two (inferior) in comparison to Sale One (slightly superior). Therefore, Sale One is adjusted downward by 2.5% in comparison to the subject, while Sale Two is adjusted upward by 12.5% in comparison to the subject. Based on the preceding analysis, Sale Three (inferior) is also adjusted upward by 12.5% in comparison to the subject. Conclusions: The following adjustment grid is indicated: z + - Sales Price/Acre S92,275 $60,573 $35,731 Property Rights $0 $0 $0 Conditions of Sale/Financing $0 $0 $0 Market Conditions $0 $0 $0 'usted`P.-rfee/Acre 79' 6Q 73' _$350r31 Location/Appeal $0 $0 $21,439 Phvsical Characteristics Land Size (52u_301 } $1,817 $3,216 Topography/Composition $0 $0 $5,360 Flood Zone (S-'307) $7,572 $4.466 lndica#ed Value/Acre - -- -7$G9 +668. _ G9 . G2 0 211 The range of the adjusted comparable sales is $69,668/acre to $70,211/acre. The mean of the sales is $69,947/acre, while the median is $69,962/acre. Each of the sales is given some consideration. Sale Three represents the most recent transaction. Each of the comparables is located in close proximity to the subject. Sale Two received the lowest gross adjustment. In addition to the comparable sales presented and analyzed, two comparable listings in close proximity to the subject are discussed. Detailed MLS profiles of the comparable listings are presented in the Addenda of this report. The first comparable listing presented is for approximately 50.24f ACS of vacant land along the northeast side of Old Missouri Road, just north of Old Wire Road. This property is listed by Downtown Properties Real Estate Group for $3,900,000, or $77,628f per acre. The listing broker indicated approximately 10+ acres along 87 Old Missouri Road could be rezoned for potential light commercial use, while a preliminary subdivision concept for the remainder of the acreage could support 135± single-family residential lots. The list price was established considering approximately $150,000 per acre for the 10± ACS with commercial potential, and $60,000 per acre for the balance of the site. The acreage is adjacent to Butterfield Elementary School, The site is undulating/near level to gently sloping in topography, and primarily wooded. The listing broker indicated the property has seen significant interest from local developers for small parts of the property; the listing broker further indicated the offers have been near/slightly below list price. No further information pertaining to the offers was available to the appraiser. The second comparable listing is for approximately 5.368± ACS of land at the northeast corner of Old Wire Road and Oak Bailey Drive. This property is listed by Legend Realty for $400,000, or $74,516=L per acre. The property is improved with a 1,665f square foot (SF) dwelling and 1,408�= SF shop building; however, the listing broker indicated no consideration was given to the improvements in the list price. The site is undulating/near level to gently sloping in topography, and primarily wooded. The listing broker indicated the property has seen significant interest, despite being listed on the market for a short period of time. Based on the preceding analysis, it is my opinion the indicated per acre value for subject site "as vacant" is $70,000. Therefore: 10.95f Acres @ $70,000/Acre = $766,500 Rounded To $765,000 The preceding represents the estimated market value estimate of the fee simple interest in the subject site "as vacant". PIease see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The preceding subject site value "as vacant" is allocated as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50f AC) _ $ 50,000 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75f AC) _ $ 75,000 9.7L ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 88 COST APPROACH In the Cost Approach, an estimated reproduction or replacement cost of the building and land improvements as of the date of the appraisal is developed, together with the losses in value that have taken place due to wear and tear, design and plan, or neighborhood influences. To the depreciated building cost estimate is added the estimated value of the land. The total represents the indicated value by the Cost Approach, The following terms utilized in the Cost Approach require defining: "Reproduction Cost is the estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of the effective date of the appraisal, an exact duplicate or replica of the building being appraised, using the same materials, construction standards, design, layout, and quality of workmanship and embodying all the deficiencies, superadequacies, and obsolescence of the subject building ". rz„ "Replacement Cost is the estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of the effective appraisal date, a building with utility equivalent to the building being appraised, using modern materials and current standards, design, and layout. "t 3 "Entrepreneurial Incentive" is the amount an entrepreneur expects to receive for his or her contribution to a project. Entrepreneurial incentive may be distinguished from entrepreneurial profit (often called developer's profit) in that it is the expectation o_f'fitture profit as opposed to the profit actually earned on a development or improvement. "14 "Accrued Depreciation is the difference between the reproduction or replacement cost of the improvements on the effective date of the appraisal and the market value of the improvements on the same date. "is "Effective Age is the age of property that is based on the amount of observed deterioration and obsolescence it has sustained, which may be different from its chronological age. "16 "Economic Life is the period over which improvements to real property contribute to property value ". t "Economic Age -Life Method is the method of estimating depreciation in which the ratio between the effective age of a building and its total economic life is applied to the current cost of the improvements to obtain a lump -sum deduction. "18 Subject land value has previously been estimated in the Land Value Section. In the Cost Approach, the Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements are estimated, utilizing Marshall Valuation Service (national cost service) and a market derived entrepreneurial incentive. Accrued Depreciation attributable to the improvements is then estimated based upon 12 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary afReal Estate Appraisal -Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute. 2010), P. 169. 13 Ibid.. P. 244. "Appraisal Institute, The Dictiazazy ofReal Estate Appraisal - Fah Edilioz, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010). P. 67. 1s Ibid., P.4. 16 Ibid., P.9. 17 Ibid., P.91. 1s Ibid., P. S. 89 the Economic Age -Life Method, and is subtracted from Replacement Cost New to arrive at Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements. The estimated land value is then added to the Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the improvements to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject property by the Cost Approach. The estimated market value of the subject whole property was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. IMPROVEMENTS Marshall & Swift Residential Cost Handbook, Pages Average -1 through Average -29, Page F-1, and Page F-3 indicate the following: 2634 N. Old Wire Road Base Price Per SF = $93.00 Multipliers Cost 1.01 Area .93 x 0.9393 Adjusted Price Per SF — $87.35 x 1,316f SF = $114,953 Plus: Kitchen Appliances = $2,510 Fireplace/Insert = $1,810 Garage/Shop — 832f SF @ $23.78 = $19,785 Enclosed Porch — 210± SF @ $32.85 $6,899 Estimated Cost New = $145,957 Plus: Entrepreneurial Incentive @ 10% (From Market) = 14 596 Replacement Cost New = $160,553 Less: Accrued Depreciation (40t Yr. Eff. Age _ 551 Yr. Ec. Life = 72.7%) — 116 722 Depreciated Replacement Cost New = $43,831 Plus: Estimated Contributory Value Of Site Improvements $20,000 Estimated Present Value Of Improvements = $63,831 Say $64,000 90 2648 N. Old Wire Road Base Price Per SF = $93.00 Multipliers Cost 1.01 Area .93 x 0.9393 Adjusted Price Per SF = $87.35 x 1,551E SF = $135,480 Plus: Kitchen Appliances = $3,310 Fireplace/Insert = $1,810 Garage — 580E SF @ $23.78 = $13,792 Greenhouse — 152E SF @ $45.50 $6,916 Enclosed Porch — 340E SF @ $42.30 $14,382 Estimated Cost New = $175,690 Plus: Entrepreneurial Incentive @ 10% (From Market) $17,569 Replacement Cost New = $193,259 Less: Accrued Depreciation (28f Yr. Eff. Age : 551 Yr, Ec. Life = 50.9%) — 98 369 Depreciated Replacement Cost New = $94,890 Plus: Estimated Contributory Value Of Site Improvements & Shop Bldg. $50,000 Estimated Present Value Of Improvements = $144,890 Say $145,000 The Cost Approach is summarized as follows: SUMMARY OF COST APPROACH Dwelling/Site Improvements = $209,000 Land Value $765,000 Total = $974,OOo 91 The preceding represents the indicated market value of the fee simple interest in the subject whole property by the Cost Approach. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The preceding indicated value of the subject whole property is allocated as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50t AC) _ $114,000 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75f AC) _ $220,000 9.7f ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 92 SALES COMPARISON APPROACH In the Sales Comparison Approach, the subject property is compared to similar properties that have been sold recently or for which listing prices or offering figures are known. Data for generally comparable sale properties are used, and comparisons are made to demonstrate a probable price at which the subject property would sell if offered on the market. 'To apply the Sales Comparison Approach, appraisers follows a systematic procedure: Research the competitive market for information on properties that are similar to the subject property and that have recently sold, are listed for sale, or are under contract. Information on agreements of sale, options, listings, and bona fide offers may also be collected. The characteristics of the properties such as property type, date of sale, size, physical condition, location, and land use constraints should be considered. The goal is to find a set of comparable sales or other evidence such as property listings or contracts as similar as possible to the subject property to ensure they reflect the actions of similar buyers. Market analysis and highest and best use analysis set the stage for the selection of appropriate comparable sales. 2. Verify the information by confirming that the4 data obtained is factually accurate and that the transactions reflect arms -length market considerations. Verification should elicit additional information about the property such as buyer motivation, economic characteristics (f the property is income producing), value component allocations, and other significantfactors as well as information about the market to ensure that comparisons are credible. 3. Select the most relevant units of comparison used by participants in the market (e.g., price per acre, price per square foot, price per front foot, price per dwelling unit) and develop a comparative analysis far each unit. The appraiser's goal is to define and identify a unit of comparison that explains market behavior. 4. Look for differences between the comparable sale properties and the subject property using all appropriate elements of comparison. Then adjust the price of each sale property, reflecting how it differs, to equate it to the subject property or eliminate that property as a comparable. This step typically involves using the most similar sale properties and then adjusting for any remaining differences. If a transaction does not reflect the actions of a buyer who would also be attracted to the subject property, the appraiser should be concerned about comparability. 5. Reconcile the various value indications produced from the analysis of comparables into a value conclusion. A value opinion can be expressed as a single point estimate, as a range of values, or in terms of a relationship (e.g., more or less than a given amount). "19 The Sales Comparison Approach is utilized to estimate the market values of the improved subject homesites. The comparable sales utilized are presented on the following pages. The estimated contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) is added to the estimated values of the improved homesites to arrive at the indicated value of the whole property 19 Appraisal Institute, Tire Appraisal ofReal Estate — Fourteenth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2013), P. 381-382. 93 by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount can be supported to the sum of the two value indications. 94 Improved Sale No. 1 Location: Date Of Sale: Grantor: Grantee: Recorded: Legal Description: Reported Consideration: Financing: Verified: 1211 North Crestwood Drive, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County March 29, 2013 Carolyn C. Pugh Robert D. & Karen A. Brandon Book 2013/Page 10949; Filed April 3, 2013 Lot 21 & Pt. Lot 1, Block 2 of Broadview Subdivision to the City of Fayetteville; Detailed Legal Description Kept On File $175,000 Conventional; Arm's-Length Selling Agent Land Size: 0.30t Acre Dwelling Size: 1,568t SF Price/SF Dwelling: $111.61 Remarks: This property is located along the north side of North Crestwood Drive, just east of Shrewsbury Lane, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 1.5t miles south of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape. The topography is undulating/near level. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing approximately 1,568f SF of living area. There is also a two -car attached carport containing approximately 540± SF, covered storage area (216f SF) with electricity, and 456+ SF wood deck with pergolas. The 95 dwelling is Class "D" construction, with brick veneer and vinyl exterior siding. The roof cover is composition shingle. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms. The dwelling includes a wood burning fireplace and kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered to be average; however, needed some updating. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1967=�-. The condition at the date of sale was good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25± years. Additional improvements included: asphalt/concrete driveways; fencing; landscaping; etc. The additional improvements generally were in average condition. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $50,000f. 96 Improved Sale No. 2 ;b- Location: 1500 North Old Wire Road, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County Grantor: Don Edgar Kirby, Successor Trustee of the Marie L. Kirby Revocable Trust u/t/d December 27, 2004 Grantee: Howard D. & Naomi J. Baird Date Of Sale: July 5, 2012 Recorded: Book 2012/Page 19763; Filed July 9, 2012 Legal Description: Pt. Lots 18, 19, & 23 in Meadowview Addition to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Consideration: $160,000 Financing: Conventional; Arm's-Length Verified: Selling Agent Land Size: 0.49± Acre Dwelling Size: 1,566 SF Price/SF Dwelling: $102.17 Remarks: This property is located on the south side of North Old Wire Road, a short distance north of Mission Boulevard, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 1.40E miles southwest of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape. The topography is undulating/near level. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing an indicated 1,566E SF. There is also a two car attached carport containing approximately 456E SF and two storage 97 buildings totaling 188f SK The dwelling is Class "D" construction, with a brick veneer and vinyl exterior. The roof cover is composition shingle. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. The dwelling includes kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered to be average; however, needed some updating. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1959f. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 25 to 30f years. Additional improvements included: asphalt/concrete driveways; fencing; landscaping; etc. The additional improvements generally were in average condition. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $50,0M=. 98 Improved Sale No. 3 Location: 2763 North Old Wire Road, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County Grantor: Lance & Anna Williams Grantee: Nathan & Kelsey Friend Date Of Sale: February 14, 2014 Recorded: Book 2014/Page 3687; Filed February 18, 2014 Legal Description: Pt. of the NE % NW 1/ SE'/ Of 36-17-30 Detailed Legal Description Kept On File Consideration: $136,250 Financing: Conventional; Arm's-Length Verified: Selling Agent Land Size: 0.75+ Acre Dwelling Size: 1,644 SF Price/SF Dwelling: $82.88 Remarks: This property is located on the north side of North Old Wire Road, a short distance east of Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 0.25f mile northeast of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape, and has a deep/narrow shape. The topography is undulating/near level to gently rolling. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing an indicated 1,644t SF. There is also a large detached garage containing approximately 936± SF and 144f SF wood deck. The dwelling is Class "D" construction, with vinyl exterior. The roof cover is composition shingle. The dwelling is indicated to contain 4 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms. The dwelling 99 includes kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered to be average. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1976:L. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 20 to 25f years. Additional improvements included: asphalt/concrete driveways; fencing; landscaping; etc. The additional improvements generally were in average condition. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $65,000f. 100 Improved Sale No. 4 Location: 2626 North Old Wire Road, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County Grantor: Marlin K. & Rhonda Reddell Grantee: Matthew B. & Amanda Jo Niehues Date Of Sale: June 20, 2014 Recorded: Book 2014/Page 15609; Filed June 24, 2014 Legal Description: Part Of The NE '/ SW 1/4 Of 36-17-30; Detailed Legal Description Kept On File Consideration: $153,000 Financing: Conventional; Arm's-Length Verified: Public Records Land Size: 0.58f Acre Dwelling Size: 1,393+ SF Price/SF Dwelling: $109.83 Remarks: This property is located on the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of Old Missouri Road; this location is adjacent to the southwest of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape. The topography is undulating/near level to gently rolling. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing an indicated 1,393f SF. There is also a two -car attached garage (finished) containing approximately 420f SF, as well as a 276:L SF covered patio. The dwelling is Class "D" construction, with brick veneer and "James 101 Hardie" exterior siding. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. The dwelling includes kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered average. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1965f. The condition at the date of sale was average. The dwelling had recently been updated with exterior paint, roof, carpet, windows, etc. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 25 to 30f years. Additional improvements include: fencing; concrete/asphalt driveways; landscaping; etc, The condition of the site improvements, overall, was considered average. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $58,000f. 102 Improved Sale No. 5 Location: 814 East Peel Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County Grantor: Jason K. & Jodi L. Reynolds Grantee: Cynthia D. Nielsen, Trustee of the Cynthia D. Nielson Trust, u/t/d October 19, 2001 Date Of Sale: May 29, 2013 Recorded: Book 2013/Page 18044; Filed May 31, 2013 Legal Description: Lot 8, Block E, North Ridge Subdivision to the City of Fayetteville Consideration: $13 5,000 Financing: Conventional; Arm's-Length Verified: Selling Agent Land Size: 0.44+ Acre Dwelling Size: 1,270E SF Price/SF Dwelling: $106.30 Remarks: This property is located along the north side of East Peel Street, just east of Juneway Terrace; this location is approximately 0.81+ mile southwest of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape, and has a deep/narrow shape. The topography is undulating/near level. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing an indicated 1,270-+ SF. There is also a two -car attached garage (finished) containing approximately 567E SF, as well as a 103 522f SF covered patio and small storage building, The dwelling is Class "D" construction, with brick veneer and wood exterior. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathroom. The dwelling includes kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered average. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1965f. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 30f years. Additional improvements include: fencing; concrete/asphalt driveways; landscaping; etc. The condition of the site improvements, overall, was considered average. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $40,000±. 104 Improved Sale No, 6 Location: 707 East Ash Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County Grantor: Carol Anne Marsh Grantee: James Lewis Date Of Sale: May 5, 2014 Recorded: Book 2014/Page 11029; Filed May 7, 2014 Legal Description: Lot 22, Jug Wheeler Addition to the City of Fayetteville Consideration: $125,000 Financing: Conventional; Arm's-Length Verified: Selling Agent Land Size: 0.38t Acre Dwelling Size: 1,267t SF Price/SF Dwelling: $98.66 Remarks: This property is located on the south side of East Ash Street, just west of Austin Drive; this location is approximately 1.25f miles southwest of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape. The topography is undulating/near level. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing an indicated 1,267± SF. There is also a two -car attached garage (finished) containing approximately 4907L SF, as well as 131± SF of porches and a 56f SF storage building_ The dwelling is Class "D" construction, with wood exterior. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms. The dwelling 105 includes a double fire place and kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered average. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1966f. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The dwelling had recently been updated with exterior paint and carpet. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 30 f years. Additional improvements include: fencing; concrete/asphalt driveways; landscaping; etc. The condition of the site improvements, overall, was considered average. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $4O,OOOf. 106 Improved Sale No. 7 Location: Grantor: Grantee: Date Of Sale: Recorded: Legal Description: Consideration: Financing: Verified: Land Size: 2786 North Old Wire Road, Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County William W. & Barbara A. McIver Mark Zweig, Inc. October 1, 2012 Book 2012/Page 29837; Filed October 2, 2012 Part Of The NW 1/ SE 1/4 Of 36-17-301 Detailed Legal Description Kept On File $101,000 Conventional; Arm's-Length Selling Agent 0.61:L Acre Dwelling Size: 1,248t SF Price/SF Dwelling: $8093 Remarks: This property is located on the south side of North Old Wire Road, just west of Azalea Terrace; this location is approximately 0.35f mile northeast of the subject. The site is near rectangular in shape, and has a deep/narrow shape. The topography is undulating/near level. All typical city utilities are available to the site. The site is improved with a one story single-family dwelling containing an indicated 1,248:L SF. There is also a one -car attached carport containing approximately 312± SF, as well as a 180:L SF open porch and 144± SF wood deck. The dwelling is Class "D" construction, with brick veneer 107 and cedar exterior siding. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. The dwelling includes kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered average; however, needed some updating. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1964f. The condition at the date of sale was fair to average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 40t years. Additional improvements include: fencing; gravel driveways; landscaping; etc. The condition of the site improvements, overall, was considered average. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $50,000±. 108 906, A Q ti m co m l= EZ V�l �t g Uin _ W x � 7 M � c om M 0: IL W O ce N N R111 lanossOJO N ^ is 7 2 a %p s 3se3 tn z w 00 MO N a o ° Ld 0 m a ul ssll N a� W Z m E a F+ N LL poonsu+ N •10 luwodma!A N 6`5 ate, A 0 � ° ev V Ma E� '% N m a o 2" c N „` W N w No ik q�j n cacly T, N � �� a m m '� w W v�i r V} z o a. Ln um o O w® 0 LU W W 4brss a� }� Al m Q Q a W M LM # n P^18 RIM N 9� a a o c ` v w &' 3 n m eny 1S913ll!H N z a wCL w ix ,—�01 N a a W 6@Ylo� N 'o E ITO m 0 CO 1L ❑ W El p W V w a n a '25 W any 66aiD N ro m Y 60�0 Vca om m W a G^V r C �h V ,V X r N Z aJQ ua►sa 3 A SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE IMPROVED SALES The comparable improved sales are summarized as follows: Ji Date of Sale 03/29/2013 07/05/2012 02/14/2014 06/20/2014 Consideration $175 000 $160,000 $136 250 $153,000 Dwelling Size SF t 1,568 1,566 1,644 1,393 Price/SF $111.61 $102.1 7 $82.88 $109.83 Use Single -Family Single -Family Sin le-Famil Single -Family Location 1211 N. Crestwood Dr., Fayetteville 1500 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville 2763 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville 2626 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville Date of Sale 05/29/2013 05/05/2014 10/01/2012 Consideration $135,000 $125,000 $101,000 Dwelling Size SF 1,270 1,267 1,248 Price/SF $106.30 $98.66 $80.93 Use Single -Family Single -Family Single -Family Location 814 E. Peel St., Fayetteville 707 E. Ash St., Fayetteville 2786 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville ANALYSIS OF SALES The preceding sales represent comparable improved sales in Fayetteville, all of which are in close proximity to the subject property. The unit of comparison is whole property. The elements of comparison are property rights, financing, conditions of sale, market conditions, location, and physical characteristics. First, Improved Sales One through Four are utilized in the adjustment process with respect to the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road. Next, Improved Sales Four through Seven are utilized in the adjustment process with respect to the dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road. The contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) is added at the end of the Sales Comparison Approach to arrive at the indicated market value of the subject whole property by the Sales Comparison Approach. Property Rights: I am addressing the fee simple estate of subject in this report. Each of the sales involved the transfer of the fee simple estate. No adjustments are indicated. Financing: Each of the sales involved conventional financing at market terms. No adjustments for financing are indicated. Conditions Of Sale: Each of the sales appears to have been an arm's-length transaction; however, Sale Three appears to have occurred at the lower end of the market range for a property of this nature. No adjustment can be supported to Sale Three; however, this will be considered in the reconciliation of the sales. No adjustments for conditions of sale can be supported. 110 Market Conditions: The respective sale date of each comparable appears on the summary table on the preceding page. The sales occurred between the July 2012 and June 2014 time period. Market conditions during this time period were considered reasonably similar to those as of the effective date of this report. Based on data available to the appraiser, each of the comparable sales is believed to be representative of current market conditions. No market conditions adjustments are warranted. Location: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical address of this homesite is indicated to be 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated just north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Sale One is located along the north side of North Crestwood Drive, just east of Shrewsbury Lane, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 1.5f miles south of the subject. Sale Two is located on the south side of North Old Wire Road, a short distance north of Mission Boulevard, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 1,40f miles southwest of the subject. Sale Three is located on the north side of North Old Wire Road, a short distance east of Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 0.25± mile northeast of the subject. Finally, Sale Four is located on the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of Old Missouri Road; this location is two parcels to the southwest of the subject. Each of the comparable properties, and subject, has an adequate location for their respective use. Overall, no separate location adjustments can be supported to any of the sales. Any necessary location adjustments are considered to be adequately reflected in the `site value' category in the next section. Physical Characteristics: The categories of adjustment considered under physical characteristics are site value, dwelling living area size, dwelling age/condition, dwelling quality, garage/porch, and "other". First, site value is considered. The value of the subject homesite (0.75+ acre) has previously been estimated in the Land Value Section at $75,000. The estimated land values of the comparables are $45,000, $50,000, $65,000, and $58,000, respectively. The following upward adjustments are indicated: $30,000 to Sale One; $25,000 to Sale Two; $10,000 to Sale Three; and, $17,000 to Sale Four. Next, dwellinglg area size is considered. The subject (1,551+ SF) is smaller in dwelling living area size than each of the Sales One (1,568+ SF), Two (1,566f SF), and Three (1,644t SF), and larger than Sale Four (1,393f SF). Sales and Cost Analysis supports a size multiplier of $35.00 per SF. Therefore, in comparison to subject, Sale Three requires a downward adjustment of $3,255 (931 SF @ $35), while Sale Four requires an upward adjustment of $5,530 (158� SF @ $35). No adjustment can be supported to Sales One and Two for the small difference in dwelling living area size compared to subject. 111 Next, dwelling age/condition is considered. Based on Assessment Records, the subject dwelling was originally constructed in 1961+. Discussions with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. The subject dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. The effective age is estimated to be 28± years. Sale One was originally constructed in 1967±. The condition at the date of sale was good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 f years. Sale Two was originally constructed in 1959f. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30f years. Sale Three was originally constructed in 1976f. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 20 to 25f years. Sale Four was originally constructed in 1965+. The condition at the date of sale was average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30+ years. Overall, Sale One is considered somewhat superior to subject with respect to dwelling age/condition, while each of Sales Two and Four is considered reasonably similar, and Sale Three is considered superior. Paired Sales Analysis utilizing Sales One and Two indicates, after adjusting for other differences, that Sale One requires a 10%+ downward adjustment for dwelling age/condition. The indicated dollar adjustment is-$17,500 to Sale One. Although Sale Three is considered superior to subject with respect to dwelling age/condition, no adjustment could be supported based on Paired Sales Analysis. No adjustments to Sales Two and Four are warranted. Next, dwelling qualilyis considered. Subject dwelling represents average quality construction. Subject dwelling is centrally heated and cooled, and includes 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms. Subject also includes a fireplace and kitchen appliances. Each of the comparable improved sales is also considered to represent average quality construction and includes kitchen appliances. Sale One has 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, Sale Two has 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms, Sale Three has 4 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, and Sale Four has 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. Overall, Sale One is considered reasonably similar to subject in construction quality, while Sales Two and Three each appear to be slightly superior, and Sale Four is considered to be slightly inferior. Paired Sales Analysis utilizing Sales Two and Four indicates a difference of near 5% between Sales Two and Four with respect to dwelling quality. Again, Sale Two is considered slightly superior to subject while Sale Four is considered slightly inferior to subject. Therefore, Sale Two is adjusted downward by 2.5% in comparison to the subject, while Sale Four is adjusted upward by 2.5% in comparison to the subject. Again, Sale Three is considered slightly superior to subject with respect to the dwelling quality category; however, no adjustment can be supported based on Paired Sales Analysis. Next, garage/porch is considered. Subject includes a 580f SF attached garage. Subject also includes a 340f SF enclosed porch. Sale One includes a 540f SF carport. Sale Two has a 456+ SF carport. Sale Three has a 936+ SF detached garage with no electricity. Sale Four has a 420+ SF garage. None of the sales include an enclosed porch. Based on Cost and Sales Analysis, an adjustment of $10 per SF is indicated for difference in garage sizes, and an additional $5 per SF for difference between garage and carport. The indicated adjustment for the enclosed porch is $20 per SF. In comparison to subject: Sale One requires a net adjustment of +$7,400; Sale Two a net adjustment of +$8,660; Sale Three a net adjustment of +$3,240; and, Sale Four a net adjustment of+$8,400. 112 Lastly, the "other" category is considered. This pertains to other buildings, as well as site improvements. Subject other improvements have previously been described in this report. The other improvements on the sale properties were previously described in this report in the sale narratives. Each of the comparable sales, and subject, are considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to site improvements; however, are each considered inferior to subject with respect to other buildings. Based on Sales and Cost Analysis, each of the comparable sales is adjusted upward by $30,000; this is mostly reflective of the subjects superior "other buildings" situation due to the shop building. Conclusions: The following adjustment grid is indicated: Sales Price S175 000 $160 000 $136 50 S153,000 Property Ri hts $0 $0 $0 $0 Financin $0 $0 $0 $0 Conditions of Sale $0 $0 $0 so Market Conditions $0 $0 $o $0 Location $o $0 $0 $o Physical Characteristics Site Value $30,000 $25,000 $10,000 $17,000 Dwellin Size $0 $0 ($3,2551 $5,530 Dwelling Age/Condition 1 ($17.500) 1 $0 1 $0 s0 Dwelling Quality $0 ($4.000) 1 $0 $3,825 Garage/Porch $7,400 $8.660 1 $3.240 $8,400 Other $30,000 $30.000 1 $30.000 $30.000 The range of the adjusted comparable sales is $176,235 to $224,900; the mean is $209,638 and the median is $218,708. The mean is distorted by Sale Three which falls much below the indicated values by Sales One, Two, and Four; the reason for this is not clear. Sale Four represents the most recent sale and is located nearest to the subject. Sale Three received the lowest gross adjustment; however adjustments for dwelling age/condition and quality could not be supported by Paired Sales Analysis. Sale Four received the most weight, followed by Sales One and Two. Sale Three is given the least amount of weight. Based on the preceding analysis, it is my opinion the indicated market value of the subject improved homesite located at 2648 North Old Wire Road by the Sales Comparison Approach is: $218,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. Next, the subject improved homesite located at 2534 North Old consideration to Sales Four through Seven previously presented through Seven is presented again in the following exhibit: 113 Wire Road is addressed with . A summary of Sales Four �.- T - _- - • f _ • Its I -ram T� ♦ T �,� Date of Sale 06/20/2014 05/29/2013 05/05/2014 10/01/2012 Consideration $153,000 $135,000 $125,000 $101,000 Dwelling Size SF 1,393 1,270 1,267 1,248 Price/SF S109.83 $106.30 $98.66 $80.93 Use Single -Family Single -Family Single -Family Single -Family Location 2626 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville 814 E. Peel St., Fayetteville 707 E. Ash St., Fayetteville 2786 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville Property Rights: I am addressing the fee simple estate of subject in this report. Each of the sales involved the transfer of the fee simple estate. No adjustments are indicated. Financing: Each of the sales involved conventional financing at market terms. No adjustments for financing are indicated. Conditions Of Sale: Each of the sales appears to have been an arm's-length transaction. No adjustments for conditions of sale can be supported. Market Conditions: The respective sale date of each comparable appears on the summary table above. The sales occurred between the October 2012 and June 2014 time period. Market conditions during this time period were considered reasonably similar to those as of the effective date of this report. Based on data available to the appraiser, each of the comparable sales is believed to be representative of current market conditions. No market conditions adjustments are warranted. Location: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical address of this homesite is indicated to be 2634 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated just north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Sale Four is located on the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of Old Missouri Road; this location is two parcels to the southwest of the subject. Sale Five is located along the north side of East Peel Street, just east of Juneway Terrace; this location is approximately 0.81± mile southwest of the subject. Sale Six is located on the south side of East Ash Street, just west of Austin Drive; this location is approximately 1.25± miles southwest of the subject. Finally, Sale Seven is located on the south side of North Old Wire Road, just west of Azalea Terrace; this location is approximately 0.35± mile northeast of the subject. Each of the comparable properties, and subject, has an adequate location for their respective use. Overall, no separate location adjustments can be supported to any of the sales. Any necessary location adjustments are considered to be adequately reflected in the `site value' category in the next section. 114 Physical Characteristics: The categories of adjustment considered under physical characteristics are site value, dwelling living area size, dwelling age/condition, dwelling quality, garage/porch, and "other'. First, site value is considered. The value of the subject homesite (0.5f acre) has previously been estimated in the Land Value Section at $50,000. The estimated land values of the comparables are $58,000, $40,000, $40,000, and $50,000, respectively. The following adjustments are indicated: downward $8,000 to Sale One; and, upward $10,000 to each of Sales Two and Three. No site value adjustment is warranted to Sale Four Next, dwellinglg area size is considered. The subject (1,316+ SF) is smaller in dwelling living area size than Sale Four (1,393f SF), and larger in dwelling living area size than each of Sales Five (1,270f SF), Six (1,267f SF), and Seven (1,248:L SF). Sales and Cost Analysis supports a size multiplier of $35.00 per SF. Therefore, in comparison to subject, Sale Four requires a downward adjustment of $2,695 (77+ SF @ $35), Sale Five requires an upward adjustment of $1,610 (46f SF @ $35), Sale Six requires an upward adjustment of $1,715 (49f SF @ $35), and Sale Seven requires an upward adjustment of $2,380 (68:L SF @ $35). Next, dwelling age/condition is considered. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963t. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. The effective age is estimated to be 40+ years. Sale Four was originally constructed in 1965t. The condition at the date of sale was average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30f years. Sale Five was originally constructed in 19651. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30± years. Sale Six was originally constructed in 1966-L. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30f years. Sale Seven was originally constructed in 1964+. The condition at the date of sale was fair to average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 40t years. Overall, each of Sales Four, Five, and Six is considered superior to subject with respect to dwelling age/condition, while Sale Seven is considered reasonably similar. Paired Sales Analysis utilizing Sales Four and Seven indicates, after adjusting for other differences, that Sale Four requires a 25%f downward adjustment for dwelling age/condition. The indicated dollar adjustment is-$38,250 to Sale One. Based on the preceding analysis, each of Sales Five and Six are also adjusted downward by 25% in comparison to the subject, or $33,750 and $31,250, respectively. No adjustment to Sale Seven is warranted. Next, dwelling_ quality is considered. Subject dwelling represents average quality construction. Subject dwelling is centrally heated and cooled, and includes 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom. Subject also includes a fireplace and kitchen appliances. Each of the comparable improved sales is also considered to represent average quality construction and includes kitchen appliances. Sale Four has 3 bedrooms and 1 bathroom, Sale Five has 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, Sale Six has 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, and Sale Seven has 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. Overall, Sale One is considered reasonably similar to subject in dwelling quality, while Sales Five and Six each appear to be slightly superior, and Sale Seven is considered to be somewhat superior. Sales Analysis supports a downward adjustment of 2.5% to each of Sales Five and Six, 115 and a downward adjustment of 5% to Sale Seven. No adjustment to Sale Four is warranted for dwelling quality. Next, garag_elporch is considered. Subject includes a 372f SF attached garage, 460± SF attached shop, and a 210f SF enclosed porch, Sale Four has a 4201 SF garage. Sale Five has a 567t SF attached garage and a 522f SF covered patio. Sale Six has a 490f SF attached garage. Sale Seven has a 312± SF attached carport. None of the sales include an enclosed porch. Based on Cost and Sales Analysis, an adjustment of $10 per SF is indicated for difference in garage/shop sizes, and an additional $5 per SF for difference between garage and carport. The indicated adjustment for the enclosed porch is $20 per SF. In comparison to subject: Sale Four requires a net adjustment of +$8,320; Sale Five a net adjustment of +$2,650; Sale Six a net adjustment of +$7,620; and, Sale Seven a net adjustment of +$12,000. Lastly, the "other" category is considered. This pertains to other buildings, as well as site improvements. Subject other improvements have previously been described in this report. The other improvements on the sale properties were previously described in this report in the sale narratives. Each of the comparable sales, and subject, are considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to site improvements and other buildings. No adjustments for the "other" category are warranted to any of the comparable sales. Conclusions: The following adjustment grid is indicated: Sales Price S153.000 S1350W S125,000 $101.000 Property Rights $0 $0 $0 $0 Financing $0 $0 $0 $0 Conditions of Sale $0 $0 $0 $0 Market Conditions $o $0 $0 $0 Location $0 $o $0 $0 Physical Characteristics Site Value ($8,000) $10,000 $10,000 $0 Dwelling Size ($2,695) $1,610 $1,715 $2,380 Dwelling AgeJCondition 1 ($38,250) ($33,750) (531,250) $0 Dwelling Quality $0 {$3,375) ($3,125) f$5.050) Garage/Porch $8,320 $2,650 $7,620 $12,000 Other $0 $0 $0 $0 The range of the adjusted comparable sales is $109,960 to $112,375; the mean is $111,200 and the median is $111,233. Sale Four represents the most recent sale and is located nearest to the subject. Sale Seven received the lowest gross adjustment. Sales Four and Seven received the most weight. Each of Sales Five and Six also provide strong support. Based on the preceding analysis, it is my opinion the indicated market value of the subject improved homesite located at 2634 North Old Wire Road by the Sales Comparison Approach is: $111,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 116 SUMMARY OF SALES COMPARISON APPROACH 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50f AC) = $111,000 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75f AC) = $218,000 9.7f ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 Estimated Value Based on = $969,000 Sales Comparison Approach The preceding represents the indicated market value of subject whole property by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount could be supported to the sum of the values of the improved subject homesites and the excess land_ Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 117 INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH In the Income Capitalization Approach, the current rental income is shown with deductions for vacancy and credit loss and operating expenses. A conclusion about the prospective Net Operating Income of the property is developed. In support of this Net Operating Income estimate, operating statements for the previous years may be reviewed, together with available operating -cost estimates. An applicable capitalization method and appropriate Capitalization Rate are developed for use in computations that lead to an indication of value by the Income Capitalization Approach. The following definitions are necessary before applying the Income Capitalization Approach to the subject property: "Potential Gross Income (PGI) is the total income attributable to real property at full occupancy before vacancy and operating expenses are deducted. "20 '`Effective Gross Income (EGI) is the anticipated income from all operations of the real properly after an allowance is made for vacancy and collection losses and an addition is made for any other income.'ai "Net Operating Income (NOI) is the actual or anticipated net income that remains after all operating expenses are deducted from effective gross income but before mortgage debt service and book depreciation are deducted. Note: This definition mirrors the convention used in corporate finance and business valuation for EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization). "22 "Overall Capitalization Rate (Ro) is an income rate for a total real property interest that reflects the relationship between a single year's net operating income expectancy and the total property price or value (Ro = IolVo) "23 "Direct Capitalization is a method used to convert an estimate of a single year's income expectancy into an indication of value in one direct step, either by dividing the net income estimate by an appropriate capitalization rate or by multiplying the income estimate by an appropriate factor. Direct capitalization employs capitalization rates and multipliers extracted or developed from market data. Only a single year's income is used. Yield and value changes are implied but not identified The Income Capitalization Approach is not utilized as this is not typically the basis upon which buy/sell decisions are being made in this market on properties of the subject's nature. Application of the Income Capitalization Approach to Value is not considered necessary to produce credible appraisal results for the subject property. 20 Appraisal Inslilure, 77re Dicliotar o Real Erfare Appraisal Fifth Edition, (Chicago. Appraisal Insttrte, 2010), 1'. 148. 21 Appraisallnstitule, rhepicliowrti-ofReal.CstateRp-aisa -Fifth Edition, fChicago: Appraisal institute, 2010), P_ 65. zz Appraisal firstitnte. 7ir Dicrianar a Real Fslure Appraisal Fifth Edition. (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 134. 23 Appraisal Institute, Ilre Dictiorrar efReal ,Estate d_pgraisal - Fifth Edition. (Chicago Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 141. 118 RECONCILIATION 1 Reconciliation is the part of the valuation process in which the appraiser attempts to resolve differences among the value indications derived from the application of the approaches. The conclusion drawn in the reconciliation is based on the appropriateness, the accuracy, and the quantity of the evidence in the entire appraisal. Indicated Land Value "As Vacant": $765,000 Indicated Value by the Cost Approach: $974,000 Indicated Value by the Sales Comparison Approach: $969,000 Indicated Value By the Income Capitalization Approach: Not Utilized Cost Approach The Cost Approach is based, in part, upon the principle of substitution. This principle is basic to the Cost Approach and holds that no prudent investor would pay more for an existing property than the cost to acquire the site and construct improvements of equal desirability and utility without undue delay. Other appraisal principles that relate to the Cost Approach are: Supply and demand; balance; externalities; and, highest and best use. In the Cost Approach, the Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements were estimated, utilizing Marshall Valuation Service (national cost service) and a market derived entrepreneurial incentive. Accrued Depreciation attributable to the improvements was then estimated based upon the Economic Age -Life Method, and was subtracted from Replacement Cost New to arrive at Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements. The estimated land value was then added to the Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the improvements to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject property by the Cost Approach. The estimated market value of the subject whole property was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. The strength of the Cost Approach is the availability of recent comparable land sales in estimating the market value of the subject site "as vacant" in the Land Value section, and the availability of cost estimates from Marshall Valuation Service. A weakness of this approach is the difficulty in estimating Accrued Depreciation of the older improvements. Overall, the reliability of the Cost Approach is considered to be average. 119 Sales Comparison Approach Certain principles are also basic to the Sales Comparison Approach: Substitution; supply and demand; balance; and, externalities, Again, the principle of substitution is very important. This principle states that the value of a specific property generally is set by the price necessary to acquire a substitute property of equivalent utility. In the Sales Comparison Approach, comparable improved sales were examined and analyzed for comparison purposes to the respective dwelling improvements. The unit of comparison was whole property. Adjustments were made to the sales based upon differences with respect to the respective subject dwellings. The market value of the respective subject dwellings was then estimated from within the adjusted range of the comparables. Finally, the contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) was added to the value of the subject dwellings to arrive at the estimated market value of the whole subject property by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount could be supported to the sum of the values of the improved subject homesites and the excess land. The strength of the Sales Comparison Approach is the availability of recent and reliable comparable sales. A weakness of this approach is that each of the comparables required adjustments; however, the adjustments were believed to be market supported. Overall, the reliability of the Sales Comparison Approach is considered to be good. Income Capitalization Approach The application of the Income Capitalization Approach is based on the operation of value influences and appraisal principles. The appraisal principles considered are: Anticipation and change; supply and demand; substitution; balance; and, externalities. Anticipation and change are very important. The principle of anticipation states that value is created by the expectation of benefits to be derived in the future. Income Capitalization methods attempt to forecast future benefits and estimate their present value. The Income Capitalization Approach also focuses on how change affects the value of income -producing properties. The Income Capitalization Approach was not utilized as this is not typically the basis upon which buy/sell decisions are being made in this market on properties of the subject's nature. Application of the Income Capitalization Approach to Value was not considered necessary to produce credible appraisal results for the subject property. Final Value In the final value analysis both the Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches are given consideration. Most weight is placed on the Sales Comparison Approach due to the quantity and quality of evidence available to the appraiser; however, some weight is still placed on the Cost Approach It is my opinion the market value of t_ he fee simple estate of the subject property, as of July 10, 2014, was: 120 NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($970,000) The preceding value reflects terms equivalent to cash to the owner, and represents that for real property only. No personal property has been included in this valuation assignment. The preceding value estimate is based upon the following Extraordinary Assumptions: 1. That the subject and adjacent properties are in compliance with all applicable EPA regulations; 2. That the subject excess acreage does not need a second point of ingress/egress; 3. That the subject dwellings are structurally sound, and are not adversely affected by the presence of mold or other environmental issues; 4. That the plumbing, electrical, and HVAC systems in the subject dwellings are in proper working order; and, 5. That the subject land and dwelling sizes are approximately as indicated. If any, or all, of these Extraordinary Assumptions prove to be untrue, the preceding value estimate could be influenced. The reader is referred to additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions appearing in the Introduction Section of this report. The estimated exposure time for the subject property is one± year or less. This was determined from an analysis of market conditions and comparable sales. At the request of the client, the contributory value of each of the subject parts to the market value of the subject whole property is broken down as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50± AC) = $111,500 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75± AC) = $218,500 9.7± ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 121 EXPOSURE TIME Exposure time is the length of time the subject property would have been exposed for sale in the market had it sold at the market value concluded in this analysis as of the date of this valuation. The exposure times of Land Sales One and Three utilized in the Land Value section were 636f days and 1,264f days, respectively. The exact exposure time for Land Sale Two utilized in the Land Value section is not known. The exposure times of Improved Sales One through Three, and Five Through Seven utilized in the Sales Comparison Approach are 701 days, 72t days, 99f days, 71± days, 164+ days, and 66f days, respectively. The exact exposure time for Improved Sale Four utilized in the Sales Comparison Approach is not known. Based. on MLS data, the average exposure time for residential land sales in Benton and Washington Counties, greater than 1 acre in size, for the twelve months preceding the effective date of this report was indicated to be 385f days, while the median was indicated to be 184�L days; this is based on 328 transactions. Based on MLS data, the average exposure time for single-family residential sales in Fayetteville for the twelve months preceding the effective date of this report was indicated to be 130f days, while the median was indicated to be 97f days; this is based on 1,235 transactions_ As previously discussed in this report, the real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties remains in a correction period, particularly the commercial sector. Slow improvement in economic conditions prolonged the correction period; however, national and local economic conditions have improved over the recent past and continued improvement is expected. This has resulted in significant improvement in the overall residential sector. There have also been some positive signs in the commercial sector (declining vacancy rates and some new development), - however, the commercial sector as a whole is still lagging_ There is still a significant amount of Other Real Estate Owned (OREO) being held by financial institutions in Northwest Arkansas. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. Exposure times have extended as a result of the correction period. The subject property is reasonably well located in an area with significant residential and special - purposes uses. The subject's proximity to Gulley Park is also a positive factor with respect to exposure time. In my opinion, an exposure time of one-L year or less is considered applicable to subject whole property. 122 PART IV -ADDENDA 123 Parcel: 765-16080-OCO Washington County Report ID: 53806 Prev Parcel 149063-000-CO As of 6/26/2014 Property Owner Property Information Name: DUNN, ALLEN L & MARY L Physical Address: N OLD WIRE RD Mailing Address: 2648 N OLD WIRE RD Subdivision: 36-17-30 FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703-3771 Block / Lot: Type: (AM) - Agri UMisc Imps S-T-R: 36-17-30 Tax Dist: (011) - FAYETTEVILLE SCH, FAY Size (in Acres): 9.700 Millage Rate: 53.75 Extended Legal: PT W/2 SE PT E/2 SW 9.7 A Market and Assessed Values: Estimated Full Assessed Taxable Market Value: (20°% Market Value): Value: Land: $1,700 $340 $340 Building: $500 $100 $100 Total: $2,200 $440 $440 Homestead Credit: $0.00 Status: (N) -No Adj Note: Tax amounts are estimates only. Contact the county/parish tax collector for exact amounts. Land: Land Use Size Units Pasture(15) 0.300 Acres Pasture(04) 0.540 Acres Pasture(13) 4.110 Acres Pasture(13) 4.750 Acres Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www,actD@tiaScout.com Page 1 Parcel: 765-16080-000 Washington County Report ID: 53806 Prev Parcel 149063.000-00 As of 6/26/2014 Deed Transfers: Date Book Page Deed Type Stamps Est. Sale Grantee Code Type 1/1/1985 93 19847 Warr. Deed 4.40 $4,000 DUNN, ALLEN L. & MARY L. 2648 InsufFcien OLD WIRE RD t Amount Details for Residential Card 1: Occupancy Story Finish 1st Liv Other Liv Total Liv Grade Year Age Condition Beds Area Area Area Built NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Exterior Wall: NIA Foundation: NIA Floor Struct: NIA Floor Cover: NIA Insulation: N/A Roof Cover: NIA Roof Type: NIA Plumbing: NIA Fireplace: NIA Heat 1 Cool: NIA Basement: NIA Basement Area: NIA Year Remodeled: NIA Style: NIA Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www. actData Scout. com Page 2 Parcel: 765-16080-000 Washington County Report ID: 53806 Prev Parcel 149063-000-00 As of 6/26/2014 Outbuildings and Yard Improvements: Item Type Size/Dim Unit Multi. Quality Age Outbuilding,frame 700 General Purpose Barn 20x35 Map: Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 3 Parcel: 765-16092-000 Prev Parcel 149075-000-00 AS of 6/26/2014 Property Owner Name: DUNN, ALLEN L & MARY L Mailing Address: 2648 N OLD WIRE RD FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703-3771 Type: (RI) - Res. Improv. Tax Dist: (011) - FAYETTEVILLE SCH, FAY Millage Rate: 63.75 Extended Legal: PT NE SW .75 A Market and Assessed Values: Washington County Report ID: 53821 Property Information Physical Address: 2648 N OLD WIRE RD Subdivision: 36-17-30 FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS Block l Lot: S-T-R: 36-17-30 Size (in Acres): 0.000 Estimated Full Assessed Taxable Market Value: (20% Market Value): Value: Land: $64,000 $10,800 $7,680 Building: $114,000 $22,800 $11,723 Total: $168,000 $33,600 $19,403 Homestead Credit: $350.00 Status: (F) -Fixed Note: Tax amounts are estimates only. Contact the co u ntylparish tax collector for exact amounts. Land: Land Use Size Units 1.000 House Lot Deed Transfers: Date Book Page Deed Type Stamps Est. Sale Grantee Code Type 6/22/1959 526 444 Warr. Deed 0.00 $0 DUNN, ALLEN L & MARY L Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.gom Pagel Parcel: 765-16092-000 Washington County Report ID: 53821 Prev Parcel 149075-000-00 As of 6/25/26 14 Details for Residential Card 1: Occupancy Story Finish 1st Liv Other Liv Total Liv Grade Year Age Condition Beds Area Area Area Built Single Family ONE Masonry 1567 0 1567 4+5 1961 49 Average NIA Veneer Exterior Wall: BV Foundation., Closed Piers Floor Struct: Wood with subfioor Floor Cover: Carpet & Tile Insulation: Ceilings Walls Roof Cover: Asphalt Shingle Roof Type: Gable Base Structure: Plumbing: Full: 1 Half: 1 Fireplace: Type: 1s Sgl. Heat I Cool: Central Basement: NIA Basement Area: NIA Year Remodeled: NIA Style: NIA DataScout, LLC I GE} 0 '1601 0 fcF 39 Item Label Description Area A MN Main Living Area 1567 B MFA Garage - masonry 609 finished, att C GEP Porch, glass 160 enclosed D FEP Frame enclosed 378 porch E OP Porch, open 84 Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 2 Parcel: 765-16092-000 Prev Parcel 149075-000-00 As of: 6/26/2014 Outbuildings and Yard Improvements: Washington County Report Item Type Size/Dim Unit Multi. Fence, chain link 4' 188 1 Utility Bldg, Avg, Std Class 30x40 1 Gravel Driveway Fence, wood 6' 121 Driveway, concrete 18x80 Driveway, concrete 15x16 Map: Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions, www.actDataScout.com ID: 53821 Quality Age 2000 Page 3 Parcel 765-16095-000 Washington County Report ID: 53824 Prev Parcel 149078-000-00 As of 6/26/2014 Property Owner Property Information Name: DUNN, ALLEN & MARY L Physical Address: 2634 N OLD WIRE RD Mailing Address. 2634 N OLD WIRE RD Subdivision: 36-17-30 FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703-3771 Block I Lot: Type: (RI) - Res. Improv. S-T-R: 36-17-30 Tax Dist: (011) - FAYETTEVILLE SCH, FAY Size (in Acres): 0.000 Millage Rate: 53.75 Extended Legal: PT NE SW .50 A Market and Assessed Values: Estimated Full Assessed Taxable Market Value: (20% Market Value): Value: Land: $42,750 $8,550 $8,550 Building: $92,950 $18,690 $18,590 Total: $135, 700 $27,140 $27,140 Homestead Credit: $0.00 Note: Tax amounts are estimates only. Contact the county/parish tax collector for exact amounts. Land: Land Use Size Units 1.000 House Lot Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 1 Parcel: 765-16095-000 Washington County Report ID: 53824 Prev Parcel 149078-000-00 As of 612612014 Deed Transfers: Date Book Page Deed Type Stamps Est. Sale 5/20/1993 93 27263 Warr. Deed 0.00 $0 3/29/1993 93 15833 FidDeed 0.00 $0 2/16/1993 93 20041 0.00 $0 6/30/1992 92 33142 Warr. Deed 0.00 $0 1/1/1985 622 135 0.00 $0 Details for Residential Card 1: Occupancy Story Finish Single Family ONE Masonry Veneer Exterior Wall. BV Foundation: Closed Piers Floor Struct: Wood with subfloor Floor Cover: Carpet & Tile Insulation: Ceilings Walls Roof Cover: Asphalt Shingle Roof Type: Gable Grantee Code DUNN, ALLEN & MARY L. 2634 OLD WIRE RD DAVENPORT, RICHARD E. DUNN, ALLEN HENDRICKS, BERTHA E. TRUSTEE OF BERTHA E. HENDRICKS TRUST HENDRICKS, GLENN G. & BERTHA E. 1st Liv Other Liv Total Liv Grade Year Area Area Area Built 1895 0 1895 4+5 1963 Plumbing: Full: 1 Half: 1 Fireplace: NIA Heat / Cool: HotAir/F Basement: NIA Basement Area: NIA Year Remodeled: NIA Style: NIA Type Age Condition Beds 47 Average N/A DataScout, LLC CF i 2 a F- 5 1 1$� 7 2 MIA a 36UI ; 1 1 iQ a Not a Legal Document, Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataSgovt.com Page 2 Parcel: 765-16095-000 Washington County Report ID: 53824 Prev Parcel: 149078-000-00 As of: 612612014 Base Structure: Item Label Description Area A MN Main Living Area 1895 B MFA Garage - masonry 360 finished, att C OP Porch, open 84 D OP Porch, open 72 Outbuildings and Yard Improvements: Item Type Size/Dim Unit Multi. Quality Age Asphalt Driveway 16x17 1 Asphalt Driveway 12x104 1 Fence, chain link 4' 251 1 Well House 4x4 Map: Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 3 WARRANT' DEED with roliagaishmont of dower and houtestand I[NOW ALL, U1W BY THESl; pRDS1l ITS: ThRt,we, Fred Gull ey_and.Floy _Gulley, husband and wife ------------- --------------------------- for and in consideration of the sum' of one Dollar {$1. 00) 'and ,: other good -and valuable considerations -------------- Yi --- onmt us in ha, d paid by Allen Dunnrand Mary L. Dunn, ht{ebaad aadriiife'`---------------------------------- do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Allen 'Dunn and bi Mary L. Dunn, husband ands wife, and unto their --------- heirs and asstgns, the following described land, situate In Washington County, State of Arkansas, to -wit: f 40, i 3 0 Q:�=.. ,,,,-. , ,Do nut,wrlm ia,thla, zvgo , -v' m r 27 o .} 7" rn c') > Fart Of the $ast half of the Southwest Quarter end part of the West half of the" Southeast Quarter of Section 36, in Towmehip 17 North, of Range 30 West, described as follows: Beginning at a point 1485 feet East and B05 1/3 feet North of the South West corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, and tvrtni ;theSoe North 0'10' East 1185.2 feet; thenc4 North 89' Best 220 feet,; thence South!33.'•36' Weef-.486.6 feet; thence South 42*6' West 127.6 feet;jjthence-South 30-111I+Weat',1-24 feet';,theuce South 47' East 861.6 feet to the point of.beginning, conta�nidg 9,�7 acYea �` more dr less. Ali } i ii p �I l� TO IiAVE AND TO IIOLI) the Said lands and appurtenances thereunto belonging unto the said Allen Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband and wife, and unto their ------------------------------------ heirs and Rssigus, forever. And we , the said Fred Gulley and Floy Gulley, husband and +sift\ ------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- hereby covenant that we are lawfully seized of Said land and premises: that the same Is unineumbered and we will forever wnrrnnt and defend the title to the Said lands against all legal claims whatever. And I, the said Floy Gulley ----- „_--------- wife of Fred Gulley in consideration of said sum of money, do hereby release and relinquish unto the saldAllea Dunn and MRry L. Dunn, husband and wife - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ____ _ ______ all my interest, right, title and dower and convey my homestead In and to said lands, - - - WITNESS our hand a and seals on this Z 7 day at--- April --------- 1973. [Seal] ACICN4�i'LIw171 QXEN'P ... STATE OF ARKANSAS County of- Weahington BE IT IIEMEMD REri That onthisday came before the undersigned, &Notary public ---------------- -------------------- _----._ «within an Sn�, Fred Gulley d for the County aforesaid, duly commissioned and act- y and Floy Gulley, husband and wife -- to m2o .we;E known, as the Grantor in the foregoing Deed, and Stated that -..they had executed the Sam o for the evnsidergkl( irposes therein mention .• "�-''VV ed and set forth, � � fiitiNnnd Seal as such----- Notary Pub lic-------- this AP!Lta��;."!^ -'- 19 73 day o! GREER ABSTRACT COMPANY - IV IAlr ucxnow NrRj" q.11 I QAA17 4V- WARRANTY D E]EDODK 526 with relloqulshmeat of dowor and horestead KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: - That we, Fred Gulley s and Flay Gulley, —— ——— a — — -- — —— —— his wife for and In consideration of the sum of One Dollar and other valuable considerations — — — — — — a — — — — - _ — — to as in hand — _ — paid by Allen L. Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband and wife, — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Allen L. Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband and wife, and unto their — — — — heirs and assigns, the following described land, altuate in Washington — — — _ — — County, State of Arkansas, to -wit: uo not, vine-R N -*LL cinl111 6 ­ LLpy CiRGCri Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section thirty six (36) in Yoanehip seventeen (17) North of Range thirty (30) Vest, described as followss Beginning two hundred forty five and one —tenth (245.1) feet West and four hundred ninety one (491) feet North of the South East corner of said forty acre tract, thence South 1208'11" (lest fifty nine and's't'en tenths (59d7) feet for a place of beginning, and runningp thence North 87*37°15a West one hundred ninety eight and eighty five hundredths (198.85) feet, more or less, to East line of Old Wire Road; thence South 280551 190 18est one and eight —tenths (lab) feet with East right of way line of said road; thence South 601561 19" East two hundred five and seventy five hundredths (205.75) feet; thence North 12008°11' East ninety five and three —tenths (95.3) feet to the place of beginning. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said lands and appurtenances thersunto belonging into the said — — — — o — — — — Allen L. Dunn and Ataxy L. Dunn, husband and wife, and unto their - — — - — — — — heirs and assigns, forever. And rats , the said grantors, — — — — - — — — — --- — — — — — — — — hereby covenant that we are lawfully seised of said land and premises; that the same is unineumbered, and we will forever warrant and defend the title to the said lands against all legal claims whatever. And I, the said Flay Gulley' e — — — — — — — — - wife of Fred Gulley — — — — - — — — 1 n in consideration of said sum of money, do hereby release and relinquish unto the said Allen L. Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband end wifep e — — — — — — — — — — - — —all my intereet, right, title and dower and convey my homestead in and to said lands. WITNESS our Lands and seal s on this 22nd. _ — — day of June, 4 e - 1959 _[Seal] _7. • f'— v —_[Seat] O _ _ —---_--. [Seal] A0RN0WLElDGM ENT STATE OF'ARKANSAS iYashin se. County of._ _.__9..—_ton ...__— BE IT REMEMBERED. That on this day came before the undersigned, a Notary Public - - - - - — - a — — - — — — — within and for the County nforesald, duly commissioned and act- ing, Fred Gulloy,drid,#icy Gulley, husband and wife= - - — — — — •- — - — - — — - - - — - - - to me well kodvn-bs't'ji ,G' Finlors in the foregoing Heed. and staled that they - — bad executed' a ypm6�j;?A�-Considoratiun and purposes therein mentionerl and set forth. tvicness.IAY i4nt� MR ae�{ as such Notary Public - — - — — — this 22nd. — — r-'— day of June, A.D.; V 1 ro dt— �.1RO �•rj My COMmi February 14�i.�_+2.::::_:.:.:.:__--... Notary public. WARRANTY DEED MARRIED PERSON CONVEYING SOLE OWNERSHIP WITH SPOUSE'S RELINQUISHMENT OF ALL RIGHTS AND INTERESTS KNOW ALL MEN 9Y THESE PRESENTS: Thal I. IN ten D= r 4 herel ller callod Grantor, !el and In conslderallon 01 the Eum el One Dollar ($1,00) and other pood and valuable camlderatlun 10 me \ In hand pald by Allen Dunn and Mary L. Dunne husband and wife t hereinelter celled Grantee, d0 hereby grant, bargain and call unto the said Grantee and Grenlee•s hats and assigns, the following ticscribod land, alluale in Washington _ _ County, Slate of Arkansas, to-wil - Il-c, i?:CORD '93 My z7 fin 9 go Part of the llortheasL- Quarter (NE'-;) of the Southwest Quarter {SW',) of Section Thirty-six (36) in Township Seventeen (17) [north of Range Thirty (30) West, beginning taro hundred forty -Live and one -tenth (245.1) feet West and four hundred ninety-one (491) feet North of the Southeast corner of said torty (40) acre tract, and running, thence South 12 degrees O'11n West one hundred fifty-five (155) feet for a point of beginninq to the lands herein described, and running, thence North 60 degrees 5l3'19" West two hundred five and seventy-five hundredths (205.75) feet, more or less to the Fast right of way line of the Old Wire brad; thence South 29 degrees 65'11" West with said Fast line one hundred (100) feet; thence South GO degrees 58'19" Last two hundred (200) feet, thence Northeasterly one hundred (100) feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easements, rights -of -way and restrictive covenants, if any. TC' r'Y-ti'E A1, C?G HOLD ;nc 53iC ia,eg and bclunrlr,g unto Inc 5a'^ G:3nlec an- Grar.let 5 riEi•5 d'C as"_ .. F��,", ! Ihr 59.0 G r,Ic,r hcrCa}' C��C",ar:: Thal 1 am lawlull)• se:2ea GI 9ni:: Ianc ar'._ (�i%mn5e: Na, the 5a"E rc u rnz:!:•;�r'e:: ana l'�a: Hd,, al5rece; warrant and deiend Me ille to the Said lands eg3i'l SV all Icpaf -!3ims Ano I Ire sdiC Gr,,nio, nerri, re'�zs! an_ rplinquisr unl_ ME Sa:d Granloe my dowcricurlcs) an^ homes;eaC it an[ io SaA In9aS Mary _L._Dunn ----_-_ ._......—_-. �_ - --- ---. aC'uuSP rl Sa IC {srd rig: 6r ncrC^y rck: asc a..� r,,:'.riCu'S^ unl� ;hE Sa i^ C:: d"'14i ',y do%y F'r'zl1r:v5}' amho ni.'S4t'a+; jr arr6 1. Sal= lane! :l qull^ljni on10 531C a5% in;Cr CS:_ riyh: anC I'Ilr. 1 ma) 1,d:; w'f7NESt nut nand: a"C Sra'l r. tla', N _ _--11ay_-- _ 19 _93 ' cam. "- --- ------ — ---- - -- THI- lN5TRt.•iA=-N? PREI-APED fit Granl•).+S i',clCrcrs �jjllllen AC Y.NGWLEriG rr, �'NT o' . Wdshjng-ton y{�){ f .'•'--rn"-T�''-a'-� f'i --May 19 ­93 �elo'E me F. nC�lbr� �uC n[ �iC.•S4 nal!} eli:•C'�r'^(' _---- Allen fltanniY f.. tn0-n ;e ^•e {o• 4.1:1 IL bl :hn aErSbns x:,a cs air v917'IG"' 1C n, !bc,-;o�•,� ,r sty •, r.. �r�f-an,- d Cr:nn �.Ie7 ca I.:J Ihcl haC EIevJ:r:. :he sF,,r Lb thr purse _ Ine:e.r, eCn , In w�',csr w, r.er-D' i ;e; , hd,= and oil., , $CAI My C; m iss a �.,•, •c{ OFFICIAL SEAL _ i GH7 RYL THDMAS MILLER Plf3LIC r'o+, NOTARY • ARKANSAS al •--W�S:itiVCTON COIJIv1�- �- e � ,��� A STDBONLINE'corn FLOODSOLIlRCE FLOODSCAPE"' PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2648 N Old Wire Rd, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 72703 f L+MAv 7 ZONE X t I L OHN North ii ZONE X 36 "tidyy J — 1� . f l t — --ONE AE ZONE X P VF ZONE AE C) I i FLOODSCAPETM re, ixiiia s, --4 4-17-14 0 r Flood Hazards Map ZONE X c: -1 r F U i Z Map Number ZONE AE wi T-iF 05143CO21OF rnjVf Effective Date 0 May 16, 2008 C) -A-1 L pni77 --NE Flood Legend High flood risk El Moderate flood risk 0', E Low flood risk C3 E haler? tu� �!j Ll > mL 2 This report makes no ZONX reprosentafions or warranfins E —T corceming its content, accuracy ZONE X T• or DompleLeness. STDBonline.com ZONE AE 469.574.1234 .600, 1200' 1860' 2400- - �!i Ll $I Powered by qDodSource P, A"" 877.77.FLOOO WWW'floodSoUroerCon 0 1990-2014 SourceProse Corporation All rights reserved. Protected by U.S Patent Nurnhers 6631326. 6678615, 6842698, and 7038681 TOPOGRAPHY MAP 14 Print Page 1 of 1 Irwin Partners Tom Reed 07/03/14 3739 N. Steele Bivd, Ste 220 ML# 704776 List$1,200,000 Current Fayetteville, AR 72703 House Phone:479-444-9111 Fax: 479-444-9112 2648 OLD WIRE RD N FAYETTEVILLE AR 72703 RESIDENTIAL List Agt: David Mix 479-521-5600 List Orc: Bassett Mix & Associates OFC/Agt:: 479-521-5600 479-841-7377 Agt Fax: 479-521.5698 Co-Agt: Agt Email: david@bassettmix.com Owner: Finance Terms: Appr Name: Lkbx: Virtual Tour: Showing List Agent Present APP CALL NOKEY Inst: Call to Show: List Date: 04/21/14 List $/HtSgFt: $765.80 Pend Date: Sold $/HtSgR: Wdrwn Date: Commissions/Fees Agency: ER Exp Date: Days Pending: Suyer Agent Fee: 2.7 Variable: N DOM: 73 Cpnungencyl Sublect To: NOT APPL Type: Ranch New COnstru: Bedrms: 3 Total Baths: 2 Apx Heat SgFt /-: 1567 Full Baths: 1 1 2 Baths: 1 Levels; 1 Sq tSource: COURT Rooms: 7 School Dist: Fay -Ville Tubs/Shwr: Combo: 1 Tubs/Shwr: Age: Apx Yr Bt: 1959 Disabled Access: N Driveway: CONC GRVL Garage/Cpt: 2/Attached Garage Taxes: 2100 Assmnt: Transfer Fee: Assmnt Yr; Monthly Fee: Mill Rate; Parcel ID: 765-16080-000 Liv Rm: 21.5X11 Mstr Bd: 11.5X11.5 Frml Bdrm 2: 11.5X30.5 Kitchen: 25X11 Bdrm 3: 11.50.5 Fam Rm: 15Xi4 Bdrm 4: Bonus: Bdrm 5: Oth Rm: Util Rm: 11X5 Main Level: LR KT MB 2B 35 Dill UT FB 2nd Level. County: Washington Subdv: FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS 3rd Level: Acres: 10.950 Lot: Flood Zn: N Bsmt Level: [50 Block: Covenant: N Zoning: AGR Rms. Lot Dim: IRREGULAR Lndscp: Appv: Disclsure: Y LOt Loc: HSPL SCHL BSNS Anchor: Lot Desc: CLR OPEN LEV VIEW ENa Legal: PT W/2 SE PT E/2 36-17-30 Amenities: ATCSTR BLNDS CELFAN WDCONN Pool Y/N: N Appliances: REF ELEC OVEN MW DISH Aso/POA Fee: Equipment: GDOPEN Aso/POA Paid: Hnd Amen: Assoc. Fees Ind: Com Amer PARK PLYGD Golf Course: Wter/Ike: NA Pool Type Air: 1/ ELEC Heat Sys: 1/ CEN GAS Elem Sch: Exterior: BRK FRM Patio: 1PAT COV Mid Sch: Fencing: BACKCHNLNK Roads: PUB High Sch: Fireplace: i/ FAM GLOG Utilities: ELEC SEWAV TEL WATPU Det. Bldg: Floor: CER CRPT WOOD Wtr Htr: 1/GAS Foundation: CRWLSP Windows; VNYL 2P Exclusions: Workshop: PET Storm Shelter: Public Remarks: THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST PARCELS OF LAND LEFT IN THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ADJOINING GULLEY PARK. TOTAL IS 10.95 ACRES WITH ACCESS TO ALL UTILITIES AND 2 STREET FOR ACCESS. MAGNOLIA & OLD WIRE ROAD. PROPERTY INCLUDES 2 HOUSES AND A 38x30 SHOP WITH CONCRETE FLOORS, WATER AND ELECTRIC. 2 HOUSES ZONED RE5IDENTIAL AND ADJOINING LAND IS ZONED AGRI. ABSOLUTELY THE BEST PROPOERTY FOR A FANTASTIC SUBDIVISION. MLS Remarks: 2 HOUSES ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND ADJOINING LAND IS ZONED AGRI. ABSOLUTELY THE BEST PROPOERTY FOR A FANTASTIC SUBDIVISION. Directions: MISSION TURN NORTH ON OLD WIRE OR OLD MISSOURI. TURN SOUTH ON OLD WERE ROAD. Selling Office: Selling Office Name: Selling ID: Selling Agent Name: Buyer: Copyright Z014 Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. 07/03/2014 9.30 AM http://nwa.mlxchange.com/5.11.05.353 82/Search/PrintPreviewDlg.asp 7/3/2014 David Mix From: David Mix <david@bassettmix.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 201412:45 PM To: Edmonston, Connie (cedmonston@fayetteville-ar.gov) Subject: FW: Message from "RNP0026732E7288" Attachments: 20140626120247942.pdf Connie, Attached please find a amortization schedule pertaining to the property that is owned by Mrs. Dunn on Old Wire Road here in Fayetteville. They have decided to offer to the City of Fayetteville the following proposal. Purchase price $1.1 million Down Payment of $450,000.00 They will carry at 4% interest a loan to be paid out over a 5 year period in the amount of $650,000.00. They will consider monthly or yearly payments Please see the amortization chart with the terms as described. Mrs. Dunn has an offer on the table from 3 local developers but she is waiting to see the response from the city. I am ethically bound to tell you that there is an offer. So this is not a sales ploy, but the truth to the matter. Their wish is for it to go to the City for the park. We need a quick response if this is even anything the City will respond to. She and the family are open to discussions on the proposal. Thank you and you may call me any time. I would appreciate it if you would run all correspondence through me as the Dunn's are a little worn out with all the people that have been contacting them about the property. You can reach me any time at 479-841-7377 Thank you sincerely, David Mix Broker/Owner Bassett Mix and Assoc. -----Original Message ----- From: David Mix [mailto:david@bassettmix.com Sent: Thursday, June 26, 201411:03 AM To: David Mix Subject: Message from "RNP0026732E7288" This E-mail was sent from "RNP0026732E7288" (Aficio MP C5501). Scan Date: 06.26.2014 12:02:47 (-0400) Queries to: lanier@bassettmix.com Personal Banking Calculators - Arvest Bank Al VEST Arvesl Personal Banking How much will my fixed rate mortgage payment be? This calculator computes the payments (principal and interest) for a Fixed rate loan, using monthly interest compounding and monthly payments. $1,i00,000, I)-'Wrr I1,1yol, lit $450,000.01' 00/ad$ 5 0 Months *Year-; 4.000 % W Shuw paymenL xhedule COMPUTE Your will be $11,970.74. Financial Details Home price $1,100,000.00 Down payment $450,000.00 Total amount financed $650,000.00 Payment amount $11,970.74 Total payments $718,244.36 Interest rate 4.000 % Interest compounding Monthly Total Finance charge $68,244.36 Payment Summary Event Amount Term Period Loan $650,000.00 1 Payment $11.970.74 59 Monthly Payment $11,970 70 1 https://www.arvesLeoml?LOANAMOUNT-10lo2C100%2C000.00&DO WNPAYMENT�450%2C000.00&DO... 6/24/2014 Personal Banking Calculators - Arvest Bank 4 Payment 31 $11,970.74 $1,137.37 $10,833 37 $330,376 14 Payment32 $11,970.74 $1,101.25 $10,86949 $319,506.65 Payment 33 $11,970 74 $1,065 02 $10,905 72 $308,600.93 Payment 34 $11,970,74 $1.028.67 $10,942.07 $297,658 86 Payment 35 $11,970 74 $992.20 $10,978 54 $286,680 32 Payment36 $11,970.74 $95560 $11,01514 $275,66518 Payment 37 $1 1,970 74 $918 88 $11.051 86 $264,613 32 Payment 38 $11,970 74 $882.04 $11,088 70 $253,524.62 Payment M $11 970 74 $845 OB $11,125 66 $242,398 96 Paynrenl 40 $11,070 74 $80800 $11,IV 74 $231,236 22 I 1%1yl,Wlua1 .1l.ldnl rti y(e1) 1IJ yl 1, 1` J!17, �1�U.II. kU Payment42 $11,970 74 $133.4!) $11.23729 $208,798.98 I',lylr ont 4 t $1 1.$)/0 74 $Bg61 10 $11 2/4 l4 $Ili/ 'V4 A Paynlenl 44 $11,970 74 $658 41 $ 11.312 Xi $186.2 1 1 91 Paylnenl45 $11.970 74 $620 71 $11,350.03 $174.661 88 Payment 46 $11,970 74 $582 87 $11.387.87 $160,474 01 Payment 47 $11,970 74 $544.01 $11,425 83 $152.048 18 Payment 46 $11,970.74 $506.83 $11,463.91 $140.584 27 Payment 49 $11,970 74 $468.61 $11,502.13 $129.082,14 Payment 50 $11.970.74 $430 27 $11,540 47 $117,541 67 Payment 51 $11,970 74 $391 81 $11,576 93 $105,962.74 Payment 52 $11,970.74 $353.21 $11,617 53 $94,345.21 Payment 53 $11.970.74 $314.48 $11,656.26 $82.688.95 Payment 54 $11,970.74 $276 63 $11,695 11 $70,993 84 Payment 55 $11,970.74 $236,65 $11,734 09 $59,259 75 Payment 56 $11,970 74 $197.53 $11,773 21 $47,486 54 Payment 57 $11.970.74 $158 29 $11,812.45 $35,674 09 Payment 58 $11,970 74 $118.91 $11,851 83 $23,822 26 Payment59 $11,970.74 $7941 $11,89133 $11.93093 Payment 60 $11,970 70 $39 77 $11,930.93 $0.00 Grand Total $660,000.00 $718,244.36 $66,2".36 $650,000.00 $0.00 This amortization schedule is powered by:-xTimeValue Software https,llw ww. arvest.coniPLOANAMOUNT--1%2C l OOYo2C000.00&DO WNPAYMBNT=450%2COOOAO&DO... 6/24/2014 Irwin Partners Tom Reed 07/16/14 3739 N. Steele Blvd. Ste 220 ML# 699818 List $3,900,000 Current Fayetteville, AR72703 Phone:479.444-9111 Fax:479-444.9112 2900 OLD MISSOURI RD FAYETTEVILLE AR 72703 Land List Agt: Mitch Weigel 479-443-1313 . List Ofc: Downtown Properties Real Estate Groul Ofc/Agt: 479-443-1313 479-466-2369 Co Agt: Agt Fax. 479-527-7128 Agt Email: mitch@dpreg.com Owner: Finance Terms: Appraiser: Showing Instructions: Call to Show: LP/Acre: $77627.339 SP/Acre: Subject To: NOT APPL List Date: 02/ 01/ 14 Pend Date: Commissions/Fees Agency: ER Wdrwn Date: Buyer Agent Fee: 2.5 Variable: N Exp Date: Days Pending: Contingency: DOM: 165 Virtual Tour: SubType: RESD DEVPOTNL Location: Description: NO School Dist: Fay -Ville Elementary School: Middle School: High School: Taxes: 3,900 Assmnt: Assmnt Yr: Mill Rate: Disclosure: Y Mobile Hm Allowed: N Covenants: Flood Zn: N Zoning: RES Parcel ID: County: Washington Lot: 0 Block: 0 Subdivision 36-17-30 Fayetteville Ou Legal: PT W/2 NE & PT SE NW 52.24A Acres: 50.240 Lot Dim: Irregular Surveyed: Y Frontg: Lot Desc: LEV SLP Aso/POA Fee: Exclusions: Aso/POA Paid 1;---- ;--, Assoc. Fees Incl: Electric: Lake/Property: Gas: Water/Sewer: STRTSWR TV HkUp: Ponds: Roads: PUB PAVE Streams: Topography: LEV SLP PTWOOD Minerals: Fencing: PART WIRE Public Remarks:50+/- acres located in north Fayetteville currently zoned RSF4. Prime undeveloped residential acreage adjacent to Butterfield Elementary School, with convenient transportation corridors and access to utilities. Exact parcel size will determined by two splits required to separate existing structures from the property. Preliminary SID concept layouts indicate the "potential' for between 135 and 159 lots at the properties current RSF4 zoning. Seller will consider offers on smaller parcels. 1 MIS Remarks:Parcel offered is subject to lot splits within the city of Fayetteville to separate existing structures from the property. I currently have concept designs for RSF2, RSF4 and RSF7 zoning prepared by McClelland Engineering. Directions: From Joyce in Fayetteville, south on Old Missouri, or from College Ave (Hwy 71) east on Rolling Hills to Old Missouri Rd. Sell Ofc: Selling Office Name: Sell Agt: Selling Agent Name: Buyer Name: Copyright 2014 Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. 07/ 16/2014 11:44 AM Irwin Partners Tom Reed 07/16/14 3739 N. Steele Blvd. Ste 220 ML* 711541 List $400,000 Current Fayetteville, AR72703 Phone: 479-444-9111 Fax:479.444-9112 2911 OLD WIRE RD N FAYETTEVILLE AR 72703 Land List Agt: Gina Lyle -Bailey 479-846-2222 List Oft: Legend Realty Ofc/Agt: 479- 267-5911479- 263-1739 Co Agt: Agt Fax: 479-267-5912 Agt Email; ginalyle42@yahoo.com Owner: Finance Terms: Appraiser: Showing Instructions: Apmt Only LBSUP Call to Show: LP/Acre: $74515.648 Subject To: NOT APPL Commissions/Fees Agency: ER Buyer Agent Fee: 3 Variable: N Contingency: Virtual Tour: SP/Acre; List Date: Pend Date: Wdrwn Date: Exp Date: Days Pending: DOM: 07/10/14 6 SubType: RESD Location: Description: NO School Dist: Fay -Ville Elementary School: Middle School: High School: Taxes: 620 Assmnt: Assmnt Yr: Mill Rate: Disclosure: Y Mobile Hm Allowed: N Covenants: Flood Zn: Zoning: Parcel ID: 765-16035-000 County: Washington Lot: 0 Block: 0 Subdivision FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS Legal: PT NE NE 2.368 A, PT SE NE 3 AC Acres: 5.368 Lot Dim: 5.368 AC Surveyed: Frontg: Lot Desc: NSUBDV SEC Aso/POA Fee: Exclusions: Aso/POA Paid Financing: Assoc. Fees Incl: Electric: ONSITE Lake/Property: Gas: ONSITE Water/Sewer: SITEVITR EXSTSPTC TV HkUp: Ponds: NO Roads: PUS Streams: Topography: OPEN PTWOOD Minerals: UNK Fencing, Public Remarks: Small house on property (no value), 32x44 garage shop, barn. Shop is in good condition with steel beams & concrete Floors. House is in need or repairs. Current appraisal. Great place to build a home. See MLS 711509 MLS Remarks:Make appointment to show. Seller is related to agent. Directions: From I-49, go 71B (College) to Rolling Hills, turn left, go to Old Missouri & turn left onto Old wire Rd. property on the left past Oak Bailey. Sell Ofc: Selling Office Name: Sell Agt: Selling Agent Name: Buyer Name: Copyright 2014 Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. 07/16/2014 11:44 AM 7IY2014 Gmail - FW: Gul ley Park E)panslon Project Gm I Full: Gulley Park Expansion Project Tom Reed <TReed@reedappraisal.biz> To: katle.hampton85@gmail.com Frorm Edmonston, Connie[malito:cedmonston@fayetteville-ar.govj Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 12:15 PM To: Tom Reed Cc: Tom Reed; Bearden, Alan; Spann, Alan Subject: Re: Gulley Park Expansion Project Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:45 PM Da%Ad Mix requested that you call him when you need to get on the property so he can notify the Dunn Family. David's cell is 841-7377. Thank you. Sent from my iPad On Jul 3, 2014, at 11:46 AM, "Spann, Alan" <aspann@fayetteville-ar.gov> wrote: Mr, Reed, My name is Alan Spann and I am writing to you on behalf of Connie Edmonston. The City would like for your company to proceed with the appraisal of the property adjacent to Gulley Park, according to the details in the email exchange between yourself and Connie. Within the appraisal, we would like for each home and corresponding lot to be valued separately from the open acreage. We have created P.O. # 14-303 for $3,500 for the appraisal by Reed & Associates. Thanks very much and let me know if you have any questions or concems. Alan Spann Recreation Superintendent City of Fayetteville, Arkansas T 479.444.3471 I F 479.521. 7714 Website I Facebook I Twitter I instagram , YouTube hops:/1m9iI.gmgle.comlmail/Monti=2&i0029a4bedcb&uewr—pt&search=inbox&msg=146fd4a7nbedM&sirr=146rd4ar?bed3W2 112 702014 Gmail - FW; GulleyParkEVansion Project Gm �I FW: Gulley Park Expansion Project Tom Reed <TReed@reedappraisal.biz> To: katie.hampton85@gmail.com From: Edmonston, Connie[mailto:cddmonston@fayetteville-ar.gov] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 9.46 AM To: Tom Reed Subject: RE: Gulley Park Expansion Project Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM Thank you Tom. I am waiting to hear back from the Dunn family if they will not sell the property until the City receives the appraisal and makes an offer on the property. From: Tom Reed[mailto:TReed@reedappraisal.biz] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 9.33 AM To: Edmonston, Connie Subject: Gulley Park Expansion Project Connie, We will complete the appraisal in connection with the above captioned project by 1:00 P.M. on Friday, July 18tn Our fee will be $3, 500. 1 originally told you we accept credit cards for payment, but forgot we discontinued this a short time ago. Thank -you, TOM REED, MAI, CRE Reed and Associates, Inc. One Steele Plaza 3739 N. Steele Boulevard, Suite 220 Fayetteville, AR 72703 https:l/rraiI.googIexarWn aiIA* V?ui=2&iIF029a4bedcb&VeA-pUsearch=inbor&msg=1461ceblaaaT01cl&sim1=14fteblaal0l0i 112 7/a-2014 Gmail - FW; Gul ley Park EVansi on Project Email: treed@reedappreisaL6iz Phone: 479-521-6313 Ext. 102 Fax: 479-521-6316 hftps.*#rnaiI-google.caTr rnaiIJu10J?ui=2&ik=029a4bedcb&liev,f--pi&search=inboAnisg=146fceblaBafOlcl&sirnl=149cablaaaf0ici 2J2 CONTRACT Comes now on this day of August, 2014, the City of Fayettevil and the Faye ville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. which agree as follows; 1. Th Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. is a non ofit corporation which seeks preserve beautiful and important natural areas and arkland in and near Fayetteville, Ar nsas. 2. The City o ayetteville and the Fayetteville Natural eritage Association, Inc. have worked cooper lively over the last several years in oint projects to preserve the Mount Sequoyah Wood the Brooks -Hummel natural area, and most recently the Mt. Kessler Preserve. 3. In order to encourage\ enable and acquisition costs of about 10 acre�gf open sl Natural Heritage Association, Inc. pli Dollars ($130,000.00) by January 1, 201 of the costs of this million dollar aca-Ld 4. The City of Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, that is $130,000.00 more than I IN AGREEMENT assis the City of Fayetteville to meet the )ac owned by Mary L. Dunn, the Fayetteville o raise One Hundred and Thirty Thousand pay this amount to the City as the last portion ition. Frees that because of this promise by the Fayetteville it will purch�se the Mary L. Dunn property at a price appraisal obtaine�,by the City. ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROMISES above, we sign below: FAYETTEVILLE NATURAL HERITAGE ASSdCIATION, INC. By: JOHN COLEMAN CHAIRMAN CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE Los MAYOR JORDAN ATTEST: Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk WE 41 �d�i D'A O„k A6 Fumar d# GULL Y PARKx t CONTRACT Comes now on this day of August, 2014, the City of Fayetteville and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. which agree as follows: • The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. is a nonprofit corporation which seeks to preserve beautiful and important natural areas and parkland in and near Fayetteville, Arkansas. • The City of Fayetteville and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. have worked cooperatively over the last several years in joint projects to preserve the Mount Sequoyah Woods, the Brooks -Hummel natural area, and most recently the Mt. Kessler Preserve. • In order to encourage, enable and assist the City of Fayetteville to meet the acquisition costs of about 10 acres of open space owned by Mary L. Dunn, the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc. pledges to raise One Hundred and Thirty Thousand Dollars ($130,000.00) by January 1, 2017 and pay this amount to the City as the last portion of the costs of this million dollar acquisition. • The City of Fayetteville agrees that because of this promise by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, Inc., it will purchase the Mary L. Dunn property at a price that is $130,000.00 more than the appraisal obtained by the City. IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROMISES above, we sign below: FAYETTEVILLE NATURAL CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE HERITAGE ASSOCIATION, INC. By: By: JOHN COLEMAN CHAIRMAN MAYOR JORDAN ATTEST: Sondra E. Smith, City Clerk CITY OF Tay4 0 1VV1 Ie ARKANSAS TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: Alison Jumper, Park Planning Superintendent DATE: August 8, 2014 SUBJECT: Gulley Land Purchase Agenda Item Mayor and City Council, STAFF MEMO The City has been negotiating an offer to purchase approximately 10.95 acres adjacent to Gulley Park from the Dunn family. The family has been very gracious during this process and has allowed the City time to prepare an offer contingent upon City Council approval. The family has always envisioned this land becoming an extension of Gulley Park and offered the City the first chance to purchase the land. An offer has been accepted by the seller and we are submitting this for your approval for the August 19'h City Council meeting. The contract negotiation required to bring a proposal to the City Council was not finalized until after the City Council agenda deadline. We are requesting this item be walked on at the August 12th City Council agenda session in order to keep the process moving forward and not delay closing on the property. Expediting the decision on the offer and placing this item on the August 191h meeting would be helpful for the family to move forward with their plans. Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form 2014-0361 Legistar File ID 8/19/2014 City Council Meeting Date - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item Alison Jumper $/11/2014 Parks & Recreation / Parks & Recreation Department Submitted By Submitted Date Division / Department Action Recommendation: Approval of the purchase of approximately 10.95 acres of land including two single family residences adjacent to Gulley Park for $1,100,000 and approval of a Budget Adjustment. Budget Impact: 2250.9255.5805.00 Account Number 14017. 1 Project Number Parks Development Fund Gulley Park Land Acquisition Budgeted Item? No Current Budget Funds Obligated Current Balance Does item have a cost? Yes Item Cost Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Project Title I$ - I $ 700,000.00 $ 700,000.00 V20140710 Original Contract Number: Approval Date: Comments: Funds proposed in the 2015 Capital Improvement plan for 2015 and 2016 will be utilized to fund this project. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association has committed to raise the remaining $130,000. $270,000 will be paid in 2016. CITY OF • Tay e evi le ARKANSAS MEETING OF AUGUST 19, 2014 TO: Mayor and City Council CITY COUNCIL -AGENDA MEMO THRU: Justin Tenant, City Council Alderman, Ward 3, Position 1 Don Marr, Chief of Staff Connie Edmonston, Parks and Recreation Director FROM: Alison Jumper, Park Planning Superintendent DATE: August 8, 2014 SUBJECT: Approval to Purchase approximately 10.95 acres of land adjacent to Gulley Park RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the purchase of approximately 10.95 acres of land including two single family residences adjacent to Gulley Park for $1,100,000. BACKGROUND: Gulley Park is a 27 acre community park that was created in 1988 when the Fred Gulley family sold the land to the City of Fayetteville. Its walking trail, playgrounds, pavilion and open space are very highly used by citizens city wide. Fayetteville is fortunate to have many parks, however Gulley is one of the few parks that still retains a somewhat pastoral atmosphere due to the nature of the land, open, non -programmed usable green space. As many are aware, people do not have to be actively engaged in any particular outdoor sport or recreation activity to reap the benefits of being in nature. Often it just takes 'being' in nature to reset. The addition of the land to the north is a natural expansion of what the City currently provides and will presence that pastoral setting to which people appear to flock. Gulley Park is one of the City's most popular parks. It is home to the Gulley Park Concert Series, which has completed its 181h consecutive year. The concerts draw an average crowd of 1,000 people per show. In 2013, citizens reserved the Gulley Park pavilions over 400 times. In additions, many events are held at Gulley Park such as the annual Dogwood Walk, Cow Paddy Run and our own drama camp. The property adjacent to the park has been offered for sale. A group of citizens formed the Friends of Gulley Park group in support of purchasing the property and they are currenity raising funds to assist in the purchase. An offer and acceptance contract has been signed by the seller (attached). DISCUSSION: The City of Fayetteville solicited bids to conduct an appraisal of the land. Reed and Associates, Inc. was the low bid. According to the attached appraisal, the land and two homes are worth $970,000. Staff is requesting approval to make an offer to purchase the land and two residences Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov for $1,100,000 The offer includes an initial payment of $700,000, a second payment $270,000 to be made on February 1, 2016 and a final payment of $130,000 on February 1, 2017. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA) has committed to raise $130,000 above the appraised value. The efforts of the "Friends of Gulley Park" group have already raised a substantial amount of the $130,000 to go towards FNHA's commitment. The opportunity to preserve greenspace in the center of the city does not present itself often. This property acquisition would add important land to the City's parks system, improving upon our Green Infrastructure. A public meeting will be held at some point in the future to determine the citizen's desires for development of the approximate 9.7 acres addition to Gulley Park. A master plan will be designed and presented to the public and Parks and Recreation Advisory Board for approval. BUDGET/STAFF IMPACT: Funding for the purchase would come from the Parks Development Funds proposed in 2015 of the Capital Improvement Plan ($700,000), and 2016 ($270,000). The original proposal for the 2015 capital project included the renovation of the trail, lighting, and additional parking at Gulley Park. These Gulley Park improvements would be delayed until the next five year Capital Improvement Plan. The current proposed 2016 capital project is to make improvements at Wilson Park to the rock house, restroom, basketball court and playground. If the purchase of the land adjacent to Gulley is approved, it is anticipated that the two lots with homes fronting Old Wire Road would be sold. The revenue from the sale of these houses will go towards the second payment of $270,000 in 2016 and will help replenish the funding planned for the improvements to Wilson Park. This land purchase would increase maintenance costs minimally as it will be incorporated into the existing maintenance plan for Gulley Park. Attachments: Offer and Acceptance Contract Letter of Commitment from FNHA Appraisal Staff Review Form City of Fayetteville, Arkansas - Budget Adjustment Form (Legistar) Budget Year Division: Parks & Recreation Adjustment Number 2014 Dept.: Pdrks &-Recrea ion Requestor: Connie Edmonston BUDGET ADJUSTMENT DESCRIPTION / JUSTIFICATION: Staff is requesting approval to make an offer to purchase the land and two residences for $1,100,000 The offer includes an initial payment of $700,000, a second payment $270,000 to be made on February 1, 2016 and a final payment of $130,000 on February 1, 2017. $130,000 will be paid by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association (FNHA). COUNCIL DATE: 8/19/2014 LEGISTAR FILE ID#: 2014-0361 KevlYvSpr%v� 8/11/2014 4:22 PM Budget Director Date TYPE: DESCRIPTION: I GLDATE: RESOLUTION/ORDINANCE POSTED: TOTAL 700,000 700,000 v.20140716 Increase / (Decrease) Proiect,Sub# Account Number Expense Revenue Project Sub AT Account Name 2250.9255.5805.00 700,000 - 14017 1 EX Land Acquisition 2250.0925,4999.99 - 700,000 RE Use of Fund Balance G:\Users\cdiones\AppDota\Roaming\E5\Temp\t287cc75-eod7-4b74-a8ld-616c42d69db1 I of 1 CITY OF Ta e eve e ARKANSAS TO: Connie Edmonston, Parks & Recreation Director THRU: Don Marr, Chief of Staff FROM: Connie Edmonston, Parks & Recreation Director DATE: August 11, 2014 STAFF MEMO SUBJECT: Change of CIP if Gulley Park Land Expansion Purchase is approved RECOMMENDATION: If the Gulley Park land expansion is approved, there will be a couple of changes to our CIP as follows: 1. Gulley Park land expansion purchase: $1,100,000 2015: $700,000 2016: $270,000 2017: $130,000 — Contracted to be funded by the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association. 2. In 2015, the original proposal of $700,000 to renovate the trail and lighting, and providing additional parking at Gulley Park will be delayed until the next five year Capital Improvement Plan. 3. The current proposed 2016 capital project is to make improvements at Wilson Park to the rock house, restroom, basketball court and playground. It is anticipated that the two lots with homes fronting Old Wire Road would be sold. The revenue from the sale of these houses will go towards the second payment of $270,000 in 2016 and will help replenish the funding planned for the improvements to Wilson Park Mailing Address: 113 W. Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 www.fayetteville-ar.gov -- OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT 1. The City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation, offers to buy, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein (especially Paragraph 18). the following described property: SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" FOR PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2. Purchase Price: Subject to the following conditions, the City of Fayetteville shall pay for the property at closing the initial payment of $700,000.00, with the second payment of $270,000.00 to be made on February 1, 2016, and a final payment of $130,000.00 on February 1, 2017 for a total purchase price amount of $1,100,000.000 (one Million One Hundred Thousand Dollars). 3, Contingent Earnest Money Deposit: The City of Fayetteville herewith tenders a check in the amount of $ 1,000.00 to Mary L. Dunn, surviving spouse of Allen L Dunn, as earnest money, which shall apply on the purchase price. This offer of purchase is contingent upon approval of the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, and, if they do not so approve, the earnest money deposit will be returned to the City of Fayetteville by Mary L. Dunn. If title requirements are not fulfilled or Mary L. Dunn fails to fulfill any obligations under this contract, the earnest money shall be promptly refunded to Fayelteville. 8. Conveyance will be made to the City of Fayetteville by general Warranty Deed, except it shall be subject to recorded instruments and easements, if any, which do riot materially affect the value of the property. Such conveyance shall include mineral rights owned by Mary L. Dunn, 5. Mary L. Dunn shall furnish a policy of title insurance in the amount of the purchase price from a title insurance company as selected by the City of Fayetteville. The City of Fayetteville and Mary L Dunn shall share equally in the cost of the title insurance, 6. Mary L. Dunn agrees to allow the City of Fayetteville, if the City of Fayetteville so desires, at City of Fayetteville's expense, to survey the property. Mary L Dunn agrees to cure any title problems which may result from any differences between the recorded legal descriptions of the property and the survey description. Said title problems, if any, must be solved prior to closing to the satisfaction of the City of Fayetteville. 7. Taxes and special assessments due on or before closing shall be paid by Mary L. Dunn. Insurance, general taxes, ad valorem taxes, special assessments and rental payments shall be prorated as of closing. 8. The closing date shall be within one hundred and twenty (120_) days after approval of this offer by the City Council. If such date of closing fails on a weekend or holiday, it will be held the following working day. 9. Possession of the property shall be delivered to the City of Fayetteville on the date of closing except that Mary Dunn shall be allowed to retain possession of both houses and the outbuildings for 120 days rent free and will still have the risk of loss during this 120 day period and shall pay for and keep both houses and all outbuildings fully insured with the City being the insured. Property taxes for the entire property shaft be prorated not to the date of closing, but to 120 days after closing. 10, Mary L. Dunn hereby grants permission for the City of Fayetteville or its employees or designates to enter the above described property and improvements for the purpose of inspection andfor surveying. 11. All fixtures, improvements and attached equipment are included in the purchase price. 12. Risk of loss or damage to the properly by fire or other casualty Occurring up to the time of closing and 120 days thereafter is assumed by Mary L. Dunn. 13. Mary L. Dunn shall disclose to the City of Fayetteville any and all environmental hazards of which Mary L. Dunn has actual knowledge. Should the existence of environmental hazards be known or determined, Mary L. Dunn shall cure such, at her expense; or, in the alternative, at the City of Fayetteville's discretion, the City of Fayetteville may cure such environmental hazard, and Mary L. Dunn shall indemnify the City of Fayetteville for all costs associated with said cure. OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT Page 2 of 4 14. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Stale of Arkansas. 15. This agreement, when executed by both the City of Fayetteville and Mary L. Dunn shall contain the entire understanding and agreement of the parties with respect to the matters referred to herein and shall supersede all price or contemporaneous agreements, representations and understanding with respect to such matters, and no oral representations or statements shall be considered a part hereof. 16. This contract expires, if not accepted by Mary L. Dunn on or before the 41h day of August, 2014. 17, The City of Fayetteville shall submit this fully executed Offer and Acceptance Contract to the City Council for their approval within twen (LO) days of acceptance by Mary L. Dunn. 18. NOTICE, THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ASSERTS AND MARY L. DUNN HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THIS OFFER IS EXPRESSLY CONTINGENT UPON THE APPROVAL OF THIS OFFER OF PURCHASE BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF FAYETTEVILLE AND THAT THE FAILURE OF THE COUNCIL. TO SO APPROVE WILL MAKE ALL PORTIONS OF THIS OFFER NULL AND VOID, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE RETURN TO CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE OF THE $1,000.00 EARNEST MONEY DEPOSIT_ �.1 ti Date: a�}� mm L. unn Date: AGENT OR WITNESS: 1 Dater City of Fayetteville, Arhansa , A muni a'I corporation' Date: Lio eld Jord n, ay / / � // �11113El131/1 ,--;44L•1! Cr �;.1l1)+,�1�.. Date: Z31 Sondra Smith, City Clerk <<�''�•�1 �' , , f ". �C�'IA'jj II;+;I�r, OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT Page 3 of 4 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Parcel No. 766-16080-000, Part of the East half of the Southwest Quarter and part of the West half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, in Township 17 North, of Range 30 West, described as follows: Beginning at a point 1485 feet East and 805113 feet North of the South West corner of the Southeast Quarter of (lie Southwest Quarter, and running thence North 0'10' East 1185.2 feel; thence North 89" West 220 feet; thence South 33°36' West 486.6 feet; thence South 42V West 127.6 feet; thence South 30011 I'West 124 feet; thence South 47" East 861.6 feet to the point of beginning, containing 9.7 acres, more or less. AND Parcel No. 765-16092-000: Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest cfuar ter of Section thirty six (36) n i Township seventeen (17) North of Range: thirty (30) West, described as follows: I.tCgirlllrllg two liulldred f(llty-IIV[ S1E1Ctc3iil' tLillll (245A) feel West and four hundred ninety-one (491) feet North of the 5cluth Fast c:ornar of .aicl ftlrty arse tract, IhNmc: Soulh 12"8'11' West fifty-nine and seven -tenths. (59.7) feel for a plain of beginning, and funning, thence North 87"37'15" West one hundred ninety-eight and eiigldy-live huodredilis ('198,85) feet, more or less, to Past lirle of Old Wire Road; thence tiouth 28*5519" Worst oilo rind citlht k:rrlhs (1.8) feet with East right of way line of said road; thence South 60*50'19' East two hundred five and w-weirty-five hundredtlis (205.75) feet; thence North 12008'11" East'ninety-five and three -tenths (95.3) feet.lo the place of beginning. AND Parcel No. 765-16095-000: Part of the Northeast Quarter (NE%) of the Southwest Quarter (SW%) of Section Thirty-six (36) in Township Seventeen (17) North of Range Thirty (30) West, beginning two hundred forty-five and one -tenth (246-1) feet West and four hundred ninety-one (491) feet North of the Southeast corner of said forty (40) acre tract, and running, thence South 12 degrees 8'11" West one hundred fifty-five (155) feet fora point of beginning to the land herein described, and running, thence North 60 degrees 58'19' West two hundred five and seventy-five (205.75) feet, more or less, to the East right-of-way fine of the Old Wire Road; thence South 28 degrees 65'11" West with said East line one hundred (100) feet; thence South 60 degrees 58'19" East two hundred (200) feet; thence Northeasterly one hundred (100) feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easements, rights -of -way and restrictive covenants, if any. SIGNED FOR IDENTIFICATION: 8� >10 zo:t��� Mary L. Dunn Date: S 1i I )I________ Date: z):�rIGULt'f ��.I.-_--. Date: I cJ Liorfeld Jordan, M y rr �y{tillnlli� 1{Y, i f 4J U. �4 (?,1r r„ f �, i z C•�: ; r� _ Date: / c Sondra Smith, City Clerk =` ': r A" I I . {t i I OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE CONTRACT Page 4 of 4 ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS 654 COUNTY OF WASHINGTON BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this date, before the undersigned, a duly commissioned and arting Notary Public within and for said County and State, personally appeared Mary L. Dunn, surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn, to me well known as the persons who executed Iho foregoing document, and who stated and acknowledged that she had so signed, executed and deliva l'Od said isishLiment for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. WITNESS my hand and seal on this , day of N ' CONNI MES MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: ' `s My COMMISSIONtl12366740 EXPIRES: July 28, 2Q16 (1 •-'!�R«��'.'' was Oat COuli ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON BE IT REMEMBERED, that on this date, before the undersigned, a duly coin missioned and acting Notary Public within and for said County and State, personally appeared Lioneld Jordan and Sondra Smith, to me well known as the persons who executed the foregoing document, and who stated and acknowledged that they are the Mayor and City Clerk of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, i municipal coq)oration, and are duly authorized In their respective capacities to execute the foregoing instrument for and in the name and behalf of said municipal corporation, and further stated and acknowledged that they had so signed, executed and delivered said instrument for the consideration, uses and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. WITNESS my hand and seal on this _ i �; L day of t _� . �. 2014. i ��.1`� C.;� �� 1C( #,, ,,No ary Public , MY COMMISSION EXPIRES: 0 7 � ••�, ', Vyy i t+:ten{�e �4r �0�„ � Izer'tagp QSSPG�4YO l he FayertewAe Natural Huitage Aowdai+on is Qedicate: to conserving natural areAD of FiyeDtr+Nlc and Ito emironp forthe benefit of present arkd futuregzneratlono August 10, 2014 t_ioneld Jordan, Mayor City of Fayetteville 113 West Mountain Street Fayetteville, AR 72701 Dear Mayor Jordan, Gulley Park, a 27 acre community park, is one of the few parks that we have that still retains a somewhat pastoral atmosphere due to the nature of the land, open, non -programmed usable green space.. As you know, people do not have to be actively engaged in any particular outdoor sport or recreation activity to reap the benefits of being in nature. Often it just takes 'being' in nature to reset. The proposed addition of the Dunn property to the north of the current Park boundary is a natural expansion and will preserve that pastoral setting to which people are attracted. Niokaska Creek, which runs through the Park, is an important feature of the City's Enduring Green Network providing a green corridor from this area west to Scull Creek. The Watershed Conservation Resource Center has done a significant streambank restoration in the Park and the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association has sponsored a number of invasive plant removals along the Creek. The City of Fayetteville Master Trail Plan calls for a multi -use trail to be built along Niokaska Creek. The current target for building this trail is 2016. The Niokaska Creek Trail would go through Sweetbriar Park, also the site of a WCRC streambank restoration, and close to Butterfield School before joining Mud Creek Trail. Butterfield School has the highest percentage of students that waiklbike to school today. The Niokaska Creek Trail is expected to increase the use of Gulley Park in two ways. The Park will become an eastern access point to the Fayetteville Trail sys- tem with good parking and bathrooms, and the Trail will bring visitors to the Park from the west like Butterfield Trail Village residents. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association, working with the Friends of Gulley Park and the Cow Paddy Foundation, has pledged to raise $130,000 toward the purchase of the Dunn property to be paid to the City an or before January 1, 2017. The Friends of Gulley Park have close to $35.000 raised and verbal pledges for another S30,000. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association is working on another pledge to provide community support toward the purchase of the Kessler Mountain Reserve, but we felt it important to accept this additional challenge because opportunities to add to important Enduring Green Network features in urban areas are rare, and City staff is excited about expanding this very highly used park. Sincerely, John Coleman Chairman P.O. 6m, 3_35 Fayette-ille, Arizarssa® 72702-3535 mw w fayeM;eW lenatura l " APPRA9ISAI EPORT, ON' THE "GULLEY PARK EXPANSION" PROPERTY; TWO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS SITUATED ON 1.25E ACRES, AND 9.7± ACRES OF EXCESS LAND; LOCATED ALONG THE SOUTHEAST SIDE OF NORTH OLD WIRE ROAD, SOUTHWEST OF NORTH OLD MISSOURI ROAD, IN FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS; WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS MI. REED & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3739 N. STEELE BLVD., SUITE 220 FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS Appraisal No. 5301 AS OF JULY 10, 2014 WF4 00 -'0, Real Estate Appraisers — Consultants 3739 N. Steele Blvd., Suite_22Q Fayetteville, AR 72703 * 479-521-6313 * Fax: 479-521-6315 * www.reedappraisal.biz Tom Reed, MAI • Brian Kenworth_v • Barbara Rhoads • Shannon Mueller • Katie Hampton July 18, 2014 City of Fayetteville Attn: Ms. Connie Edmonston Director of Parks & Recreation 1455 South Happy Hollow Rd Fayetteville, Arkansas 72701 RE: Appraisal Report on the "Gulley Park Expansion" property; two single-family residential dwellings situated on 1.25± acres (ACS), and approximately 9.7± ACS of excess land; located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. Dear Ms. Edmonston: In compliance with your request and for the purpose of estimating the market value of the above captioned property, I hereby certify that I have examined the subject property and have made a survey of matters pertinent to the estimation of its value. further certify that I have no interest, present or contemplated, in the property appraised and that my fee was not contingent upon the value estimate reported. The following written real property appraisal report contains data gathered in my investigation, information from my files, and shows the method of appraisal in detail. This report has been prepared under the Appraisal Report option. Based upon an analysis of relevant data and contingent upon the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions which follow and appear later in this report, it is my opinion the market value of the fee simple estate of the subject property, as of July 10, 2014, was: NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($970,000) The preceding value reflects terms equivalent to cash to the owner, and represents that for real property only. No personal property has been included in this valuation assignment. The preceding value estimate is based upon the following Extraordinary Assumptions: 1. That the subject and adjacent properties are in compliance with all applicable EPA regulations; 2. That the subject excess acreage does not need a second point of ingress/egress; 3. That the subject dwellings are structurally sound, and are not adversely affected by the presence of mold or other environmental issues; 4. That the plumbing, electrical, and HVAC systems in the subject dwellings are in proper working order; and, 5. That the subject land and dwelling sizes are approximately as indicated. If any, or all, of these Extraordinary Assumptions prove to be untrue, the preceding value estimate could be influenced. The reader is referred to additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions appearing in the Introduction Section of this report. The estimated exposure time for the subject property is one± year or less. This was determined from an analysis of market conditions and comparable sales. At the request of the client, the contributory value of each of the subject parts to the market value of the subject whole property is broken down as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50± AC) = S111,500 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75± AC) = S218,500 9.7± ACS of Excess Land = S640,000 Sincerely, -;�S- gl'l� Brian J. Kenworthy, CG3496 REED & ASSOCIATES, INC. nsi nn1 R'''. 5 �' r �•ERiIFI�41d•��,'' oy S STATE CERTIFIED :A GENERAL CG3496 'rhhliuill�N\\ 3 PART I -INTRODUCTION TABIU OAF CQNTENTS.` Title Page Letter Of Transmittal - - - - - - - - 2 PART I — INTRODUCTION Table Of Contents - - - - - - - - 5 Subject Photographs - - - - - - - 6 Certificate - - - - - - - - - 28 Assumptions And Limiting Conditions - - - - - - 29 Summary Of Important Conclusions - - - - - - 31 Qualifications of Brian Kenworthy - - - - - - - 34 PART Il — FACTUAL DESCRIPTIONS Identification Of The Property - - - - - - - 36 Purpose Of The Appraisal - - - - - - - - 37 Definition of Market Value - - - - - - - 37 Intended Use/User Of Report - - - - - - - 38 Property Rights Appraised- - - - - - - - 38 Scope Of The Appraisal - - - - - - - 38 Ownership Of The Appraised Property - - - - - - 39 Date Of The Appraisal - - - - - _ - 39 Regional Map - - - - - - - - - 40 Area Data - - - - - - - - 41 Market Area Map- - - - - - - 57 Market Area - - - - - - - - - 58 Aerial - - - - - - - - 61 Description Of Site - - - - - - - 62 Zoning - - - - - - - - 64 Assessment And Tax - - - - - - - 64 Dwelling Sketches - - - - - 66 Description of Improvements - - - - - - - 68 History - - - - - - - - 69 PART Itl —ANALYSIS OF DATA AND OPINIONS OF THE APPRAISERS Highest And Best Use Analysis - - - - - - 72 Land Value - - - - - - - - 78 Cost Approach - - - - - - - - 89 Sales Comparison Approach - - - - - - - 93 Income Capitalization Approach - - - - - - 118 Reconciliation - - - - - - 119 Exposure Time - - - - - - - 122 PART IV —ADDENDA Assessment Records Deed Records Flood Zone Map Topography Map MLS Listing Profile Offer Letter to the City Comparable Land Listings Engagement Letter 5 2 ` �!C \ /--z \ \|' �_� � y�y / ■ ��� . .^ 4 ��� ` � � �} jpw OIL /� x | � � � ' •� / .� i LAW, X. Qlff -vr �' - y.a..� r • �i~ •�Lk�tir. `•+pit . � • , � : - _ 'S� '� "''{��L=�.i =, .. .t f1 a I`,I . ". I-,, r _ 11 Ili I I"r i 1, FlIlpvitia`,i 1.-,"itci<i11111?+ i+Ja',Ia lop r I \I ,.[Ip{ I.( )( Ft( fI, 1i41%' (IE D AI R 1 k,( I, D ti\t11k f \I _'r,.h1)tI)%1IP J?it1,;l LEI KAMT�111- " 1%11 l folk %II \% (if "fl(ll' fib 11.01"(i 11 61',� ��i 1)%�Iftl R()AD 111'N" Id wjI10 1 "'41,11:1)�kIItf Pt(ti i) - • j lip Ak Air 1 "t C � ff OP� a ad"dols Ptt 1 '.WWI dri # . .r f T-7 EVE - M 4b Erik �4�rr .ti 0 r .; i_, ;t?�'S`-`{Y `' R"f �'�'M li'_•.r.'�� fix'*. I' � ':i�',i. -► � , � .yam ,-� . T' Y - .MI r Fes+ • 1 - ' r } I{ +�rrrrF�' •�*' f MAW .- ,w t . , I qqpLAir - Y .a L r k �r cc I �7t 14 tlp R/l 14t --, wmw=r" ;;T 4w4mm. -Xpo�. . ., ., CERTIFICATE .: I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief: • The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. • The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are my personal, unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. • 1 have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. • 1 have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. • My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. • My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event. The appraisal assignment was not based on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the approval of a loan. • My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. • 1, Brian Kenworthy, have not previously performed services, as an appraiser, or in any other capacity, regarding the property that is the subject of this report within the three-year period immediately preceding acceptance of this assignment. Brian Kenworthy has examined the property that is subject of this report. • No one provided significant professional assistance to the persons signing this report. • 1 certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. • I certify that the use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. • As of the date of this report, I, Brian Kenworthy, have completed the Standards and Ethics Education Requirement of the Appraisal Institute for Associate Members. Sincerely, STATE CERTIFIED Brian J. Kenworthy, CG3496 -s J GENERAL REED & ASSOCIATES, INC. CG3496 �_ rrrr rrll r11177j 7+'+ 28 ASSUMPTIONS ANDrL' I- �NG&COND,IT.i�NS This Appraisal Report has been made with the following general assumptions: 1. No responsibility is assumed for the legal description or for matters including legal or title consideration. Title to the property is assumed to be good and merchantable unless otherwise stated. 2. The property is appraised free and clear of any or all liens or encumbrances unless otherwise stated. 3. Responsible ownership and competent property management are assumed. 4. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable. However, no warranty is given for its accuracy. 5. All engineering is assumed to be correct. The plot plans and illustrative material in this report are included only to assist the reader in visualizing the property. 6. It is assumed that there are no hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil, or structures that render it more or less valuable. No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or for arranging for engineering studies that may be required to discover them. 7. It is assumed that there is full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental regulations and laws unless noncompliance is stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. g. It is :assumed that all applicable zoning and use regulations and restrictions have been complied with, unless a nonconformity has been stated, defined, and considered in the appraisal report. 9. It is assumed that all required licenses, certificates of occupancy, consents, or other legislative or administrative authority from any local, state, or national government or private entity or organization have been or can be obtained or renewed for any use on which the value estimate contained in this report is based. 10. It is assumed that the utilization of the land and improvements is within the boundaries or property lines of the property described and that there is no encroachment or trespass unless noted in the report. 11. "Unless otherwise stated in this report, the existence of hazardous materials which may or may not be present on the property was not observed by the appraiser. No responsibility is assumed for any such conditions or any expertise or engineering knowledge required to discover them. The client is urged to retain an expert if desired." 29 This Appraisal Report has been made with the following general limiting conditions: 1. The distribution, if any, of the total valuation in this report between land and improvements applies only under the stated program of utilization. The separate allocations for land and buildings must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if so used. 2. Possession of this report, or a copy thereof, does not carry with it the right of publication. It may not be used for any purpose by any person other than the party to whom it is addressed without the written consent of the appraiser, and in any event only with proper written qualification and only in its entirety. 3. The appraiser herein by reason of this appraisal is not required to give further consultation, testimony, or be in attendance in court with reference to the property in question unless arrangements have been previously made. 4. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraiser, or the firm with which the appraiser is connected)_ shall be�disseminated to the public through advertising, public relations news, sales, or other media without the prior written consent and approval of the appraiser. 5. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. 1 (we) have not made a specific compliance survey and analysis of this property to determine whether or not it is in conformity with the various detailed requirements of the ADA. It is possible that a compliance survey of the property together with a detailed analysis of the requirements of the ADA could reveal that the property is not in compliance with one or more of the requirements of the act. If so, this fact could have a negative effect upon the value of the property. Since I (we) have no direct evidence relating to this issue, (we) did not consider possible noncompliance with the requirements of ADA in estimating the value of the property. 30 RVOAF. I PORTA�NF CONCLUSIONS; Client: City of Fayetteville, Parks & Recreation Department— Fayetteville, Arkansas Property Location: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. Purpose Of The Appraisal: Market value estimate Property Rights Appraised: Fee simple estate Ownership Of The Appraised Property: Allen & Mary L. Dunn Dates Of Value Estimate: July 10, 2014 Description Of Site: The subject site consists of approximately 10.95f acres (ACS), or 476,982± square feet (SF), of land area. The subject land area is allocated as follows: 2634 North Old Wire Road- 0.50f acre (AC); 2648 North Old Wire- 0.75± AC; and, excess land- 9.70± ACS. The shape of the subject acreage is irregular, overall; each of the subject homesites is near rectangular in shape. The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. The subject acreage is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. The subject site has vehicular access/frontage along the southeast right-of-way of North Old Wire Road in the northwest part of the site (homesites); this frontage is considered near road grade. There is a drainage ditch located along the North Old Wire Road frontage. The subject site has additional frontage along the west right-of-way of the Magnolia Drive cul-de-sac in the southeast part of the site (excess land); this frontage is also considered near road grade. As of the effective date of this report, vehicular access to the subject site is not available via Magnolia Drive. The southwestern boundary of the subject site has frontage along Gulley Park. Approximately 0.3f AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site (excess land) is located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". All typical city utilities are located at/near the subject site. The subject acreage is located within the Fayetteville City Limits, and is zoned RSF-4 (Residential Single -Family- Four Units Per Acre). Please see Description of Site section later in this report for further details. Description Of Improvements: The subject property is improved with two single- family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316t square feet (SF) of living 31 area. In addition, this homesite includes a 372± SF attached garage, 460± SF -attached ----- shop, and 210± SF enclosed porch. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, laundry room, and storage closet. Kitchen appliances include an oven, range, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood and carpet floor cover; painted gypsum board and wood panel wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963±. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551f square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 580± SF attached garage, 340± SF enclosed porch, and 152zL SF attached greenhouse. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, one half bathroom, a living room, den, kitchen, and storage closet. The laundry room is located in the garage. Kitchen appliances include an oven/range �^ combination, built-in microwave, dishwasher, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood, carpet, and the floor cover; painted and wall papered gypsum board wall, cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1961±. Discussions with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. This dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road is accessed via an asphalt paved drive, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road is accessed via a gravel paved drive. A 1,200± square foot (SF) metal shop building is located behind the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road. The shop building has concrete floors, two- 8' manual overhead doors, electricity/plumbing, and is insulated. The shop building includes a 2-fixture restroom, and has wall heat and air units. In addition, there is a built- in vacuum system in the shop building. Discussions with the property owner indicated the "shop" building was originally constructed 15f years ago; the shop building is considered to be in average condition. Other site improvements include: 238f SF wood storage building; 529f SF wood lean-to agricultural building; well house; landscaping; garden; water feature; agricultural, chain link, and PVC fencing; etc. Please see Description of Improvements section later in this report for further details. Highest And Best Use: In my opinion, the "bighest and best use" of the subieet is continued single-family residential use of the homesites, and to hold the subject excess land for future single-family residential or special-purpose development, within size/Flood Zone limitations, that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements, and in conformity to the Market Area, as demand dictates. 32 The agricultural improvements situated on the subject excess land are older and in poor condition. These improvements, in my opinion, do not provide any contributory value to the subject excess land. Final Value: Indicated Land Value "As Vacant": $765,000 Indicated Value by Cost Approach: Not Utilized Indicated Value by Sales Comparison Approach: $974,000 Indicated Value by Income Capitalization Approach: $969,000 INDICATED FINAL VALUE $970,000 The preceding value reflects terms equivalent to cash to the owner, and represents that for real property only. No personal property has been included in this valuation assignment. The preceding value estimate is based upon the following Extraordinary Assumptions: 1. That the subject and adjacent properties are in compliance with all applicable EPA regulations; 2. That the subject excess acreage does not need a second point of ingress/egress; 3. That the subject dwellings are structurally sound, and are not adversely affected by the presence of mold or other environmental issues; 4. That the plumbing, electrical, and HVAC systems in the subject dwellings are in proper working order; and, 5. That the subject land and dwelling sizes are approximately as indicated. If any, or all, of these Extraordinary Assumptions prove to be untrue, the preceding value estimate could be influenced. The reader is referred to additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions appearing in the Introduction Section of this report. The estimated exposure time for the subject property is one± year or less. This was determined from an analysis of market conditions and comparable sales. At the request of the client, the contributory value of each of the subject parts to the market value of the subject whole property is broken down as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50± AC) = $111,500 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75± AC) _ $218,500 9.7± ACS of Excess Land = 5640,000 Mi EDU(AT(ONe : g Q.S. Finance (Real Estate Concentration) — Clemson University — 2008 Master of Science, Real Estate (M.S.R.E.) — Georgia State University —2010 I'ROFESSI®NC, C®.URSES`�C®MPLETED Basic Appraisal Principles, 30-Hr. Course- Career Webschool — July 2009 Basic Appraisal Procedures, 30-Hr. Course- Career Webschool — July 2009 Residential Report Writing and Case Studies, 15-Hr. Course- Career Webschool — July 2009 Business Practices and Ethics- 7-Hr. Course — The Appraisal Institute, Atlanta Chapter — June 2010 National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 15-Hr. Course- Appraisal Institute — October 2011 General Appraiser Sales Comparison Approach, 30-Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute — December 2011 General Demonstration Report Writing, 7-Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute- August 2013 Evaluating Commercial Construction, 15-Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute- October 2013 Appraisal of Real Estate 14`h Edition Webinar, 2- Hr. Course, Appraisal Institute- November 2013 National Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 7-Hr. Course- Appraisal Institute — March --` 2013 OTHER RELAUENT''CUURSES:COMPLETEI) Clemson University — Fall 2007 — Real Estate Finance Clemson University — Spring 2008 — Real Estate Investment Analysis Clemson University — Spring 2008 — Real Estate Valuation Georgia State University — Fall 2008 — Real Estate Development Georgia State University — Fall 2008 — Legal and Regulatory Environment of Real Estate Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Advanced Real Estate Investment Analysis Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Real Estate Case Analysis Gcorgia State University -- Spring 2009 — Strategic Management of Real Property in a Corporate Environment Georgia State University — Spring 2009 — Real Property Project Planning and Development Georgia State University — Summer 2009 — Equity Real Estate Investment Trust Analysis Georgia State University — Fall 2009 — Applied Real Estate Market Analysis Georgia State University — Fall 2009 — Quantitative Analysis of Real Estate REAL ESTATE DESIGNATIONS/ASSOChATIONS Arkansas Certified General Real Estate Appraiser No. CG3496 Associate Member of The Appraisal Institute Member, Ozark Mountain Appraisal Institute Chapter WORK EXPERIENCE August 2008 to August 2009 — Georgia State University Real Estate Department, Atlanta Georgia — Graduate Research Assistant August 2009 to August 2010 — Greystone Valuation Services, Inc., Atlanta Georgia —Assistant Appraiser August 2010 to Present — Reed & Associates, Inc., Fayetteville, Arkansas - Staff Appraiser/Consultant PART II -FACTUAL DESCRIPTIONS 35 IDENTIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. The legal descriptions of the subject property areas follows: Part of the Lust half of the Southwest Quarter and part of the West half of -the' Southeast Quarter of Section 36, in Township 17 North, of Range 30 West, described as follows: -Beginning at a point 1485 feet East and 805 1/3 feet North of the South west corner of the Southeast Quarter of the southwest Quarter, and ruuning;thin6e North,O"10' Last 1185.2 feet; thenc'i North 89' West 220 feet.; thence South`-33.'•36' Westt486.6 feet; thence South 42'6' West 127.6 feet;jEthence:$outh 30'll'Wese;124 €eet;:;thence South 4T East 861.E feet to the point o€_ibeginnimg, containing 9� 7 acres; more dr less. - -AND- - Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section thirty six (36) in Ta reship seventeen (17) North of Range thirty (30) best, described as folleass Beginning trio hundred forty five and one -tenth (245.1) feet West and four hundred ninety one (491) feet North of the South East corner of said forty acre tract, thdnce Sbuth 1208111" West fifty nine and'soVen tenths(59.7)feet for a place of beginning, and running, thence North er 37°15" West one hundred ninety eight and eighty five hundredths (198.65) feet, more or less, to East line of Old Wire Road; thence South 28055' 19' West one and eight -tenths (1.6) feet with East right of way line of said road; thence South 60*56' 19" East two hundred five and seventy five hundredths (205.75) feet; thence Borth 12008111m East ninety five and three -tenths (95.3) feet to the place of beginning. -AND- Part of the Northeast Quarter {NiM of the Southwest Quarter (SA) of Section 'dirty--si (36) in 'Township Seventeen (17) North of Range Thirty (30) west, beginning two hundred forty-five and one -tenth (245.1) feet West and four hundred ninety-one (491) feet North of the Southeast corner of said forty (40) acre tract, and running, thence South 12 decrees 8'11" west one hundred fifty-five (155) feet for a point of beginninq to the lands herein described, and running, thence North 60 degrees 58,19" west two hundred five and seventy-five hundredths (203.75) feet, more or less to the East right of way line of the Old wire Re7ad; thence south 29 degrees 65,11" west with said East line one hundred (100) feet; thence youth 60 degrees 58'19" Fact two hundred (200) feet; thence Northeasterly one hundred (100) feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easements, rights -of -way and restrictive covenants, if any_ 36 Based on Assessment Records, the total land area is indicated to be 10.951 acres (ACS).--The-..--- ---- first legal description presented (excess land) does not appear to close, and as written, appears to be closer to 10.2f ACS; however, the legal description states a land area of 9.7± ACS and Assessment Records also indicate a land size of 9.7±- ACS. In addition, the second legal description presented (2648 North Old Wire Road homesite) as written appears to be near triangular in shape and supports a land size of approximately 0.221 AC. Assessment Records for this homesite indicate a land area of 0.75f AC, which appears to be more accurate. The third legal description presented (2634 North Old Wire Road homesite) indicates a land area of 0.5f AC, and is also supported by Assessment Records. The land sizes indicated by Assessment Records appear to be a more accurate representation of the actual subject land size, and are relied upon for the purposes of this report. An Extraordinary Assumption of this report is that the land sizes are as indicated. A Survey Plat of the subject property is recommended to confirm the reasonableness of this Assumption. The subject property is improved with two single-family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316f square feet (SF) of living area, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551f square feet (SF) of living area. PURPOSE IT aAPPRAISAL The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the fee simple interest in the subject property, as of the effective date. DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE Market value is defined as follows: "The most probable price that a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, tire buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stinnihis. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title fr-our seller to buyer under conditions whereby: a. buyer and seller are typically motivated, b, both parties are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what they considers their hest interest; c. a reasonable time is allowed for exposure itr the open market; d. pclvment is made in terms of cash in U.S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto, and, e. the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated wish the sale. "t Appraisal Institute, The Dicrronan, of Reat Estate Anrn'aisa — Fif1h Edrtron. (Chicago: Appraisal Insrrrrrre, 2010), P. 123. 37 INTENDED USE/USER OF REPORT The intended use of this report is to assist the client with internal decisions regarding a potential acquisition of the subject property. The intended user of this report is the City of Fayetteville— Parks & Recreation Department, PROPERTY RIGHTS APPRAISED In this appraisal, I am concerned with the valuation of the fee simple estate of the subject property. Fee simple estate is defined as follows: "Absolute oivnership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the ]imitations imposed by the governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police po+ver, and escheat. ,2 SCOPE OF THE WORK The scope of work in this appraisal involves the application of the "Valuation Process" in estimating the market value of the subject property. This real property appraisal report has been prepared under the Appraisal Report option. Subject was last inspected in July 2014. Pertinent locational and physical data was obtained on the property inspections. Photographs were taken on a July 10, 2014, and a July 11, 2014, inspection, by Brian Kenworthy. General data pertinent to the appraisal assignment was obtained from local sources. The legal description of the subject property was obtained from public records. Building measurements were taken by the appraiser on the July 10, 2014, inspection. Certain information pertaining to the subject property (marketing information, property history, offer letter, etc.) were provided by property owner and listing broker. Property tax data and the history of the property were researched through Washington County Assessment Records. The highest and best use of the property was projected based upon location, physical characteristics, zoning, past, present, and potential use, etc. The Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches to Value have been utilized in this report. The Income Capitalization Approach was not utilized, as this is not typically the basis upon which buy/sell decisions are being made in this market on properties of the subject's nature. Application of the Income Capitalization Approach to Value was not considered necessary to produce credible appraisal results for the subject property. The "Approaches to Value" appear later in the report. In the Land Value Section, the estimated value of the subject site "as vacant" was established first utilizing comparable land sales in Fayetteville. The unit of comparison was price per acre (AC) of land area. The sales were compared to subject and adjustments made for differences 2 Appraisal histitute, The Dictionai , o Real Estate Appraisal — FifNi Edilio3t. (Chicago: Appraisal htuirute, 2010), P. 78. 38 with respect to the subject. The per AC value of the -subject was estimated from within the adjusted range of the comparables, and was multiplied by the subject whole property acreage to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject site "as vacant". The estimated market value of the subject site "as vacant" was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. In the Cost Approach, the Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements were estimated, utilizing Marshall Valuation Service (national cost service) and a market derived entrepreneurial incentive. Accrued Depreciation attributable to the improvements was then estimated based upon the Economic Age -Life Method, and was subtracted from Replacement Cost New to arrive at Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements. The estimated land value was then added to the Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the improvements to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject property by the Cost Approach. The estimated market value of the subject whole property was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. In the Sales Comparison Approach, comparable improved sales were examined and analyzed for comparison purposes to the respective dwelling improvements. The unit of comparison was whole property. Adjustments were made to the sales based upon differences with respect to the respective subject dwellings. The market value of the respective subject dwellings was then estimated from within the adjusted range of the comparables. Finally, the contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) was added to the value of the subject dwellings to arrive at the estimated market value of the whole subject property by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount could be supported to the sum of the values of the improved subject homesites and the excess land. The two approaches utilized were reconciled to a final market value conclusion for the subject based on the appraisers' evaluation of the appropriateness, the accuracy, and the quantity of the evidence in the entire appraisal. OWNERSHIP OF THE APPRAISED PROPERTY As of the effective date of this report, the subject property was under the ownership of Allen & Mary L. Dunn. DATE OF THE APPRAISAL The effective date of this report is July 10, 2014; this represents one of the dates of inspection. The date of this appraisal report is July 18, 2014. 39 r - ? ;, °.ac k r L uj p..: li.. y Ccn i w 01 ALA a z k EF'joto a L� _ T }# cp C kq �-- LLI 7 y YZ 700t O � t a LL J — . Q a mm - ' y� ' po § eo el d r �� Oc = o Y �• y S I Z _ �I I m ! U N U c � ` �4 r in LL w m, t (a M N.0 p CD d4 D aCID m 5`—° � °m �d _ 1! m L L U O C O � 0 IDi � Q � O oa ,A� y w V c C„ O" V .� m.. .. w N Lu 1 p Qo 0 - w'� to e O g n U) r m w Np u O m .> O _ :3 tl '- 's. i O' .Y n r. tmcm Ir cc .l A REA, DATA The Trade Area includes Washington and Benton Counties in Arkansas, as well as Madison County, Arkansas, and McDonald County, Missouri. The four counties are Iocated in the extreme northwestern part of Arkansas and extreme southwestern part of Missouri, respectively, and make up the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers, AR Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This area is bordered by the Oklahoma State line on the west, Newton County (Missouri) on the north, Carroll, Newton and Barry (Missouri) Counties on the east, and Crawford, Franklin and Johnson Counties on the south. The total land area of Benton County is indicated to be 847.36f square miles, Washington County 941.97f square miles, Madison County 834.26f square miles, and McDonald County 539.48f square miles. It should be noted that near 92%f of the population of the MSA is located in Washington and Benton Counties. As a result, this Area Data analysis primarily pertains to Washington and Benton Counties in Arkansas. The value of real property reflects and is influenced by the interaction of basic forces that motivate human activity. These forces are divided into four major categories: Social trends; Economic circumstances; Governmental controls and regulations; and, environmental conditions. These forces exert pressure on human activities and are also affected by these activities. The interaction of all the forces influences the value of every parcel of real estate in the market. Social;"Fa.rces Social forces`a're eXer`ted pririiarily through populatio"n characteristics. The demographic compositionofthe'populafion reveals the potential, basic demand for real estate services. The 1980 Census showed population figures of 78,115 and 100,494, respectively, for the two counties. This totals 178,609 for the two -county area. The population of Benton County in 1990 was 97,499, while Washington County indicated a population 113,409. The combined population of the two counties in 1990 was 210,908, representing an 18.1 %:L increase over 1980, or 1.81%f per year. The 2000 Census indicated populations for Benton and Washington Counties of 153,406 and 157,715, respectively. The total for the two counties, 31 1,121, represents a 47.5%± .ncrL�asc over 1990, or 4.75%f per year. Based on data released by the U.S. Census Bureau, the population of the two -county area as of 2010 was 424,404, with Benton County reflecting a total of 221,339 and Washington County a total of 203,065, The growth between 2000 and 2010 is indicated to be 36.4%A:, or 3.64%± per year. The estimated 2012 populations of Benton and Washington Counties, based on State & County QuickFacts, were 232,268f and 211,411±, respectively, or a total of 443,679t. The U.S. Census Bureau data reflected the population of the MSA as of 2010 to be 465,780. The estimated 2012 population of the MSA, based on State & County QuickFacts, was 482,200t. The following chart reflects the population trend in the four -county MSA since 1990: Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA Population 500000 ! 425:000 - - - 350,000 ------ - --- i 275,000 - -- - - - - - 200,000 Source: U.S. Census Bentonville is the County Seat of Benton County. This city is located in -the-north--part of the county. Bentonville had a population of 11,257 in 1990, a 28.6%f increase since 1980. The 2000 population of Bentonville was approximately 19,730. This represents a 75.30/of increase since 1990. The 2010 population was indicated to be 35,301, a 78.91/0f increase from 2000. Rogers is the largest city in the county. Its 1990 population of 24,692 reflects a 41.7%f increase since 1980. The 2000 population was indicated to be 38,829. This represents a 57.3%f increase since 1990. The 2010 population was indicated to be 55,964, a 44.1°/� increase from 2000. Siloam Springs, located on the Oklahoma line in the southwest part of the county, is the third major city in Benton County. It grew from a population of 8,151 in 1980 to 10,843 in 2000, a 33%f increase. The 2010 population was indicated to be 15,039, a 38.7%f increase from 2000. Some of the smaller cities and towns in Benton County include Gentry, Gravette, Pea Ridge, Lowell, Centerton, Decatur, Cave Springs, Bella Vista, etc. It should be noted that the City of Centerton, located just west of the Bentonville City Limits, reflected an increase in population from 491 in 1990 to 2,146 in 2000, and to 9,515 in 2010. The indicated increase was 343.40/0f°/u from 2000 to 2010, or 34.341/o± per year. Within the county, there are a total of 18± incorporated towns and cities. It should also be noted that Lowell, lying between Springdale and Rogers, experienced an increase in population between 1990 and 2000 of 309.E0/0f. The 2000 population of Lowell was indicated to be 5,013:1:, while the 2010 population was 7,327. The indicated increase was 46.2Y61, or 4.62%f per year, between 2000 and 2010. Fayetteville is the County Seat of Washington County. This city is located in the north central part of the county. Fayetteville had a population of 42,099 in 1990. This represented a 150/0f increase since 1980. The 2000 population of Fayetteville was indicated to be 58,047, This represents a 37.9°/o±,increase since 1990. The 2010 population was indicated to be 73,580, an increase of 26.8%f from 2000. Fayetteville is also the largest city in the county. Springdale is the second largest city in Washington County. Its 1990 population of 29,941 showed a 27.61yo-h increase since 1980. The 2000 population of Springdale was indicated to be 45,798. This represents a 53%:k increase since 1990. The 2000 population figure for Springdale includes an indicated 2,011 people living in that part of Springdale located in Benton County.' The 2010 population of Springdale was indicated to be 69,797, an increase of 52.4%± from 2000. Some of the smaller cities in Washington County include Prairie Grove, Lincoln, Farmington, West Fork, Johnson, Elm Springs, etc. There are a total of 13-h incorporated cities and towns within Washington County. A small part of Elm Springs is also located in Benton County. The following table reflects population changes for major cities in the MSA since 2000: city 2000 2005 2007 2008 2010 2000-2010 % Increase 2012 Estimate Fayetteville 58,047 66,656 72,208 73,372 73,580 26.8% 76,899 Springdale 45,798 62,459 66,881 68,180 69,797 52.4% 73,123 Rogers 38,829 48.353 54.959 56,726 55,954 44.1% 58,895 Bentonville 19,730 29,530 33,744 35,526 35,301 78.9% 38,284 Lowell 5,013 7,042 7,044 7,173 7,327 46.2% 7,714 Centerton 2,146 5,477 8,162 8,593 9,515 343.4% 10,170 Siloam Springs 10,843 13,604 14,480 14,825 15,039 38.7% 15,680 Source: U.S. Census ___..The increased population trend is expected to continue in the Benton -Washington County area. This should have a positive effect on real property values. However, it should be noted that the rate of growth has declined from what appears to have been the peak period between July 1, 2004, and July 1, 2005. The net monthly population growth in the Benton -Washington County area between July I, 2004, and July 1, 2005, was estimated to be 1,256f people. Between July 1, 2008 and July 1, 2009, the net monthly population growth was estimated to be 748f people. This reflects a 40.5% decline. Between 2000 and 2010, census data supports net monthly population growth of 944± people. The estimated net monthly population growth between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2012, was 695f people. This reflects a decline of 26.4%f. Oversupply issues in the real estate market and slow improvement in overall economic conditions have had an adverse impact on population growth. The country officially went into a recession in December 2007. The recession officially ended in June 2009; however, consumer sentiment doesn't necessarily support this. Economic Forces: Economic forces are also significant to real property values. It is necessary to analyze the fundamental relationships between current and anticipated supply and demand and 'the economic ability of the population to satisfy its rants, needs,and demands. through' itspurchasing power. For 2003, the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA ranked I" nationally in Forbes/Milken Institute's "Best Performing Cities: Where America's Jobs are Created" measuring economic vibrancy and potential. For 2004, the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) was listed as the 5'h "Best Small Metro for Business" by Forbes. This publication also listed the MSA as #1 in job growth. For 2005, The Milken Institute named Northwest Arkansas to the Top Ten in Job Growth. For 2013, Milken ranked the Fayetteville -Springdale- Rogers MSA second in the nation in Short- "rerm Job Growth. Milken defines short-term job growth as the percentage of job growth between July 2012 and July 2013. Only Santa Cruz, California, ranked higher in creating more short-term jobs among the nation's largest 200 metropolitan areas. Northwest Arkansas also ranks high in Milken's review of job creation over longer periods of time, rating 18a' nationally in I -year Job Growth and 34'h in 5-year Job Growth. As a region, Northwest Arkansas is ranked as the nation's 57th Best Performing City, the highest ranked MSA in the State of Arkansas. The Job Growth USA website of Arizona State University's W.P. Carey School of Business ranked 383 of 428 Metropolitan Statistical Areas for 2013 on the basis of non -farm job growth over a 12-month moving average. The Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA ranked Number 87 nationwide for 2013. This is down from 2012 when the region ranked Number 67 nationwide in non -farm job growth. The following chart represents Non -Farm Employment Growth for the MSA since 2000: Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA Non -Farm Payroll Jobs Annual Averages 225.000 175.000 125.000 7 5, 000 25.000 -2 5, 000 N N N N N N (V [V oNo. Employed oAnnual Growth 198.500 205,400 � 199,500 200,3D0 2iW,200 ' 170,300 176,BDD 181,80Q 188,300 ZOO g00 3,9Q 30 6,50 5 QQ 6.90 g,1 6 SQ 6,00 -1, 00 Source: Arkansas Department of Workforce Services As previously indicated, the country was officially in a recession between December 2007 and June 2009. This recession, referred to as the "Great Recession", lasted ] 8 months. The previous longest recorded recessions since the Great Depression, the 1973-75 recession and the 19$1-82 recession, each lasted 16 months. The Great Depression lasted 43 months. The recessions in 1991 and 2001 each lasted 8 months. The recession obviously impacted the rate of job growth in the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA. While the United States as a whale experienced negative year on year non -farm employment growth through all of 2008, the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA remained positive through part of the year. However, non -farm employment numbers (year on year) did turn negative in this MSA in 2008 and remained negative throughout 2009. Obviously, local economic activity was affected by the national recession. In May 2010, non -farm employment numbers (year on year) turned positive and have remained positive year over year through the latest recorded data researched, which was November 2013. Employment gains for the MSA between November 2412 and November 2013 were in the following sectors: trade, transportation, and utilities; professional and business services; education and health services; leisure and hospitality services; and natural resources, mining, and construction. The civilian labor force in Benton County averaged 111,200 for the year 2012. Washington County averaged 105,300 for the same time period. The average civilian labor force for January- November 2013 was reported -at- 1_12,786 for Benton County and 107,005 for Washington - County. In 2012, Benton County's unemployment rate . averaged 5.7% while Washington County's rate averaged 5.4%. The 2012 average, annual unemployment rates for the State of Arkansas and the United States were 7.3% and 8.1%, respectively. The average unemployment rates for Benton and Washington Counties for the January —November 2013 time period were indicated to be 5.5%f and 4.8%f, respectively. All of the preceding rates represent non - seasonally adjusted rates. U.S. Census data reflect the following income figures for the Benton -Washington County area: Benton County 2000 2010 Change 2013 Median Household Income $40,276 $54,592 35.5% $51,977 Average Household Income $50,556 $66,147 30.8% $69,676 Per Capita Income $19,377 $24,912 28.6% $25,885 Washington County 2000 2010 Change 2013 Median Household Income $34,683 $45,544 31.3% $44,056 Average Household Income $44,747 $56,617 26.5% $59,789 Per Capita Income $17,347 $21,840 25.9% $23,137 Combined Counties 2000 2010 Change 2013 Median Household Income $37,483 $50,588 35.0% $48,687 Average Household Income $47,604 $61,551 29.3% $64,937 Per Capita Income $18,348 $23,441 27.8% $24,850 The real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties expanded at a rapid rate between 2003 and mid-2006. Oversupply issues in the residential sector became very visible in 2006, particularly in the latter half of the year. There were definite indicators in 2005 that this sector of the market was headed in this direction. As of the second Quarter of 2013, Benton County totaled approximately 7,399 empty, single-family and duplex lots with Final Plat filed and/or receiving final approval. The total for Washington County was approximately 5,436. Based on lot sales to end users in 2012 in the two -county area, the total empty lot supply could constitute near a 9f year inventory. This likely overstates the situation as near 15%f of the empty lot inventory represents not yet active lots. Regardless, the current lot supply in the two -county area remains significant; however, it should be noted that the supply of empty lots in Benton and Washington Counties has decreased substantially over the past couple of years. The decrease from Quarter Four 2012 to Quarter Two 2013 was approximately 7.5°/�. Housing starts and residential construction activity in both Benton and Washington Counties have increased significantly since 201 1. Interest rates remain low, which is a positive for the housing market; however, have increased somewhat as of late. Rates are expected to continue to slowly move upward, with the Federal Reserve cutting back on monthly bond purchases. However, rates are still projected to remain in an affordable range. This, along with continued improvement in non- - farm employment should sustain the downward movement in the number of empty -residential lots in the two -county area. Problems in the housing market are viewed by many as what led us into the recession, and there is a belief that continued improvement in this sector is necessary for the country to completely rebound from this last economic downturn. Obviously, the decrease in home values and the high rates of residential foreclosures across the country as a result of the "Great Recession" negatively impacted consumer sentiment. Many economists feel that the housing market bottomed in the Fourth Quarter of 2011, with an average decline in value from peak to trough of 30% to 350/0f. There is definite evidence that home values are rebounding. In Benton County, Multiple Listing Service (MLS) data reflects the median home price for the first half of 2013 to be $152,000, as compared to $140,500 for the first half of 2012. This indicates an 8.2% increase. In Washington County, the median home price for the first half of 2013 was indicated by MLS data to be $149,900. This compares to $135,000 for the first half of 2012. The increase calculates to 1 1.04%. As homeowners experience increased equity, consumer confidence should improve. Through November 2013, home sales in Arkansas were up near 12% compared to the first I 1 months of 2012. The year 2013 appears to be the best year for home sales in Arkansas since 2009 and 2010, when the government's homebuyer tax credit gave consumers extra incentive to buy a house. The multi -family residential sector of the real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties was the first sector to rebound from the recent "Great Recession". In the multi -family sector, the two -county area indicated an overall vacancy rate of 2.73% in the Third Quarter of 2013. The Fayetteville multi -family market has a good history of strength, due to the University of Arkansas, and reflected a Third Quarter 2013 vacancy rate of 2.47%. However, it should be noted that a substantial amount of new product has been added over the past 1-2t years in the Fayetteville multi -family market, and more units are in the planning stage. The Rogers, Bentonville, Siloam Springs, and Springdale multi -family markets also appear to each be in good shape with a range of vacancy rates between 2.56% and 3.54% as of the Third Quarter 2013. The Rogers and Bentonville markets in particular are doing well with vacancy rates of 2.56% and 2.67%, respectively. With respect to the commercial market in Benton and Washington Counties, the primary concerns are the professional office, retail, and development land sectors. The professional office sector of the market, Class "A" and "B" properties, has been oversupplied for some time in the two -county area. The overall vacancy rate for Class "A" and "B" professional office space for the First Quarter of 2013 was slightly above 15%. The rate for Class "A" space alone was reported at 13.2%. These rates are for investment grade, non -owner occupied space. Obviously, job creation is critical to the absorption of office space. It should be noted that the overall professional office vacancy rate was thought to have peaked in mid/late 2010, with vacancy slowly decreasing since that time. The retail sector of the commercial market had been the strength of the market through the first half of 2008; however, in the second half of the year vacancy began to rise. In the Fourth Quarter of 2009 the overall vacancy rate in this sector of the market was estimated between 15% and 16%. Obviously, problems in the national economy impacted the local retail community. The overall vacancy rate in the retail sector has slowly declined since 2010 and -was -near 10% (Class "A" and "B" combined) in the First Quarter of 2013. This, too, is for investment grade, non -owner occupied space. It should be noted that the reported vacancy rate for Class "A" retail space in the First Quarter of 2013 was 6.5%. Commercial development land must also be considered. The two areas of concern are in the north part of Fayetteville and the southwest part of Rogers. Land that was acquired at the peak of prices in 2005/2006 continues to periodically face refinancing. With a decline in values in this sector, in order to refinance and keep loan to value ratios within bank guidelines, the borrower may have to bring funds to the closing table. This is the mark to market issue that has been discussed nationally over the past several years. The service sector of the commercial market had been a concern in Benton and Washington Counties; however, has shown improvement since 2011. This pertains to hotels/motels and restaurants. With respect to hotels/motels, the following increases in tax receipts collected between Quarter One 2012 and Quarter One 2013 were indicated: Bentonville +9,5%± Fayetteville +1 D.5%± Rogers +4.8%± Siloam Springs +7.4%± Springdale +6.6%± Restaurant tax receipts collected reflected the following increases between Quarter One 2012 and Quarter One 2013: Bentonville +1.6%± Fayetteville +.25%± Springdale and Rogers do not collect restaurant tax receipts. The service sector, locally and nationally, appears to have rebounded from the "Great Recession" sooner than originally expected. It should be noted that a new full -service hotel facility is being considered for the University of Arkansas Campus in Fayetteville. This hotel is expected to feature 125-150 beds, with 13,000f square feet of conference space. It should also be noted that the recent construction of the 2 1 C Museum Hotel in Bentonville, just off the "square" in the Central Business District, has proven to be a success. Following is a listing of building permit values -For -cities -in -Benton and Washington Counties, as indicated by the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission: NWA BUILDING PERMITS city 2007 2008 2069 2010 2011 Johnson $12,894,627.00 $11,480,561.00 $2,201,298 $3,139,035 $4,815,327 Elkins $1,448,865.00 $2,992,700.00 $1,659,255 $1,217,567 $395,100 Bentonville $175,179,387.00 $84,042,846.00 $166,253,077 $92,641,213$151,852,753 Tontitown $9,117,183.00 $12,317,817.00 $5,943,915 $4,000.663 $4,178,087 Rogers $364,610,284.00 $221,417,100.00 $66,680,186 $84,916,060 $77,350,756 Lowell $23,018,357.00 $10,507,847.00 $5,156,363 $10,280,864 $9,320,710 Siloam S rin s $26,571,074.00 $8,369,852.00 $51,494,178 $15,504,723 $33,626,432 Fayetteville $282,642,878.00 $301,388,827.00 $90,257,059 $111,470,014$140,148,788 Pea Ride $10,613,632.00 $11,617,647.00 $1,701,901 $1,315,208 $7,731,04 Little Flock $1,997,419.00 $1,801,420.00 $1,807,373 $751,034 $1,675,19 Bella Vista $39,336,280.0 $19,235,786.00 $12,059,939 $8,437,960 $7,379,000 Prairie Grove $9,276,304.00 $7,929,728.00 $3,298,300 $8,230,109 $5,208,052 Greenland $1,411,691.66 $173,470.00 $707,300 $576,269 $135,000 CaveSprings $9,715,915.00 $4,835,350.00 $6,622,764 $7,666,117 $10,281,180 West Fork $2,412,200.00 $1,568,000.00 $414,100 $713,000 $1,381,350 Goshen $4,246,683.80 $2,824,327.43 $2,104,269 $3,245,078 $1,738,686 Lincoln $2,507,545.00 $0.00 $191,944 $1,219,120 $13,256,610 Elm Springs $500,000.00 $150,000.00 $1,056,647 $870,696 $1,488,00 Farmington $11,793,393.00 $10,730,420.00 $8,577,800 $11,185,157 $6,256,614 Springdale $114,491,552.00 $111,956,457.00 $59,871,046 $46,904,148 $85,993,770 Gentry $2,034,963.90 $1,705,248.20 $526,450 $2,793,005 $2,283,500 Bethel Hei hts $5,582,958.00 $702,967.00 $675,967 $686,050 $570,721 Centerton $18,033,067.00 $9,928,847.00 $5,712,560 $15,359,184 $15,033,136 Decatur $1,150,000.00 $252,000.00 $9,471,500 $348,500 $3,097,660 Gravette $2,149,440.001 $840,115.00 $5,726,000 $1,848,347 rota► $1,132,735,699.3 $838,769,332.63 $510,171,191 $433,470,77 $587,045,81 WASHINGTON COUNTY PERMITS city 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Johnson $12,894,627.00 $11,480,561.00 $2,201.298 $3.139,035 $4,815,327 Elkins $1,448,865.00 $2,992,700.00 $1,659,255 $1,217.567 $395,100 Tontitown $9,117,18300 $12,317,817.00 $5,943,915 $4,000,663 $4,178,087 Fayetteville $282,642,878.00 $301,388,827.00 $90,257,059$111,470,014 $140,148,788 Prairie Grove $9,276.304,00 $7,929,728.00 S3.298,300 $8,230,109 $5.208,052 Greenland $1,411,691.66 $173,470,00 $707,300 $576.269 $135,000 West Fork $2,412,200.00 $1,568,000.00 $414,100 $713,000 $1,381,350 Goshen $4,246,683.80 $2,824,327.43 $2,104,269 $3,245,078 $1,738,686 Lincoln $2,507,545.00 $0,00 $191,944 $1,219,120 $13,256,610 Elm S rin s $500,000.00 $150,000.00 $1,056,647 $870,696 $1,488,000 Farmington $11,793,393.00 $10,730,420.00 $8,577,800 $11,185,157 $6,256,614 S rin dale 1 $114,491,552.00 $111,956,457.00 $59,871,046 $46,904,148 $85,993,770 Total 1 $452,742,922.46 1 $463,512,307.43 1$176,282,933 $19Z 770,8561$264,995,384 BENTON COUNTY PERMITS city 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Bentonville $175,179,387.00 $84,042,846.00 $166,253,077 $92,641,213 $151,852,753 Rogers $364,610,284,00 $221,417,100.00 $6,668,0186 $84,916,060 $77,350,75 Lowell $23,018,357,00 $10,507,847.00 $5,156,363 $10,280,864 $9.320,71 Siloam Springs $26,571,074,00 $8,369,852.00 $51,494,178 $15,504,723 $33,626,432 Pea Ride $10,613,632.00 $11,617,647.00 $1,701,901 $1,315,208 $7.731.042 Little Flock $1,997,419.00 $1,801,420.00 $1,807,373 $751,034 $1,675,196 Bella Vista $39,336,280.00 $19,235,786.00 $12,059,939 $8,437,960 $7,379,000 Cave Springs $9.715,915.00 $4,835,350.00 $6,622,764 $7,666,117 $10,281,180 Gentry $2,034,963.90 $1,705,248.20 $526,450 $2,793,005 $2,283,500 Bethel Hei hts $5,582,958.00 $702,967.00 $675,967 $686,050 $570,721 Centerton $18,033,067.00 $9,928,847.00 $5,712,560 $15,359,184 $15,033,136 Decatur $1,150,000.00 $252,000.00 $9,471,500 $348,500 $3,097,66 Gravette $2,149,440.00 $840,115.00 $5,726,000 $1,848,347 Total $679,992,776.90 $375,257,025.20 $333,888,25 $240,699,91 $322,050.43 The economic base of the region consists of four basic areas: First, agricultural production with the primary commodities being beef cattle, dairy cattle, and poultry. The general offices of Tyson Foods, Inc., the largest poultry producer in the world, are located in Springdale in Washington County. Benton and Washington Counties have a considerable amount of rural acreage and, therefore, it would stand to reason that agriculture would be important to the area. There is also some cropland in the area, primarily green bean and orchard production (grapes). According to the USDA, Benton and Washington counties had total agricultural sales in 2007 of $433,957,000 and 417,965,000, respectively. Second, influence from the University of Arkansas located in Fayetteville. Total enrollment for Fall 2013 at the University was 24,537, an increase of 5.8% since the Fall 2012. The University provides considerable employment opportunities for area residents. It is not uncommon for residents of the outlying areas of Benton and Washington Counties to work at the University. A second public academic institution, the Northwest Arkansas Community College, is located in Bentonville. Fall 2013 enrollment for the school was indicated to be 8,020, a decrease of 3.8% from the Fall 2012. In addition to the main campus, the NWACC also has branch campuses located in Springdale, Rogers, and Farmington. NWACC is considering the purchase of an acreage site located in the southwest part of Springdale for the construction of a new Washington County Campus. Third, recreational usage primarily in the northeast part of Washington County, and the southeast, east, and northeast parts of Benton County. This recreational usage is primarily provided by Beaver Lake, a Corps of Engineer Reservoir on the White River. Beaver Lake affords typical fresh water sports such as boating, fishing, skiing, swimming, etc. Each of the major cities in the two -county area also has recreational amenities. It should be noted that Arvest Baseball Park opened in the Spring of 2008 in the southwest part of Springdale. This baseball park is the home of the Northwest Arkansas Naturals (Minor League AA Affiliate of the Kansas City Royals). The location is at the southwest corner of Watkins Avenue and 56`1' Street, just west of I- 540. Completion of the Don Tyson Parkway/1-49 Interchange, just southeast of the baseball park, is expected in 2014. Fourth, the large number of manufacturing businesses and industries located within the two counties. Again, residents of outlying areas of the two counties will commute to Fayetteville, Springdale, Rogers, Bentonville, etc, to work at these facilities. The general offices of Wal- Mart, Inc., the world's largest retailer, are located in Bentonville. Wal-Mart has had a tremendous impact on the area, particularly Benton County. Over the past several years, Wal- Mart vendors have been locating branch offices in the Benton County area in order to better service their account with Wal-Mart. Both professional office and residential construction increased significantly due to the influx of these suppliers. The general offices of J.B. Hunt, Inc., a major trucking company, are located in Lowell. As previously indicated, the general offices of Tyson Foods, Inc., the world's largest poultry processor, are located in Springdale. Wal-Mart, J.B. Hunt, and Tyson Foods are each Fortune 500 Companies. The presence of these companies drives demand for lawyers, accountants, architects, hotels, restaurants, retailers, etc. Most of the major industries are located in the larger cities in the counties. According to the 2002 Economic Census, total value of shipments by manufacturers in Benton County was $2,615,524,000. According to State & County QuickFacts, total value of shipments by manufacturers in Washington County in 2007 was $3,497,554,000. Retail sales estimates for Benton and Washington Counties for 2007, based on State & County QuickFacts, were $2,390,591,000 and $2,723,279,000, respectively. The following table represents major employers in the MSA (as of 2012): Employer # of Em to eest 5ectorlProduct Main Location Wal-Mart Stores (Home Office, DC's & Stores 28,000+ Retail Bentonville Tyson Foods i2,000+ Protein Processing/Marketing Springdale University of Arkansas 4,000+ Education Fayetteville Simmons Foods, Inc. 3,900+ Poultry Processing Siloam Springs J.B. Hunt Transport Services 2,600+ Transportation Lowell Washington Regional 2,100+ Health Fayetteville Geor e's Inc. 2,000+ Poultry Springdale Northwest Health Systems 1,900+ Health Bentonvillel5 rin dale Mercy Health Systems 1,500+ Health Multiple Arvest Bank 1,500+ Finance Bentonville Source: Employers; Local Chambers of Commerce In addition, Northwest Arkansas is the home of several satellite offices of Fortune 500 companies supplying products to Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. These Fortune 500 companies with a presence in Northwest Arkansas include: IBM, Coca-Cola, Proctor & Gamble, Pfizer, Gillette, Mattel, Hershey, Sara Lee, Kimberly Clark, Heinz, Colgate, Clorox, Ball Corp., Disney, General Mills, Kellogg, Hormel, Newell Rubbermaid, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsico, Philip Morris, etc. Construction of the Crystal Bridges Museum of American Art in Bentonville has been a plus for the Northwest Arkansas economy, particularly the City of Bentonville. This museum opened in November 2011, and was a project of the Walton family. Crystal Bridges is located near the Central Business District of Bentonville, and, along with the "Downtown Bentonville' program, has been instrumental in the revitalization of the Central Business District. There are many financial institutions in Benton and Washington Counties. These institutions have typically provided an adequate supply of funds for residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural growth. It should be noted that credit conditions tightened in 2008 as financial institutions dealt with problem real estate loans, and deteriorating economic conditions. The Federal Government infused funds into the financial market in an attempt to provide liquidity and ease credit. The major financial institutions in the area are located in Bentonville, Fayetteville, Rogers, Siloam Springs, and Springdale, with smaller banks and branches situated in many of the smaller communities. Currently, interest rates on long-term (15-30 years) residential first mortgages are generally in the 3.50% - 4.50% range. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) data indicate there are a total of 58 financial institutions in the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA. Deposits as of June 30, 2013, totaled $8,277,239-+ based on the FDIC data. Real estate development in the area has primarily been centered in the major cities, and in such smaller communities as Centerton, Farmington, Lowell, and Prairie Grove. However, rural development is also occurring with small acreage homesites visible throughout the two counties. Economic conditions at the present time are improving in the two -county area; however, the local economy has not yet frilly rebounded from the recent "Great Recession." A plus for the area is continued year over year increases in non -farm employment numbers. Sustained growth in non -farm employment will go a long way to absorb -vacant --commercial space. The long-term outlook is that economic forces will have a positive effect on real estate values in Benton and Washington Counties; however, at the present time the two -county area continues in a correction period, particularly with respect to the commercial sector. Governmental Forces:Governmental,' political; and legM' actiohs at -al levels have 'a great- impact'on property values. - The county seats of Benton and Washington Counties, as previously discussed, are Bentonville and Fayetteville, respectively. These two cities are some 20f minutes apart via 1-49. County government in each county is under the direction of the County Judge and Quorum Court. Other elected county officials include the County Clerk, Circuit Clerk, Collector, Assessor, Treasurer, Sheriff, Coroner, etc. Property taxes in Arkansas are collected at the county level and distributed to the counties, cities, and school districts. In Arkansas, all real property, except agricultural land, is to be appraised at market value. Agricultural land is valued based upon soil class productivity. The appraised value is multiplied by a 20% assessment ratio to arrive at the assessed value. The assessed value is then multiplied by the appropriate millage rate to arrive at the annual property tax. However, in 2001, a tax relief act was passed in Arkansas, which limits the annual increase in property tax from the base year. A new term was created, called Taxable Value. Taxable Value is now multiplied by the applicable millage rate to arrive at the annual real estate tax. The annual property tax is due by October 15th in the year after it is levied. Individual property taxes in Benton and Washington Counties have generally increased over the last several years due to continuing reappraisal; however, it should be noted that both Benton and Washington Counties made adjustments in real estate appraised values for property tax purposes due to the recent "Great Recession." Benton County does not have county zoning at the present time. Washington County; however, passed an ordinance introducing zoning regulations to unincorporated parts of Washington County. This zoning ordinance became effective in December of 2007. This zoning is enforced by the Washington County Planning Board. The major cities in the area also have zoning regulations. There are no adverse legislative restrictions on the use and development of real property in the area. However, it should be noted that some of the cities in Benton and Washington Counties have established Overlay Districts which place limitations on development of lands within the established districts. Benton and Washington Counties are considered to have adequate medical, school, lodging, and religious facilities to service the `Trade Area. The Following table reflects area schools' enrollments for the previous years: Area School Fayetteville Public Schools 41' 8,566 Fall 2010 8,838 Fall 2011120131 9,017 9,142 9,421 Springdale Public Schools 18,188 18,810 19,381 20,1141 20,547 Rogers Public Schools 13,774 14,145 14,145 14,454 14,757 Bentonville Public Schools 13,701 14,147 14,144 14,893 15,114 University of Arkansas - Fayetteville 19,849 23J99 23,199 23,199 24,537 Northwest Arkansas Community College Rogers/Bentonville 1 8,006 1 8,365 1 8,528 1 8,341 8,020 John Brown University -Siloam Springs J 2,073 1 2,134 1 2,130 1 2,130 2,183 Source: Schools' Administration Offices There are also private church schools in operation in the two -county area, as well as charter schools. There are a total of five charter schools in Benton and Washington Counties, with additional schools planned. Fall 2013 enrollment at the area charter schools was reported at 2358, Public utilities available in the rural areas of Benton and Washington Counties include electricity and telephone service. Natural gas and public water are also available in certain areas. Public sewer is available in the major cities and in some of the smaller communities. Overall, governmental forces in the area provide a positive effect on real property values. Lack of public water and sewer in certain rural areas is a drawback. However, the Two Ton Water Project and Benton -Washington County Water Authorities are addressing rural water needs in the two counties. Envitonmental :Farces Both natwaf aril mean made ,envnonmental forces influence real property values,,.- Env lronmental I forces'i`ncIude ci matic$Econdttions, topography and: soil, natural barriers to future deVelopment,plrmary transportation systems, and the nature and desirability'ofthe imt ediate area surrounding�a�property File two -county area has relatively warm summers and mild winters. High temperatures in surnmer are often accompanied by high humidity. The average daily temperature is about 57 degrees. Each year there are about 58± days when temperatures go above 90 degrees and typically only a few days when temperatures drop to freezing or below; however, the past few years have seen cold extremes where the temperature has dropped below freezing on several days. The area has an average of 4 to 5± inches of snow annually, although the past few years have also exceeded this. Rainfall averages around 45± inches annually. The following map illustrates the relationship between the cities and counties of the MSA (the four -county MSA is outlined in black): . .. • , •�- r.. �,� �M i .mow .r oul r_h•n - The area is part of the Ozark Highlands. In Benton County, topography ranges from broad plains and rolling hills in the western and central parts to rocky, rough, steeper hills in the east. Much of the eastern one-third of the county is covered by Beaver Reservoir. The elevation increases from west to east and ranges from 1,000± to 1,700f feet above sea level. The elevation of Washington County also varies from 1,000t to 1,700t feet. In general, the topography of Washington County is rough along the western, eastern, southern, and northwestern boundaries. Extending through the heart of the county, from the Oklahoma line to the City of Springdale, is a plateau -like area consisting of rolling, reasonably level land. The City of Fayetteville, located in the edge of the Boston Mountain Range, is quite hilly. Soil and subsoil conditions within the two counties range from fair to good for agricultural purposes. There are natural barriers to real property development in the area. These consist primarily of mountainous regions, rivers, etc. However, many of these barriers have a positive effect on agricultural usage. The primary transportation routes in the two counties are 1-49 and U.S. 71 B (north -south) and U.S. 412 (east -west). From Fayetteville north to Bella Vista. I-49 provides divided highway access. South from Fayetteville, 1-49 provides divided highway access to Interstate 40 at Alma. U.S. 71 south from Fayetteville was made a Scenic Byway in 1998. Divided highway access is now available from the region to Fort Smith to the south via 1-49/40 and to Little Rock to the southeast via I-49/40. Also, U.S. 412 provides divided highway access from Tontitown westerly to Siloam Springs near the Oklahoma State Line. Divided highway access is available westerly from the region to Tulsa, Oklahoma. U.S. 71 B, 1-49 and U.S. 412 are each heavily traveled traffic arteries. U.S. 71 B traverses Fayetteville. Springdale, Rogers, Bentonville, and Bella Vista, U.S. 412 traverses Springdale, Tontitown, and Siloam Springs. Construction on a new phase of U.S. 412 east of Springdale was completed in 2001. U.S. 412 is now 5 lanes or divided highway from U.S. 71 B cast to just cast of the small community of Hindsville. Construction is near complete for an extension of the U.S. 412 divided highway to the east to near Huntsville. _ U.S. Highway 62 and State Highway 16 in Washington County also provide east -west access, as do State Highways 12, 102, and 264 in Benton County. In addition, there are other state highways as well as county roads providing adequate access throughout the area. Proposed major highway construction in the two -county area includes a Bella Vista Bypass and a northern Springdale Bypass. With respect to the northern Springdale Bypass, it appears that the segment of the highway west of 1-49 (between 1-49 & U.S. 412) will be constructed prior to the segment east of 1-49. The timing of completion of the Bella Vista Bypass and the west segment of the northern Springdale Bypass is not known. It should be noted that construction of additional lanes to I-49 is also proposed in Benton and Washington Counties. Finally, several of the cities in the region are in the process of improving/constructing new transportation routes within their municipalities. A new airport for the region opened in November 1998. The Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport (XNA) is located near the small community of Highfill in the northwest part of the region. Total construction cost was estimated near $109± million. Some 2,185=i: acres were involved. There are two runways, both 8,800t feet in length by 150'f in width. There is also a 75' x 8,800'± taxiway. The terminal building was indicated initially near 69,000± square feet in size; however, has been expanded adding a new terminal. The new terminal reportedly cost $20- 25 million, and allowed parking space for twelve additional planes. The addition reportedly added 51,000± SF of building area. Direct flights are now available to many of the major MSA's across the country. In 2012, the airport served some 1,135,023f passengers. Through November 2013, the airport is reported to have served 1,069,198 passengers. A new transportation route to the airport is also projected. This new route is to run northwesterly from the west segment of the northern Springdale Bypass. The new route will likely intersect the northern Springdale Bypass near State Highway 112 (north -south route). State Highway 264 currently provides access to the south entrance to the airport, while State Highway 12 provides access to the north entrance. Growth has occurred toward the airport, especially along State Highway 12 from Bentonville. The airport has exceeded initial projections on the number of people utilizing the facility. The two -county area is reasonably well located and is within relatively short driving times of major metropolitan areas. Driving time to Tulsa is less than 2t hours, to Little Rock is 2.5-3f hours, and to Kansas City is 3-4t hours. Environmental forces, for the most part, are considered favorable for real property development in the area. CONCLUSIONS Each of the major forces affecting real property values has been discussed in this section. The conclusion is that these forces appear, basically, to favorably influence real property values in the area with the possible exception of current economic conditions. The trend in Benton and Washington Counties, overall, had been upward through 2005 and into 2006. The long-term outlook is still considered good; however, currently the real estate market in the two -county area, particularly the commercial sector, is in a correction period. This correction period is the result of excessive supply brought to the market in the 2003 to early 2006 time period, and has been prolonged by the slow improvement in overall economic conditions. Oversupply problems first became evident in the single-family and professional office sectors of the market. The professional office sector still faces oversupply issues; however, conditions have continued to improve since late 2011. The single-family residential sector also experienced improvement in 2012 and 2013, and appears now to be on the upswing. The Class "A" retail sector had been the strength of the commercial market through the first half of 2008; however, vacancy rates increased during the second half of the year and, as economic conditions continued to deteriorate, remained at higher than desired levels through 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012. It should be noted; however, that the retail sector has shown continued slow improvement since 2010. The multi -family residential sector had been very healthy in the Northwest Arkansas Area for several years. As a result of the introduction of substantial new product, the multi -family sector experienced increasing vacancy rates in 2007. Higher than norm vacancy levels continued through 2008, 2009, and 2010. However, significant improvement has occurred in the multi- family residential sector since mid 2010. This sector of the real estate market was the first to rebound from the "Great Recession". Finally, the majority of industrial growth has been limited to the expansion of existing industries. There is also substantial vacancy in the office/warehouse sector of the real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties at the present time; however, this sector of the market has also improved since late 201 l . The Benton -Washington County Area continues to experience a favorable interest rate cnviromnent, which is a positive demand indicator. In addition, year on year non -farm employment numbers reflect good positive growth. Employment obviously impacts population growth. The latest census figures are through 2010. At that time the Fayetteville -Springdale - Rogers MSA reflected a total population of 465,780. The unemployment rate for the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA remains favorable relative to the national and state levels. The December 2013 unemployment rate for the MSA was reported at 4.9%. For December 2013, the State of Arkansas reported an unemployment rate of 7.2%. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported the United States unemployment rate at 6.5% for December 2013. These represent non -seasonally adjusted rates. The current correction period in the Benton -Washington County real estate market is expected to continue in 2014. As previously stated, the long-term outlook for the Northwest Arkansas Area is considered good. 5 7 and. i M•__ 'Se- w jl r , 1 tY li v T � ., ; � ,�Ujir JQ JI AA I _ CO I71 II w;!f _ r I Ir ups ,r_ Lm s i•. �r ��' �� R�'..j•' I Im t�tio, i � mJ! any l(asooM �� tom- 3, _ aAy .;}aJana'� II Ji Gn N__.�' � I /' iLJ Market Area is defined as: `The area associated with a subject property that contains its direct competition. "3 The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. Fayetteville, the Washington County Seat, had a 2010 population of 73,580t, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The City of Springdale is located just to the north of Fayetteville and had a 2010 population of 70,747f. Fayetteville and Springdale lie within Washington County; the extreme northern portion of Springdale extends into Benton County. The indicated 2010 populations of Washington and Benton Counties were 203,065± and 221,339±, respectively. Washington, Benton, and Madison Counties, in Arkansas, and McDonald County, in Missouri, comprise the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA (FSR MSA). The 2010 population of the MSA was approximately 465,780±. The May 2014 unemployment rate for the Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA was indicated to be 4.9% (preliminary, not seasonally adjusted). The Market Area appears to consist of properties located south of East Joyce Boulevard, west of North Crossover Road (State Highway 265), north of East Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), and east of North College Avenue (U.S. Highway 71 B). The Market Area is considered to be near 80%t built-up. Each of the Market Area. boundaries represents a primary roadway. East Joyce Boulevard represents a five -lane roadway that runs in an east -west direction in the northern part of the Market Area. East Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), also runs in a generally east -west direction in the southern part of the Market Area. East Mission Boulevard alternates between two and three lanes. North College Avenue (U.S. Highway 71 B) and North Crossover Road (State Highway 265) represents four to five lane roadways in the western and eastern parts of the Market Area, respectively. Interstate 49 is the principle traffic artery serving the F-S-R MSA, and is situated just west of the Market Area. It should be noted that Interstate 49 was recently known as Interstate 540; however, 1-540 was rededicated as 1-49. Access to 1-49 is available in the northwest part of the Area. The City of Fayetteville recently completed construction of "fly over" that connects North College Avenue to the Fulbright Expressway. Construction of this project began in 2013, and was completed in early July 2014. Plans have been submitted for development of a Whole Foods grocery store located along the west side of North College Avenue, just south of the "fly over." The plans call for a 35,500f SF grocery store, along with two other smaller retail buildings to be constructed on the 6.6± acre site. The site is currently improved with a former automobile dealership building that has been vacant for several years. The exact timeline for this project is unknown. 3 Appraisal Institute, live Dielionar, nfRerd Estate Annraisat — Fifth Edilion. (Chirago: Appraisal hvsthtRe, 2010). P. 121. 58 The predominant property uses in the Market Area are residential and special-purpose in nature.- _ - Both uses are primarily situated along secondary roadways; however, are also situated along/near primary roadways. The majority of residential uses in the Market Area are older; however, there is some evidence of new residential development in the Market Area. A recently completed subdivision, known as "Cottages at Old Wire", is located along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of East Mission Boulevard. This subdivision addresses the $270,000 to mid $300,000's home price range. This subdivision is located adjacent to the north of Clarence Craft Park. Clarence Craft Park is a 4.75:h acre park that includes a gazebo, picnic area, and water feature. There are also some multi -family residential uses in the Market Area. Special-purpose uses include religious facilities, schools, public parks, Paradise Valley Athletic Club, etc. Gulley Park is the largest public park in the Market Area. The park consists of27f acres and includes a 1.5± mile multi -use trail, playgrounds, gazebo, pavilion, restrooms, picnic area, etc. Commercial development is situated along each of the primary roadways in the Market Area, especially North College Avenue and East Joyce Boulevard, The Northwest Arkansas Mall is located just northwest of the Market Area along the west side of North College Avenue, just North of East Joyce Boulevard. Commercial development located along East Joyce Boulevard in the Market Area includes professional and medical offices, retail strip centers, restaurants, bank branches, etc. North College Avenue has similar types of commercial development; however, this area of development is considered to be somewhat older. Another area of significant commercial development in the Market Area is the intersection of East Mission Boulevard and North Crossover Road. This area includes several commercial properties including: a Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market, Walgreens', First Federal Bank Branch, Arvest Bank Branch, Firestone Tire Center, Harp's Grocery Store, restaurant uses, c-stores, etc. The topography of the Market Area is undulating/near level to gently rolling/sloping, for the most part. Soil and subsoil conditions are not generally considered adverse to building construction. Portions of the Market Area are situated within the 100-Year Flood Zone. Overall, drainage is considered adequate. Utilities available in the Market Area include public water and sewer, electricity, natural gas, cable television/communications, and telephone service. The Market Area is in the growth stage of its life cycle; however, growth has slowed significantly since the late 2006/early 2007 time period. The Northwest Arkansas real estate market remains in a correction period, particularly the commercial sector, due to oversupply issues which occurred in the mid part of the past decade. The correction period was prolonged by slow improvement in overall economic conditions. New construction virtually came to a halt, with the exception of special-purpose projects, and this continued through the "Great Recession." Property values in every sector of the market started downward, and continued downward through mid-2010, and even into 2011 for some areas. It should be noted there are definite signs of improvement in overall economic conditions. "Total non -farm employment in the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA is actually at a higher level as of the effective date of this report than in the 2006 time period. The Fayetteville -Springdale -Rogers MSA has the lowest unemployment rate of all MSA's in the State of Arkansas. The multi -family sector became the first sector to rebound, and is showing good strength at the present time. The single-family sector has slowly 59 followed, with significant improvement visible in 2012 and 2013. There--have-also-been some positive signs in the commercial sector (declining vacancy rates and some new development); however, the commercial sector as a whole is still lagging. There is still a significant amount of Other Real Estate Owned (OREO) being held by financial institutions in Northwest Arkansas. With the on -going improvement in the residential sector in Northwest Arkansas, the commercial sector is expected to continue to slowly improve. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. The Market Area is considered well located in the eastern part of Fayetteville. The physical characteristics of the Market Area are considered adequate for development. Overall, the outlook for the Market Area is considered positive. 60 AERIAL N IEW OF SUB.11.4"CT 4 '7 rA 'n;arr.,IktinR,r i tL:41�1 (.ern! _ t DESCRIPTION OF SITE AREA/DIMENSIONS/SHAPE: The subject consists of approximately 10.95± acres (ACS), or 476,982± square feet (SF), of land area; this is based on Assessment Records. As discussed in the "Identification of Subject" section, the legal descriptions indicate different land sizes; however, there appears to be some discrepancies with the legal descriptions. The land sizes indicated by Assessment Records appear to be a more accurate representation of the actual subject land size, and are relied upon for the purposes of this report. An Extraordinary Assumption of this report is that the land sizes are as indicated. A Survey Plat of the subject property is recommended to confirm the reasonableness of this Assumption. The subject land area is allocated as follows: 2634 North Old Wire Road- 0.50f acre (AC); 2648 North Old Wire- 0.75::E AC; and, excess land- 9.70±'ACS. Dimensions of the subject site, starting in the southwest corner of the site and moving in a clock -wise direction, are approximately as follows: 244.9'f (NE) x 210.4'f (NW) x 251.7'f (NE) x 221.8'f (SE) x 245.1'± (NE) x 217.7':L (E) x 1,190.5';L (S) x 855.4't (NW). The dimensions were obtained from the Washington County GIS Parcel Map, and represent estimates of the subject boundaries. The subject site has an irregular "L" shape, overall. Each of the subject homesites is considered to be near rectangular in shape. An illustration of the subject site can be found on the Aerial presented on the preceding page. FRONTAGE/ACCESS: The subject site has approximately 251.T± of frontage along the southeast right-of-way of North Old Wire Road in the northwest part of the site (homesites); the frontage is considered near road grade. North Old Wire Road represents a two-lane, secondary roadway through the Market Area. There is a drainage ditch located along the North Old Wire Road frontage. The subject site has additional frontage along the west right-of-way of the Magnolia Drive cul-de-sac in the southeast part of the site (excess land); this frontage is also considered near road grade. As of the effective date of this report, vehicular access to the subject site is not available via Magnolia Drive. Finally, the subject site has approximately 855.4'f of frontage along Gulley Park; this represents the southwest boundary of the site. Visibility of the subject site is considered average. TOPOGRAPHY/SOILS/DRAINAGE: The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. Each of the homesites is undulating/near level near the dwellings; however, slope downward gently from east to west some 2-3'f west of the dwellings towards North Old Wire Road. The subject excess land slopes downward gently generally in a north to south direction. The highest elevations in the northern part of the site are near 1,350'f and the lowest elevations are in southern part of the site are near 1,320'f. The subject acreage is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. There is a former wet weather pond in the southern part of the site; however, the selling broker indicated the pond has been dry for a significant period of time. Approximately 0.3f AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site (excess land) is located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AU. Soil and subsoil conditions are assumed to be adequate 62 for building construction; however, a soil test report on the site has not been examined. Building improvements are located on the subject site, and nearby sites. Please see the Flood Zone Map appearing in the Addenda. Overall, site drainage is assumed to be adequate. STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Sidewalks - _Yes X No Curbs - _Yes X No Street Paving - _Concrete X Asphalt On -Site Parking - Asphalt/Gravel Off -Site Parking - None UTILITIES: Water System - X Public _Commercial _Individual Sewer System - X Public _Commercial _Individual Gas - X Yes No Electric - X Yes No DISCUSSION OF ECONOMIC INADEQUACIES: As stated previously in this report, the real estate market in Northwest Arkansas remains in a correction period, particularly the commercial sector, due to oversupply issues that occurred in the mid -part of the past decade. Slow improvement in economic conditions prolonged the correction period; however, national and local economic conditions have improved over the recent past and continued improvement is expected. This has resulted in significant improvement in the overall residential sector. However, the commercial sector is still lagging. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. EASEMENTS OR ENCROACHMENTS ON SITE: Typical utility easements are believed to be situated along the boundaries of the subject site. The City of Fayetteville Utility Map indicates a 6" sewer line runs along the northwestern boundary of the subject excess land; this also represents the southeastern boundary of the homesites. No adverse easements or encroachments were noted on the property inspection; however, a Survey Plat of the subject site was not provided to the appraiser. ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATIONMAZARDS: There are many materials that can be considered as hazardous. When these materials are present at or near a property, a property can be categorized as contaminated. This can potentially affect the value and/or marketability. Some examples of hazardous materials include mold, asbestos, PCPs and radioactive waste. Hazardous conditions are often in the form of soil or water contamination, and are rarely detectable without testing by a qualified expert. The existence of potentially hazardous material or contaminated conditions present at the subject or adjoining properties was not observed by us; nor do I have knowledge of the existence of such materials or conditions on or near the property being appraised. 63 -. ----- However, I am not professionally qualified to detect such substances or-situations.-l- have made my appraisal subject to the assumption that there are no environmental problems or concerns related to the subject or nearby properties. An expert in this field may be required to confirm the reasonableness of this assumption. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. CONCLUSIONS: The subject site relates reasonably well to its surroundings and is considered to be functionally adequate for certain types of residential and/or special- purpose uses. ZONING The subject property is zoned RSF-4 (Residential Single -Family- Four Units Per Acre) by the City of Fayetteville. According to the Zoning Ordinances published by the City of Fayetteville: "The RSF-d Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the development of loty density detached dwellings in suitable environments, as ivell as to protect existing development of these types. " Permitted uses in the RSF-4 district include: city-wide uses by right; single-family dwellings; and, accessory dwellings. Various conditional uses, including utility facilities, cultural and recreational facilities, government facilities, etc. are outlined in the Zoning Ordinances. The indicated maximum density of the RSF-4 district is four units per acre; and, the minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet (0.181 acre). The minimum lot width is indicated to be 70 linear feet. Discussions with the City of Fayetteville Fire Marshal's office indicated that subdivisions with 30f or more lots are required to have two points of ingress/egress. Based on the zoning requirements the subject excess acreage (9.7f ACS) could have a maximum of 38t lots; however, it would be difficult to achieve the maximum density allowance on the subject excess land. The City of Fayetteville Planning Department indicated subdivisions typically achieve just over 50% of the maximum density allowance, which would indicate approximately 20-251: lots for the subject excess acreage. Therefore, it is my opinion the subject excess land would not need a second point of ingress/egress. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The present use of the subject property is assumed to be legal and permissible. Possible firture uses of the subject excess land include residential and special-purpose uses. ASSESSMENT AND TAX The subject consists of three parcels in Washington County. The following information was obtained through Washington County Assessment Records: 64 Acreage App 2634 NORTH OLD WIRE SKETCH File No 5301 Property Address 2634 01d Wire Road City Fayetteville County Washington State Arkansas Zip Borrower WA - - f�- --- Y.— E_endeNGlient City of Fayetteville Appraiser Name Reed & Associates, Inc. tpp f6v 6 x b 15.V Scale: 1 = 13 AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN Code _ Description _ Size Net Totals r Breakdown Subtotals GLA1 First Floor 1316.00 1316.00 First Floor P/P Porch 72.00 72.00 28.0 x 47.0 1316.00 GAR Garage 372.00 372.00 OTH Shop 460.00 Enclosed Porch 210.00 670,OD TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) Rtb W Anaulls — 1316 1 Calculation Total (rounded) 1316 APEX SOFTWARE OW-434 9M _ .. 2648 NORTH OLD WIRE SKETCH File No 5301 Property Address 2648 Old Wire Road City Fayetteville County Washington State Arkansas Zip a .. _Borrower NIA — — — --- — . .....................__.-.._.-.,-....... ..-. ---............ ._.—.._.-..--..._._........... ........ ... ...... ....... ,,....... ...... .-......... ! nderl_Client_City of Fayetteville Appraiser Name Reed & Associates, Inc. 21. V AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY Code Description Size Net Totals GLAl First Floor 1551.00 1551.00 P/P Porch 84.00 B4.00 GAR Garage 580.00 580.00 OTH Enoloced Porch 340.00 Greenhouse 152.00 492.00 TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) 1551 Stale: 1 c 13 LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN Breakdown Subtotals First Floor 26.0 x 29.0 754.00 16.0 x 42.0 672.00 5.0 x 25.0 125.00 3 Calculations Total (rounded) 1551 R-1. mil. APEX SOFTwaAEeaaas ma Ap.7100- eocc DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS The subject property is improved with two single-family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316f square feet (SF) of living area, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551t square feet (SF) of living area. Each of the subject dwellings vary with respect to property characteristics and will, therefore, be discussed separately. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316f square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 372f SF attached garage, 460± SF attached shop, and 210t SF enclosed porch. Site work consists of excavation, fill, and preparation. The foundation is a reinforced concrete block perimeter crawl space, with a wood floor structure. The dwelling represents Class "D'', wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, laundry room, and storage closet. Kitchen appliances include an oven, range, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood and carpet floor cover; painted gypsum board and wood panel wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. The plumbing system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. The dwelling utilizes central heat/air conditioning systems. The electrical system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. Wall and ceiling insulation was noted throughout the dwelling. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963t. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. External obsolescence is indicated due to current market conditions in the Northwest Arkansas real estate market, as well as overall economic conditions. No functional obsolescence is indicated. The overall effective age of the dwelling, in my opinion, is approximately 40± years. This includes physical deterioration and external obsolescence. The remaining economic, life is projected to be 15-L years, based on a 55-year economic life. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551± square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 580± SF attached garage, 340-L SF enclosed porch, and 152f SF attached greenhouse. Site work consists of excavation, fill, and preparation. The foundation is a reinforced concrete block perimeter crawl space, with a wood floor structure. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, one half bathroom, a living room, den, kitchen, and storage closet. The laundry room is located in the garage. Kitchen appliances include an oven/range combination, built-in microwave, dishwasher, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood, carpet, and tile floor cover; painted and wail papered gypsum board wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. The enclosed porch has aggregate flooring. The plumbing system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. The dwelling utilizes central heat/air conditioning systems. The enclosed porch is heated and cooled by a wall unit. The electrical system is assumed to be adequate for the present use. Wall and ceiling insulation was noted throughout the dwelling. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1961±. Discussions 68 with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. This dwelling -is --- considered to be in average to good condition, overall. External obsolescence is indicated due to current market conditions in the Northwest Arkansas real estate market, as well as overall economic conditions. No functional obsolescence is indicated. The overall effective age of the dwelling, in my opinion, is approximately 28f years. This includes physical deterioration and external obsolescence. The remaining economic life is projected to be 27f years, based on a 55- year economic life. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road is accessed via an asphalt paved drive, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road is accessed via a gravel paved drive. A 1,2001 square foot (SF) metal shop building is located behind the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road. The shop building has concrete floors, two- 8' manual overhead doors, electricity/plumbing, and is insulated. The shop building includes a 2-fixture restroom, and has wall heat and air units. In addition, there is a built-in vacuum system in the shop building. Discussions with the property owner indicated the "shop" building was originally constructed 15:1: years ago; the shop building is considered to be in average condition. Other site improvements include: 238± SF wood storage building; 529f SF wood lean-to agricultural building; well house; landscaping; garden; water feature; agricultural, chain link, and PVC fencing; etc. HISTORY As of the effective date of this report, subject property was under the ownership of Allen & Mary L. Dunn. The 9.7± acres (ACS) representing the subject excess land transferred to this ownership on April 27, 1973, via a Warranty Deed filed at Book 93/Page 19847 in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. Revenue stamps affixed to the deed are not entirely legible. The Grantors were Fred and Floy Gulley. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road transferred to this ownership on June 22, 1959, via a Warranty Deed filed at Book ''716'Pagc 444 in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. Revenue stamps affixed to the deed are not entirely legible. The Grantors were also Fred and Floy Gulley. Finally, the dwelling situated at 2936 North Old Wire Road transferred to this ownership on May 20, 1993, via a Warranty Deed filed at Book 93/Page 27263 in the Washington County Circuit Clerk's office. No revenue stamps were affixed to the deed. The Grantor was Allen Dunn. The subject is currently listed for sale by Bassett Mix & Associates. The list price is indicated to be $1,200,000 for the whole property. The listing broker indicated the property owners are not interested in sub -dividing the property. Based on a document provided by the listing broker, the property owners offered to sell the property for $1,100,000 to the City of Fayetteville for expansion of Gulley Park. The terms of the offer were a down payment of $450.000, with the remaining $650,000 being paid over 5-years with 4.0% interest. A copy of the offer letter is presented in the Addenda. The listing broker indicated several local developers have expressed interest in purchasing the property; however, details pertaining to these discussions were not disclosed to the appraiser. The listing broker indicated an out of state developer has made a "full price" offer to purchase the subject property; however, the listing broker declined to provide a written copy of this offer. The listing broker did indicate that each of the potential buyers has 69 expressed interest -in razing the improvements situated -at 2634-North-Old Wire Road to provide -- better access to the subject excess land. No sales or transfers involving the subject property were noted in the three-year period of time preceding the effective date of this report. The subject is not under contract to sell, to my knowledge. Based on Assessment Records, the dwelling located at 2634 North Old Wire Road was originally constructed in 1963±. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. Based on Assessment Records, the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road was originally constructed in 1961±. Discussions with the property owner indicated this dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. 70 PART'I'IL - ANALYSIS OF DATA AND OPINIONS OF THE APPRAISERS 71 HIGHEST AND BESTUSEAND IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS. The definition of highest and best use is as follows: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, that is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum productivity."A In estimating Highest and Best Use, the appraiser goes through essentially four stages of analysis: 1. Physically Possible - To what uses is it physically possible to put the site in question? 2. Legally Permissible - What uses are permitted by zoning and deed restrictions on the site in question? 3. Financially Feasible - Which possible and permissible uses will produce any net return to the owner of the site? 4. Maximally Productive - Among the financially feasible uses, which use will produce the highest net return or the highest present worth? Highest And Best Use "As Vacant" Physically Possible The subject site consists of approximately 10.95+ acres of land area. The shape of the subject site is irregular, overall. Dimensions are considered adequate for building development. The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. The subject site is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. The subject site has vehicular access/frontage along the southeast right-of-way of North Old Wire Road in the northwest part of the site; this frontage is considered near road grade. There is a drainage ditch located along the North Old Wire Road frontage. The subject site has additional frontage along the west right-of-way of the Magnolia Drive cul-de-sac in the southeast part of the site; this frontage is also considered near road grade. As of the effective date of this report, vehicular access to the subject site is not available via Magnolia Drive. The southwestern boundary of the subject site has frontage along Gulley Park. Approximately 0.31 AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site is located within the 100- Year Flood Zone "AE". All typical city utilities are located at/near the subject site. Physically possible uses of the subject site include those within size/Flood Zone limitations. Legally Permissible The subject site is zoned RSF-4 (Residential Single -Family- Four Units Per Acre) by the City of Fayetteville. Permitted uses in the RSF-4 district include: city-wide uses by right; single-family 4 Appraisal Instirrrte. The Uictionary of Real F;siate Apnrarsal — Fifih Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal lnslarrte, 2010). N. 93. 72 dwellings; and,__accessory_dwellings. Various conditional uses, including utility facilities,.----_ cultural and recreational facilities, government facilities, etc. are outlined in the Zoning Ordinances. The indicated maximum density of the RSF-4 district is four units per acre; and, the minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet (0.18± acre). The minimum lot width is indicated to be 70 linear feet. Discussions with the City of Fayetteville Fire Marshal's office indicated that subdivisions with 30± or more lots are required to have two points of ingress/egress. Based on the zoning requirements the subject excess acreage (9.7f ACS) could have a maximum of 38f lots; however, it would be difficult to achieve the maximum density allowance on the subject excess land. The City of Fayetteville Planning Department indicated subdivisions typically achieve just over 50% of the maximum density allowance, which would indicate approximately 20-25± lots for the subject excess acreage. Therefore, it is my opinion the subject excess land would not need a second point of ingress/egress. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The physically possible and legally permissible uses of the subject property are those within size/Flood Zone limitations, and that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements. Financially Feasible The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical addresses of the homesites are indicated to be 2634 & 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated adjacent to the north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Commercial uses were noted along primary roadways in the Market Area. Overall real estate market conditions in Northwest Arkansas have previously been discussed in this report. Basically, the multi -family residential sector was the first to rebound from the recent "Great Recession". This sector is strong at the present time; however, due to new product added, vacancy rates in some cities are beginning to creep upward slightly. The single-family residential sector has seen significant improvement over the past couple of years, and economist are predicting continued improvement through 2014. The commercial sector is seeing some improvement; however, overall, is still lagging. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to continue through 2014, and possibly beyond. Despite improvement in the residential sector, the overall N.W. Arkansas market still faces an over -supply of single-family lots at the present time. There has been improvement in certain price points; however, supply still exceeds demand. Developers/builders over -addressed the demand for new lots/homes during the 2003-2007 time period. Streetsmart NWA (real estate research company located in Fayetteville) tracks the status of Active and Inactive Subdivisions in the N.W. Arkansas Area. Following is a breakdown of the lot status in Benton and Washington Counties, respectively, as of the recent past: 73 'Benton -County Active Subdivision SFD Lot Status Starts , Under Construction Complete Occupied Total 04 2013 5,542 117 �481 227 _ _ 022013 6,010 101 514 160 04201 6,221 87 402 170 022012 6,6m 95 322 119 w 9,852 � 9,321 8,792 8.357 w 16.219 16,106 15.672 15,493 Note: The activity of Springdale lots are all reflected in the Washington County lot status totals- If interested in the activity of Springdale lots located in Benton County, please see the Springdale active subdivision table located elsewhere in this report. 4r6 Quarter 2013 Market Insight report published by Sireeismart NIVA, LLC Washington County Active Subdivision SFD Lot Status Empty Starts Under Construction Complete Occupied Total 04 2013 4.204 62 224 147 Q2 2013 4,350 77 251 95 Q4 2012 4,571 47 202 ill Q2 2012 4,777 67 197 84 5.619 5,773 5.600 5.429 10.256 10,546 10,531 10,554 Note: The activity of Springdale lots are all reflected in the Washington County lot status totals If interested in the activity of Springdale tots located in Benton County, please see the Springdale active subdivision table located elsewhere in this report. ,' Quarter 2013 Market Insight report published by Sireetsmart N VA, LLC As can be seen from the preceding tables, the number of Empty Lots decreased from Q4 2012 to Q4 2013 in both Benton and Washington Counties. The most recent quarters researched also show a decrease in the number of empty lots in both counties. Dwelling starts increased in both Benton and Washington Counties, between Q4 2012 and Q4 2013. As of the most recent quarters researched, dwelling starts also increased in Benton County while dwelling starts in Washington County decreased somewhat. These factors represent positive indicators for the Northwest Arkansas residential sector. The number of complete (but unoccupied) dwellings increased year over year since Q4 2012 in both Benton and Washington Counties. There is some concern that new home construction in recent quarters has outpaced the demand for single- l1amily residential dwellings; this would represent a negative indicator for the Northwest Arkansas residential sector. The figures presented in the preceding exhibits pertain to Active Subdivisions (subdivisions that have experienced at least some vertical building construction; these subdivisions are considered to primarily make the market at the present time). If lots in Inactive Subdivisions (S/D's with no vertical building construction) are considered, the overall lot supply would increase substantially. The Fayetteville market, like the rest of the Northwest Arkansas Area, faces an over -supply of single-family lots at the present time. There were 3,326± lots in Actives Subdivisions in Fayetteville in Q4 2013; only 2,147f (64.5%) of which were occupied. This also indicates that there were 1,179± un-occupied lots in Active subdivisions as of Q4 2013. Gross lot absorption, or lot demand, over the past four quarters was 342± lots in Fayetteville; this is an average of approximately 85.5t lots/quarter in Fayetteville since Q4 2012. Based on FayetteviliCs overall supply/demand over the latest year, a 3.5f year (1,179 - 342) absorption period is indicated. The indicated absorption period represents a significant decrease from previous quarters. It is not clear if the recent absorption rates will continue in the future at the high rates. Lot absorption 5 Subdivision that has experienced some vertical building construction 74 for_Q3-Q4 of 2014 was 1.28t lots, while lot absorption for_Q.1-.Q2_of-20.1-4_was 2.14f lots; this — obviously represents a significant decline over a short period of time. These statistics are for all of Fayetteville, and includes only those lots in Active Subdivisions. Including Inactive subdivisions would obviously increase the indicated absorption period. A breakdown of lot status with respect to subdivisions in Fayetteville as of the 4t' Quarter 2013 has been retained in the appraisal file. Historical employment data provided by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) indicated that the FSR MSA experienced year -on -year declines in non -farm employment from May 2008 until January 2011. However, these estimates were revised in February 2011 and now show year -on - year employment growth from May 2010 to June 2011 in the MSA. There was a slight decline in year -on -year employment growth in the July -September 2011 time period; however, October 2011 through May 2014 reflected growth in year -on -year non -farm employment in comparison to October 2010 through May 2013. Overall, total non -farm employment in the Fayetteville - Springdale -Rogers MSA was actually at a higher level as of the effective date of this report than in the 2006 time period. Area residential demand is much lower than what was experienced in the 2004 to mid-2006 time period; however, there has been some improvement in the recent past. Although supply still exceeds demand, there have been a few new residential subdivision projects started in the recent past. Most of the newer projects appear to address the $150,000+ to $200,000 home price range. A recent article published in the Northwest Arkansas Business Journal indicated there has been some improvement in demand for the high end single-family residential dwelling home price range, as well. The majority of residential uses in the Market Area are older; however, there is some evidence of new residential development in the Market Area. A recently completed subdivision, known as "Cottages at Old Wire", is located along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of East Mission Boulevard. This subdivision addresses the $270,000 to mid $300,000's home price range. This subdivision is located adjacent to the north of Clarence Craft Park. Clarence Craft Park is a 435± acre park that includes a gazebo, picnic area, and water feature. The physically possible, legally permissible, and financially feasible use of the subject site is considered to be single-family residential or special-purpose development, as demand dictates, within size/Flood Zone limitations and that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements. Maximally Productive In my opinion, the highest and best use of the subject property "as a vacant site" is to hold for future mixed -use (residential, special-purpose, or a combination of these uses) development, as demand dictates, within size/Flood "Lone limitations, that complies with the RSF-4 zoning requirements, and that conforms to the Market Area. 75 Highest -And Best Use "As Improved" Again, the subject consists of approximately 10.95f acres (ACS), or 476,982f square feet (SF), of land area. The subject site is improved with two single-family residential dwellings, and related site improvements. The subject land area is allocated as follows: 2634 North Old Wire Road- 0.50� acre (AC); 2648 North Old Wire- 0.75t AC; and, excess land- 9.70± ACS. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,316f square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 3721 SF attached garage, 4607L SF attached shop, and 210=L SF enclosed porch. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, a living room, kitchen, laundry room, and storage closet. Kitchen appliances include an oven, range, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood and carpet floor cover; painted gypsum board and wood panel wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963+. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road consists of approximately 1,551:� square feet (SF) of living area. In addition, this homesite includes a 580f SF attached garage, 340± SF enclosed porch, and 152f SF attached greenhouse. The dwelling represents Class "D", wood frame construction. The exterior is brick veneer, with composition shingle roof cover. The layout of this dwelling includes three bedrooms, one bathroom, one half bathroom, a living room, den, kitchen, and storage closet. The laundry room is located in the garage. Kitchen appliances include an oven/range combination, built-in microwave, dishwasher, and refrigerator. The interior finish includes: wood, carpet, and tile floor cover; painted and wall papered gypsum board wall cover; and, painted gypsum board ceilings. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1961t. Discussions with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. This dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. The dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road is accessed via an asphalt paved drive, while the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road is accessed via a gravel paved drive. A 1,200f square foot (SF) metal shop building is located behind the dwelling located at 2648 North Old Wire Road. The shop building has concrete floors, two- 8' manual overhead doors, electricity/plumbing, and is insulated. The shop building includes a 2-fixture restroom, and has wall heat and air units. In addition, there is a built-in vacuum system in the shop building. Discussions with the property owner indicated the "shop" building was originally constructed 15f years ago; the shop building is considered to be in average condition. Other site improvements include: 238± SF wood storage building; 529J7 SF wood lean-to agricultural building; well house; landscaping; garden; water feature; agricultural, chain link, and PVC fencing; etc. 76 The improvements do suffer._from..Accrued Depreciation including physical deterioration and external obsolescence (due to market conditions); however, in my opinion, there is still significant remaining economic life. In my opinion, the "highest and best use" of the subieet is continued single-family residential use of the homesites, and to hold the subject excess land for future single-family residential or special-purpose development, within size/Flood Zone limitations, that comply with the RSF-4 zoning requirements, and in conformity to the Market Area, as demand dictates. The agricultural improvements situated on the subject excess land are older and in poor condition. These improvements, in my opinion, do not provide any contributory value to the subject excess land. 77 LAND VALUE In the valuation model, land value estimate is a separate step. Sales comparison is the most reliable way to estimate land value. When few sales are available, or when the value indication by sales comparison needs additional support, other procedures may be applied. The other procedures used to obtain land value indications are allocation, extraction, subdivision development, land residual, and ground rent capitalization. The techniques are defined as follows: f . Sales Comparison Approach is the process of deriving a value indication for the subject property by comparing market information for similar properties with The property being appraised, identifying appropriate units of comparison, and making qualitative comparisons with or quantitative adjustments to the sale prices (or unit prices, as appropriate) of the comparable properties based on relevant, market -derived elements of comparison". 2. Allocation is a method of estimating land value in irhich sales of improved properties are analyzed to establish a typical ratio of land value to total property vahte and this ratio is applied to the property being appraised or the comparable sale being analyzed.? 3. Extraction is a method of estimating land value in irhich the depreciated cost of the improvements on the improved property is calculated and deducted from the total sale price to arrive at an estimated sale price for the land.' 4. Subdivision Development is a method of estimating land vahte When subdivision development is the highest and best use of the parcel of land being appraised. When all direct and indirect costs and entrepreneurial incentive are deducted from an estimate of the anticipated gross sales price of the finished lots (or residences), the resultant net sales proceeds are then discounted to present value at a market -derived rate over the development and absorption period to indicate the value of the land 5. Land Residual Technique is a method of estimating land vahre in which the net operating income attributable to the land is capitalized to produce an indication of the land's contribution to the total property.10 6. Ground Rent Capitalization is a method of estimating land valrte; applied by capitalizing ground rent nt a market -derived rate. This method is useful when comparable rents, rates, and factors can be developed from an analysis of sales of leased land or other market Sour•ces.11 In this section of the report, the estimated value of the subject site "as vacant" is established first utilizing comparable land sales in Fayetteville. The subject site value "as vacant" is then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. The following comparables are 6 Appraisal institute, The Dictionary fReat Estate Appre isat - Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute. 2010), A 175 7 Appraise! lrrsritnre, The Dicrkman olReal Estate Appraisal - Fiftlr Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 7 ' Appraisal institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Apor-aisa! - Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Inslame, 1010), P. 73 9 Appraisal institute, 77re Dictionan, of Real Estate Appraisal — Fifth F,chtion, (Chicago: Appraisal Insrawe, 1010). P. 188 10 Appraisal Institute, The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal - Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute. 2010), P. 109 I I Appraisal Institute, ?hue Dictionayl o Rea! Estate Apprnisrr! -Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Apprerisal Institute, 2010), P. 92 78 utilized in estimating the market value of the subject site "as vacant" by the Sales -Comparison Approach: 79 (.vriwurl.�lIwvifrc Ilrr: I{ .I11tini1si rlra6011: 1h,5r., ,, 1 1 - r \i;..^,, II I+-•-s:k %,Itli 117A 111r1"W'd Ihlr• 1 rlti I .Ititi r , •I ( Atli Fit 1. h r I;I 1_; 1'AtA.rllxk: I v.—II : P I �A ti 41 . • +t Record r+, I Ir II, Moak: ti11 I IN1(1N111IV)% �.III'llate: LIr*':II11 'Iil' Flnalleilg!: flrllrtc:fl,. t}r\iar4.tt lilrtt, ls:kle 1,11t'r; <' I ` 11„1+ 1 %1101wu1r Blur: r, ;r, t7,Is , %dill'u-41 I%alr Prrr r' ' 1 Right% ( r611%r%rrl- I r Illy li 14t 4ttklrlr: I'L :Ir-1 �=1 ! w,1' - .. .r 1 rri frfa 114.11: '•t1 ";1''11. 1.t: r t• il.ranIAvr `,I .1. 1 r F'ROPIKIN 111(IIt%I%1141% 1arrs� l a10+1'4irc: r,- I II 1 •I " '-I Indicator% Ir41H) 11-11111; e; 01„1-'11 1lItiA h 1i Ilex%, ,f I11 Sale lnikruL; I> I -1. Id 1,1 ^ .,I •un It i .en w' 1wu1 . vale Prite l.iokk 1 Ilrhlw�l',1IThti: .' ,,, ►IIJUSIrrl pair 1'rlfr GIO%. \rIr: ' kllulr,; i ..11 r %dlu+ted SAV Pr Ice I.IIO•N w1 Kcnlarl,.; 1 \� � 17 \f41U f- , . : \ r, ; , I1Y_ Irl i:l''',i.� I i. T:_ ;.1 :+:l �.: ,I •.! 1 . 1•J I .;:t, .e,l, 1 I: ..1, .. ,I�. � � t�, I�, ,rr,l.f. .,, I•. �., �, ,1.,1�' � r. �, ��. ., � 1�, . ,. I � _ � .., ^. Ate. . r. •+� • � r. . _�� , �' � - i at - JCJ 08N r � " *J p@»eHCIL © \ \, � / L a & _ / 4 � \ - LU 2 _ `_- 7 dD 2 - 70- ± ) : LLJ : 2 � @ } § » 2 _ . $tv M a / - E m / IT - » / u ¥ - - v } 2 \ - p t > � - © M MINI % It ) M- ('()%I P kR A IIIJ I. Ns D s � I I- S IN , I I I i i I - t , i r -1 , , : : ! i %, ! i , t r ..i r) ! I- I: t ! 7 J ,I l I.: w II [TFC ',C I I I CJ i r 1 11", C t I' I L ' - \4 1 T 1 . L' \ � i I I I I I COMPARAULF LAND SALES SUMMARY c No. I 2-- Pala' ( of Sale 17 I4 i 1 '1 1 %.Ile% PrIve tl,f 01 1 %I, B I d ant! \k I r 0 RA Ilk 47h I L �:Il I i: LI C I I C J l%4 %I I ,1,. 01. s %I I % I IIL LI I I Lt k I I I :1:0 I "N I I I )I IN. k' IL' I ICI'L. { �( I k t IL111d IIIII-CLIL. I 11C tiit:IHLAII 01 L0III;)JI I I111 i I I . 11 f II I I I L:, I I rk ': I I { I l I I I I I IN . I t 1 1 ;IC . I I'l-I'llud I. Rivill": 1 0] I,1 th(; "k, 'trp':j" I'' Jjj4L: III,' 11,111' IL "01 1 u:d 1111. 01 -1:11; I" ISL 1111.11 L 114 1114 1 w, I k. Nhp kvI: cmt1i114m%'- L! t I .1 L t 1 -11 fltT I. .i 1 11..t I 'IT, III-, LIA L' L 'L� -I L r 11 1 11 1 J_' ' 11 A 1 1 �),L'I" 11 t Cif I L I I I I 1 I T I L I IIt, 1 1 I : I I L I I L7 t I I. Ilii L I I c �1 I i q 0 P) k lv�l 1 11 r I I alI 1 2 1 J I ! I k I ;II:' L III 1111 i 1i4 R I I fot -.1 11 t phd % 11 1. 111 1 1" r1t, 1 1 111 ti A I 11W-1- 111 1 i,11111I'.- 11}4I Iddt C:1'4."w cd I I I Q }11 I I e ', I tC I I L- II Ili I C Jt L 1.1 1 1 1 lL I I \,I-IS11 t IIII i� Ir L II' -J; I I I I I I Cd Lk I I t t I I 111 11, ' I I I I I l I I 'rL'Il' '111111 Al I I 'r I Ili 1 Arl•, 11 IT I' jIF I T1 I: 0 1 1 1 l t I I I I III I i LIIII 11 1 J' il Ill'' TI, 117 T' I I T N . I I (State Highway 45) and Winwood-Drive, in Fayetteville. This location is approximately 0.85± - - - — -- mile south of the subject property. Sale One is Iocated adjacent existing residential subdivisions, and was replatted into five single-family residential lots subsequent to its sale. Overall, Sale One is considered reasonably similar to the subject with respect to location/appeal. Sale Two is located along the east side of Old Wire Road, just north of Mission Boulevard (State Highway 45), in Fayetteville. This location is approximately 1.2f miles south/southwest of the subject. Sale Two is located adjacent to the north of Clarance Craft Park. Sale Two was purchased for development of "Cottages at Old Wire" Subdivision. Overall, Sale Two is considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to location/appeal. Sale Three is located north of East Township Street and east of North Crossover Road, in Fayetteville. This location is approximately 1.Of mile south of the subject. Sale Three is located between Savannah Estates Subdivision and Candlewood Subdivision. Access to Sale Three is southerly from Brookbury Woods Subdivision, or northerly from Township Street along a private drive. Overall, Sale Three is considered much inferior to subject with respect to location/appeal due to its limited road frontage/access. In summary, each of Sales One and Two is considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to location/appeal, while Sale Three is considered much inferior to subject. Paired Sales Analysis, matching Sales Two and Three indicates an upward adjustment of near 65% to Sale Three in comparison to Sale Two. Again, Sale Two is considered reasonably similar to subject while Sale Three is considered much inferior to subject. Therefore, Sale Three is adjusted upward by 65% in comparison to the subject. This adjustment appears to be somewhat excessive; however, is supported by Paired Sales Analysis. An argument could be made that the subject is somewhat superior to each of Sales One and Two as it is located adjacent to Gulley Park; however, no adjustment can be supported based on MLS data. In fact, the average per SF home sales price since January 2013 with 0.5t mile of each of Land Sales One and Two was slightly higher than the average per SF home sales price within 0.5�: mile of the subject. This will be considered in the reconciliation. Physical Characteristics: With respect to physical characteristics, the necessary categories of adjustment are land size, topography/composition, and Flood Zone. The subject site is considered reasonably similar to each of the comparables with respect to utility availability, zoning, etc. • Land Size: The subject (10.95f ACS) is larger than Sale One (2.33± ACS), and smaller than each of Sales Two (13.63t ACS) and Three (20.99f ACS). The tendency in the market is that as a property's land size increases, its price per unit decreases, and vice versa; this is for otherwise similar properties. Sales Analysis supports that as a property's land area approximates doubling, its price/AC decreases about 10%f. Based on this premise, the following adjustments are applied: downward 22% to Sale One; upward 3% to Sale Two; and, upward 9% to Sale Three. + Topography/Composition: The topography of the subject site is undulating/near level to gently sloping, overall. The subject site is cleared, for the most part, with some trees along the North Old Wire Road frontage and also in the southeast part of the site. Each of Sales One and Two is considered undulating/near level to gently rolling in topography 86 and- was..primarily_cIeared at the time of sale. Sale Three is considered rolling/sloping in—.---- - - - topography and was densely wooded at the time of sale. Overall, each of Sales One and Two is considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to topography/composition, while Sale Three is considered inferior to subject. Based on Sales Analysis, a 15% upward adjustment to Sale Three is warranted. No adjustments to Sales One and Two are warranted. • Flood Zone: Approximately 0.3f AC in the extreme southern part of the subject site is located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". Sale One is not indicated to be located within the 100-Year Flood Zone. Approximately 1.18f acres of Sale Two are located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE", and approximately 1.61± ACS of Sale Three are located within the 100-Year Flood Zone "AE". Overall, Sale One is considered slightly superior to the subject, and each of Sales Two and Three is considered inferior to subject with respect to the Flood Zone category. Paired Sales Analysis, matching Sales One and Two indicates an upward adjustment of 15% to Sale Two (inferior) in comparison to Sale One (slightly superior). Therefore, Sale One is adjusted downward by 2.5% in comparison to the subject, while Sale Two is adjusted upward by 12.5% in comparison to the subject. Based on the preceding analysis, Sale Three (inferior) is also adjusted upward by 12.5% in comparison to the subject. Conclusions: The following adjustment grid is indicated: 3 -. Sales Price/Acre $92,275 $60,573 $35,731 Property Rights $0 $0 $0 Conditions of Sale/Financing $0 $0 $0 Market Conditions $0 $0 $0 Ad'usfecl Prieel,Acre �, �_ ' :., - $22,275.-_ :.: ,_. $60 573: $35,734 Location/Appeal $0 $0 $21,439 Physical Characteristics Land Size ($20,101) $1,817 $3,216 Topography/Composition $0 $0 $5,360 Flood Zone ($2 3(17) $7,572 $4,466 indicated Value/Acre ? $69 669 $69,961' $10,211 The range of the adjusted comparable sales is $69,668/acre to $70,21 ]/acre. The mean of the sales is $69,947/acre, while the median is $69,962/acre. Each of the sales is given some consideration. Sale Three represents the most recent transaction. Each of the comparables is located in close proximity to the subject. Sale Two received the lowest gross adjustment. In addition to the comparable sales presented and analyzed, two comparable listings in close proximity to the subject are discussed. Detailed MLS profiles of the comparable listings are presented in the Addenda of this report. The first comparable listing presented is for approximately 50.24f ACS of vacant land along the northeast side of Old Missouri Road, just north of Old Wire Road. This property is listed by Downtown Properties Real Estate Group for $3,900,000, or $77,628t per acre. The listing broker indicated approximately 10± acres along 87 -- -Old Missouri Road could be rezoned for potential light commercial -use, while a -preliminary subdivision concept for the remainder of the acreage could support 135f single-family residential lots. The list price was established considering approximately $150,000 per acre for the 10± ACS with commercial potential, and $60,000 per acre for the balance of the site. The acreage is adjacent to Butterfield Elementary School. The site is undulating/near level to gently sloping in topography, and primarily wooded. The listing broker indicated the property has seen significant interest from local developers for small parts of the property; the listing broker further indicated the offers have been near/slightly below list price. No further information pertaining to the offers was available to the appraiser. The second comparable listing is for approximately 5.368± ACS of land at the northeast corner of Old Wire Road and Oak Bailey Drive. This property is listed by Legend Realty for $400,000, or $74,516�L per acre. The property is improved with a 1,665f square foot (SF) dwelling and 1,408f SF shop building; however, the listing broker indicated no consideration was given to the improvements in the list price. The site is undulating/near level to gently sloping in topography, and primarily wooded. The listing broker indicated the property has seen significant interest, despite being listed on the market for a short period of time. Based on the preceding analysis, it is my opinion the indicated per acre value for subject site "as vacant" is $70,000. Therefore: 10.95f Acres @ $70,000/Acre = $766,500 Rounded To $765,000 The preceding represents the estimated market value estimate of the fee simple interest in the subject site "as vacant". Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The preceding subject site value "as vacant" is allocated as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.501 AC) $ 50,000 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75f AC) _ $ 75,000 9.7± ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 88 COSPATPROACH.r. In the Cost Approach, an estimated reproduction or replacement cost of the building and land improvements as of the date of the appraisal is developed, together with the losses in value that have taken place due to wear and tear, design and plan, or neighborhood influences. To the depreciated building cost estimate is added the estimated value of the land. The total represents the indicated value by the Cost Approach. 'rhe following terms utilized in the Cost Approach require defining: "Reproduction Cost is the estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of the effective date of the appraisal. an exact duplicate or replica of the building being appraised, using the same materials, construction standards, design, layout, and quality of ivorkmanship and embodying all the deficiencies, superadequacies, and obsolescence of the subject building" 11" "Replacement Cost is the estimated cost to construct, at current prices as of the effective appraisal date, a building with utility equivalent to the building being appraised, using modern materials and current standards, design, and layout. "13 "Entrepreneurial Incentive" is the amount an entrepreneur expects to receive for his or her contribution to a project. Entrepreneurial incentive may be distinguished front entrepreneurial profit (often called developer's profit) in that it is the expectation of f tture profit as opposed to the profit actually earned on a development or improvement. "1 4 "Accrued Depreciation is the difference betiveen the reproduction or replacement cost of the improvements on the effective date of the appraisal and the market value of the improvements on the same dale. „t3 "Effective Age is the age of property that is based our the aniount of observed deterioralion and obsolescence it has sustained lvhich may be dierent from its chronological age. "'r "Economic Life is the period over which improvements to real properly contribute to property value" 17 "Economic Age -Life Method is the method of estimating depreciation in lvhich the ratio between the effective age of a building and its total economic life is applied to the current cost of the improvements to obtain a hunp-.sum deduction. "is Subject land value has previously been estimated in the Land Value Section. In the Cost Approach, the Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements are estimated, utilizing Marshall Valuation Service (national cost service) and a market derived entrepreneurial incentive. Accrued Depreciation attributable to the improvements is then estimated based upon 12 Appraisal Insuture, Pie Dicrionars, of Real Lsiate Anpraisa! — Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appansal Insrinae, 2016). P. 169. 13 Ibid., P. 244. "Appraisal lnstiture. 7'he Dicrionam o!'Real Estate Appraisal - rifllr Edition. (Chicago. Appraisal Instinae. 2010), P. 67. 15 Ibid., P.d. 16 Ibid„ P.9, 17 Ibid- P.92. 18 lbid., P. 8. 89 the Economic Age -Life Method, -and -is -subtracted from Replacement Cost New to arrive at Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements. The estimated land value is then added to the Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the improvements to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject property by the Cost Approach. The estimated market value of the subject whole property was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. IMPROVEMENTS Marshall & Swift Residential Cost Handbook, Pages Average -1 through Average -29, Page F-1, and Page F-3 indicate the following: 2634 N. Old Wire Road Base Price Per SF = $93.00 Multipliers Cost 1.01 Area .93 x 0.9393 _ Adjusted Price Per SF = $87.35 _.- x 1,316f SF = $1 14,953 Plus: Kitchen Appliances = $2,510 Fireplace/Insert = $1,810 Garage/Shop- 832t SF @ $23.78 - $19,785 Enclosed Porch - 210± SF @ $32.85 $6,899 Estimated Cost New = $145,957 Plus: Entrepreneurial Incentive a 10% (From Market) $14,596 Replacement Cost New = $160,553 Less: Accrued Depreciation (40:b Yr. [_ff. Age - 55+ Yr. Inc. Life = 72.7%) _ $1 16.722 Depreciated Replacement Cost New = $43,831 Plus: Estimated Contributory Value Of Site Improvements $20,000 Estimated Present Value Of Improvements = $63,831 Say $64,000 90 2648 N. Old Wire Road Base Price Per SF = - $93.00 Multipliers Cost 1.01 Area .93 x 0.9393 Adjusted Price Per SF = $87.35 x 1,551� SF = $135,480 Plus: Kitchen Appliances = $3,310 Fireplace/Insert = $1,810 Garage — 580f SF @ $23.78 = $13,792 Greenhouse — 152t SF @ $45.50 $6,916 Enclosed Porch — 3401 SF @ $42.30 $14,382 Estimated Cost New = $175,690 Plus: Entrepreneurial Incentive @ 10% (From Market) — $17.569 Replacement Cost New = $193,259 Less: Accrued Depreciation (28f Yr. Erf. Age _ 55f Yr. [:c. Life — 50.9%) = 98 369 Depreciated Replacement Cost New = $94,890 Plus: Estimated Contributory Value Of Site Improvements & Shop Bldg. _ $50,000 Estimated Present Value Of Improvements = $144,890 Say $145,000 The Cost Approach is summarized as follows: SUMMARY OF COST APPROACH Dwelling/Site Improvements = $209,000 Land Value — $765,000 Total = $974,000 01 7WO14 Gmail - FW; Gulley ParkE)pansion Project Email: treed@reedappraisal.biz Phone: 479-521-6313 Ext. 102 Fax: 479-521-6315 httpsJ/mai l.g oog le.corTVmai IlulY?ui =2&i1c-029a4bedcb&uevn- pt&search= i nboy&msg=146fcebl aaafOl c1 &sim1=145►cebl amfOi c i 212 7IM14 Gmail - FW; GulleyPark E)pansion Project Gm- ail +, r,c;�k,�la• FW: Gulley Park Expansion Project Tom Reed <TReed@reedappraisal.biz> Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 11:01 AM To: katie.hampton85@gmail.com Fronx Edmonton, Connie[mailto:cedmonston@fayetteville-ar.gov] Sent: Thursday, 3uly 03, 2014 9:46 AM To: Tom Reed Subject: RE: Gulley Park Expansion Project Thank you Tom. I am waiting to hear back from the Dunn family if they will not sell the property until the City receives the appraisal and makes an offer on the property. - From: Tom Reed[mailto:TReed@reedappraisal.biz] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 9:33 AM To: Edmonston, Connie Subject: Gulley Park Expansion Project Connie, Wewill complete the appraisal in connection with the above captioned project by 1:00 P.M. on Friday, July 18th. Our fee will be $3,500. 1 originally told you we accept credit cards for payment, but forgot we discontinued this a short time ago. Thank -you, TOM REED, MAI, CRE Reed and Associates, Inc. One Steele Plaza 3739 N. Steele Boulevard, Suite 220 Fayetteville, AR 72703 https:flmail.goog le.coWrnai ULLV? Pi=2&i k=029a4bedcb&a ev4r-- p1&search=inboArrsg=146fceb1aaaf91c1&siml= 146fceblanaf01c1 112 7WO14 Gmail - FW: Gulley ParkE"nsion Project ail 1. bYC :cxr8le FW: Gulley Park Expansion Project Tom Reed <TReed@reedappraisal.biz> To: katie.hampton85@gmail.com From: Edmonton, Connie[mailto:cedmonston@fayetteviile-ar.gov] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 12.15 PM To: Tom Reed Cc: Tom Reed; Bearden, Alan; Spann, Alan Subject: Re: Gulley Park Expansion Project Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:45 PM David Mix requested that you call him when you need to get on the property so he can notify the Dann Family. David's cell is 841-7377. Thank you. Sent from my iPad On Jul 3, 2014, at 11:46 AM, "Spann, Alan" <aspann@fayetteville-ar.gov> wrote: Mr. Reed, My name is Alan Spann and I am writing to you on behalf of Connie Edmonston. The City would like for your company to proceed with the appraisal of the property adjacent to Gulley Park, according to the details in the email exchange between yourself and Connie. Within the appraisal, we would like for each home and corresponding lot to be valued separately from the open acreage. We have created P.O. # 14-303 for $3,500 for the appraisal by Reed & Associates. Thanks very much and let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Alan Spann Recreation Superintendent City of Fayetteville, Arkansas T 479.444.3471 1 F 479.521.7714 Website I Facebook I Twitter I Instagram I YouTube httM-1/mail.googIe.corrYmaillul0/? n=2&ik=029a4bedcb&rievj--pt&search=inbox&rrsg=146fd4a77bed3062&sim1=146fd4a77bed3062 112 List Agt: Gina Lyle -Bailey 479-846-2222 List Ofc: Legend Realty Ofc/Agt: 479- 267-5911479- 263-1739 Co Agt: Agt Fax: 479-267-5912 Agt Email: ginalyle42@yahoo.com Owner: Finance Terms: Appraiser: Showing Instructions: Apmt Only LBSUP Call to Show: LP/Acre: $74SiS.648 Subject To: NOT APPL Commissions/Fees Agency. ER Buyer Agent Fee; 3 variable; N Contingency: Virtual Tour: SP/Acre: List Date: Pend Date: Wdrwn Date: Exp Date: Days Pending DOM: 07/10/14 6 SubType: RESO Location: Description: NO School Dist; Fay -Ville Elementary School: Middle School: High School: Taxes: 620 Assmnt: Assmnt Yr: Mill Rate: Disclosure: Y Mobile Hm Allowed: N Covenants: Flood Zn: Zoning: Parcel ID: 765-16035-000 County: Washington Lot: 0 Block: 0 Subdivision FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS Legal: PT NE NE 2.368 A, PT SE NE 3 AC Acres: 5.368 Lot Dim; 5.368 AC Surveyed: Frontg: Lot Desc: NSUBDV SEC Aso/POA Fee: Exclusions: Aso/POA Paid Assoc. Fees Intl: Financing. Electric: ONSITE Lake/Property: Gas: ONSITE Water/Sewer: SITEWTR EXSTSPTC TV HkUp: Ponds: NO Roads: PUB Streams: Topography: OPEN PTWOOD Minerals: LINK Fencing: NO Public Remarks:Small house on property (no value), 32x44 garage/shop, barn. Shop is in good condition with steel beams & concrete floors. House is in need of repairs. Current appraisal. Great place to build a home. See MLS 711509 MLS Remarks:Make appointment to show. Seller is related to agent. Directions: From I-49, go 71B (College) to Rolling Hills, turn left, go to Old Missouri & turn left onto Old Wire Rd. property on the left past Oak Bailey. Sell Ofc: Seliing Office Name: Sell Agt: Selling Agent Name: Buyer Name: Copyright 2014 Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. 07/ 1612014 11:44 AM Irwin Partners Tom Reed 07/16/14 3739 N. Steele Blvd. Ste 220 ML# 699818 List $3,900,000 Current Fayetteville, AR72703 Phone: 479-444-9111 Fax:479-444-4112' 2900 OLD MISSOURI RD FAYETTEVILLE AR 72703 Land List Agt: Mitch Weigel 479-443-1313 List Ofc: Downtown Properties Real Estate Groul Ofc/Agt: 479-443-1313 479-466-2369 Co Agt: AgtFax: 479-527-7128 Agt Email: mitch@dpreg.com Owner: Finance Terms: Appraiser: Showing instructions: Call to Show: LP/Acre: $77627.389 SP/Acre: Subject To: NOT APPL List Date: 02/01/14 Pend Date: Commissions/Fees Agency: ER Wdrwn Date: Buyer Agent Fee: 2.5 Variable: N Exp Date: --- Days Pending: Contingency: DOM: 165 Virtual Tour: SubType: RESD DEVPOTNL Location: Description: NO School Dist: Fay -Ville Elementary School: Middle School: High School: Taxes: 3,900 Assmi Assmnt Yr: Mill Rate: Disclosure: Y Mobile Hm Allowed: N Covenants: Flood Zn: N Zoning: RES Parcel ID: County: Washington Lot: 0 Block: 0 Subdivision 36-17-30 Fayetteville Ou Legal: PT W/2 NE & PTSE NW 52.24A Acres: 50.240 Lot Dim: Irregular Surveyed: Y Frontg: Lot Desc: LEV SLP Aso/POA Fee: Exclusions: Aso/POA Paid _. Assoc. Fees Incl: Electric: Lake/Property: Gas: Water/Sewer: STRTSWR TV HkUp: Ponds: Roads: PUB PAVE Streams: Topography: LEV SLP PTWOOD Minerals: Fencina: PART WIRE Public Remarks:50+/- acres located in north Fayetteville currently zoned RSF4. Prime undeveloped residential acreage adjacent to Butterfield Elementary School, with convenient transportation corridors and access to utilities. Exact parcel size wilt determined by two splits required to separate existing structures from the property. Preliminary S/D concept layouts indicate the "potential" for between 135 and 159 lots at the properties current RSF4 zoning. Seller will consider offers on smaller parcels. 1 MIS Remarks: Parcel offered is subject to lot splits within the city of Fayetteville to separate existing structures from the property. I currently have concept designs for RSF2, RSF4 and RSF7 zoning prepared by McClelland Engineering. Directions: From Joyce in Fayetteville, south on Old Missouri, or from College Ave (Hwy 71) east on Rolling Hills to Old Missouri Rd. Sell Ofc: Selling Office Name: Sell Agt: Selling Agent Name: Buyer Name: Copyright 2014 Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. 07/16/2014 11:44 AM Personal Banking Calculators - Arvest Bank 4 Payment 31 $11,970.74 $1,137.37 $10.833.37 $330,376.14 Payment 32 $11,970.74 $1,101.25 $10,869.49 $319,506.65 Payment 33 $11,970.74 $1,065,02 $10,905.72 $308,600.93 Payment 34 $11,970.74 $1,028.67 $10,942.07 $297,658,86 Payment 35 $11,970.74 $992.20 $10,078.54 $286,680.32 Payment 36 $11,970.74 $955.60 $11,015.14 $275,665.18 Payment 37 $11,970.74 $918.88 $11.051.86 $264,613.32 Payment 38 $11,970.74 $882.04 $11.088.70 $253,624.62 Payment 39 $11,970.74 $945.08 $11,125.66 $242,398.96 Payment40 $11,970,74 $808,00 $11,162.74 $231,236.22 Payffteiit41 $11,970.74 $770.79 $11.199,95 $220,036.27 Payment 42 $11,970,74 $733.45 $11,237.29 $208,798.98 Paymen143 $11,970,74 $696.00 $11,274.74 $197,524.24 Payment 44 $11,970,74 $658.41 $11,312.33 $186,211,91• Payment 45 $11,970.74 $620.71 $1-1,350.03 $174,861.88 Payment 46 $11,970.74 $582,87 $11,387.87 $163,474.01 Payment 47 $11,970.74 $544.91 $11,425.83 $152.,048.18 Payment 48 $11,970.74 $506.83 ,$11,463.91 $140,584.27 Payment49 $11,970.74 $468.61 $11,502,13 $129,082.14 Payment 50 $11,970.74 $430.27 $11,540,47 $117,541.67 f ayment 51 $11,970,74 $391.81 $11,578.93 $105,962Y4 Payment 52 $11,970.74 $353.21 $11,617.53 $94,345,21 Payment 53 $11,970.74 S314.48 $11,656.26 $82,688.95 Payment 54 $11,970.74 $275.63 $11,695.11 $70,993.84 Payment 55 $11.970.74 $236,66 $11.734.09 $59.259.75 Payment 56 $11,970.74 $197.53 $11,773.21 $47,486.54 Payment57 $11,970.74 $158.29 $11,812.45 $35,674,09 Payment 58 $11,970.74 $118,91 $11,851.83 $23,822.26 Payment59 $11,970.74 $79.41 $11,891.33 $11,930,93 Payment 60 $11,970.70 $39.77 $11,930.93 $0.00 Grand Total $650,000.00 $718,244.36 $68,244.36 $650,000.00 $0.00 This amortization schedule is Powered by: �0TimeValue Software h ttps://www.arvest.corn/? LOAN AMOLTNT= I %2C 100%2C000.00&DOWN PAYM ENT=450°/a2C000.00& DO... 6/24/2014 Personal Banking Calculators - Arvest Bank Pf�VEST Arvest Personal Banking How much will my fixed rate mortgage payment be? This calculator computes the payments (principal and interest) for a fixed rate loan, using monthly interest compounding and monthly payments. Home price $1,100,000. Down payment450000.0t $,O % O $ Loan term 5 O Months * Ypars Interest rate 2) Show payment schedule ( COMPUTE t Your payment will be $11,970.74. Financial Details Home price $1,100,000.00 Down payment $450,000.00 Total amount financed $650,000.00 Payment amount $1.1,970.74 Total payments $718,244.36 Interest rate 4.000 % Interest compounding Monthly Total finance charge $68,244.36 Payment Summary Event Amount Term Period Load $650,000,00 1 Payment $11,970.74 59 Monthly Payment $11,970.70 1 https://www.arvest.com/?L.OANAMOUNT-1 %2C 100%2C000.00&DOWN PAYMENT=450%2C000.00&DO... 6/24/2014 David Mix From: David Mix <david@bassettmix.com> Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 12:45 PM To: Edmonston, Connie (cedmonston@fayetteville-ar.gov) Subject: FW: Message from "RNP0026732E7288" Attachments: 20140626120247942.pdf Connie, Attached please find a amortization schedule pertaining to the property that is owned by Mrs. Dunn on Old Wire Road here in Fayetteville. They have decided to offer to the City of Fayetteville the following proposal. Purchase price $1.1 million Down Payment of $450,000.00 They will carry at 4/u interest a loan to be paid out over a 5 year period in the amount of $650,000.00. They will consider monthly or yearly payments. Please see the amortization chart with the terms as described. Mrs. Dunn has an offer on the table frorn 3 local developers but she is waiting to see the response from the city. I am ethically bound to tell you that there is an offer. So this is not a sales ploy, but the truth to the matter. Their wish is for it to go to the City for the park. We need a quick response if this is even anything the City will respond to. She and the family are open to discussions on the proposal. Thank you and you may call me any time. I would appreciate it if you would run all correspondence through me as the Dunn's are a little worn out with all the people that have been contacting them about the property. You can reach me any time at 479-841-7377 Thankyou sincerely, David Mix Broker/Owner Bassett Mix and Assoc. -----Original Message ----- From: David Mix [jnailto:david@bassettm_ix.com Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 11:03 AM To: David Mix Subject: Message from "RNP0026732E7288" This E-mail was sent from "RNP0026732E7288" (Aficio MP C5501). Scan Date: 06.26.2014 12:02:47 (-0400) Queries to. lanier@bassettmix.com Print Page I of 1 Irwin Partners Tom Reed 07/03/14 3739 N. Steele Blvd. Ste 220 ML# 704776 List $1,200,000 Current Fayetteville, AR 72703 House Phone: 479-444.9111 Fax: 479-444-9112 2648 OLD WIRE RD N FAYETTEVILLE AR 72703 RESIDENTIAL List Agt: David Mix 479-521-5600 List Ofc: Bassett Mix 8; Associates Ofc/Agt:: 479-521-5600 479-841-7377 Agt Fax: 479-521-5698 Co-Agt•. Agt Email: david0bassettmix.com Owner: Finance Terms: Appr Name: Lkbx: Virtual Tour: Showing List Agent Present APP CALL NOKEY 1 nst: Call to Show: List Date: 04/21/14 List $/HtSgFt: $765.80 Pend Date: Sold $/HtSgFt: Wdrwn Date: Commissions/Fees Agency: ER Exp Date' Days Pending: Buyer Agent Fee: 2.7 Variable: N DOM:•-- 73 Contingency: Subject To: NOT APPL Type: Ranch New CDnstru: Bedrms: 3 Total Baths: 2 Apx Heat SgFt /-: 1567 Full Baths: 1 1/2 Baths: 1 Levels: 1 SgFt Source: COURT Rooms: 7 School Dist: Fay -Ville Tubs/Shwr: Combo: 1 Tubs/Shwr: Age: Apx Yr Bt: 1959 Disabled Access: N Driveway: CONC GRVL Garaoe/Cpt: 2/Attached Garage Taxes: 2100 Assmnt: Transfer Fee: Assmnt Yr: Monthly Fee: Mill Rate: Parcel ID: 76 5-1608 0-000 Liv Rm: 21,5X11 Mstr Bd: 11,SX11.5 Frml Bdrm 2: 11.SX10.5 Kitchen: 25X11 Bdrm 3: 21.SX9.5 Fam Rm: 15X14 Bdrm 4: Bonus: Bdrm 5: Oth Rm: Util Rm: 11X6 Main Level: LR KT MB 2B 3B ON UT FB 2nd Level: County: Washington Subdv: FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS 3rd Level: Acres: 10.950 Lot: Flood Zn: N Bsmt Level: Block: Covenant: N Zoning: AGR Sod Rms- Lot Dim: IRREGULAR Lndscp: Make: Appv: Disclsure: Y Lot Loc: HSPL SCHL BSNS Model #: Anchor: Lot Desc: CLR OPEN LEV VIEW Serial #: Legal: PT W/2 SE PT E/2 36-17.30 Pk Name: Amenities: ATCSTRBLINDS CELFANWDCONN Pool YIN: N Appliances: REF ELEC OVEN MW DISH Aso/POA Fee: Equipment: GDOPEN Aso/POA Paid: Hnd Amen: Assoc. Fees Ind: Com Amer PARK PLYGD Golf Course: Wter/Lke: NA Pool Type Air: 1/ ELEC Heat Sys: 1/ CEN GAS Elem Sch: Exterior: BRK FRM Patio: 1PAT COY Mid Sch: Fencing: BACK CHNLNK Roads: PUS High Sch: Fireplace: 1/ FAM GLOG Utilities: ELEC SEWAV TEL WATPU Det. Bldg: Floor: CER CRPT WOOD Wtr Htr: 1/GAS Foundation: CRWLSP Windows: VINYL 2P Exclusions: Workshop: DIET Storm Shelter: Public Remarks: THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST PARCELS OF LAND LEFT IN THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE ADJOINING GULLEY PARK. TOTAL 1S 10.95 ACRES WITH ACCESS TO ALL UTILITIES AND 2 STREET FOR ACCESS. MAGNOLIA & OLD WIRE ROAD. PROPERTY INCLUDES 2 HOLMES AND A 3SX30 SHOP WITH CONCRETE FLOORS, WATER AND ELECTRIC. 2 HOUSES ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND ADJOINING LAND IS ZONED AGRI. ABSOLUTELY THE BEST PROPOERTY FOR A FANTASTIC SUBDIVISION, MI5 Remarks: 2 HOUSES ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND ADJOINING LAND 15 ZONED AGRI. ABSOLUTELY THE BEST PROPOERTY FOR A FANTASTIC SUBDIVISION. DirecUms: MISSION TURN NORTH ON OLD WIRE OR OLD MISSOURI. TURN SOUTH ON OLD WIRE ROAD. Selling Office: Selling Office Name: Selling ID: Selling Agent Name: Buyer: Copyright 2014 Information deemed reliable but not guaranteed. 07/03/2014 9:30 AM http://nwa.mlxchange.com/5.1 1.05.35382/Search/Printl'reviewDlg.asp 7/3/2014 TOPOGRAPHY MAP STDBU N LI N E" "' PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2648 N Old Wire Rd, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 72703 �. _ FL0UDSOURCE FLOODSCAPE r 1w ETON c+ STREET N WARWICK AVE. DRIVE ¢ E FURMAN froftu `' STREET BONE I ¢ ROLLING HILLS North a( gR11fF Z o pA1YE E`� t 7f 0� w DRIVE 2. -b O 2 4 ZONE x 'EX 1.1,LE 36 f z 2 w €S �rrt1+YK '9 p1V CP ZONE AE o F W000B ZONE X r. # aRlvr; ZONE ALE ry� ' �`'�' m� so 2 Rego �, !I FLOODSCAPET"' TO.vrtsrttP sTRFEi ilred Creek Tri a rry? � � Flood Hazards Map ZONE I Q t, E Bp1S DE GENTLE OAKS LANE I Map Number Q ZONE E r3S ARC LAN-9 ( !i 05143CO21OF OAKS DRIVE a� Z I i Effective Date LOU OARS DAtIV 0 O May 16, 2008 r ii: F Sri ENT ll AY1E Flood Legend z KAiVt srs $ � i ®High flood risk w NE =,� rn y S©sue `a Lai E KANTZ W I Moderate flood risk O r :u C J N x o CAVE w Ej Low flood risk a > �I PF11Vi T[ 1102, 2 � r R�r z ry ✓�, ti -� i ,3 This repon makes no g pi � t�� m � � representations Or warranties _ ` E ZONE _ ZONE X ? 'gi'1T LArlE;,' z concemingits content, accuracy 3B2 �j or wirnoeteress. a STDBonfine.com ZONE AE � ~469.574.1234 J 1200` 18CKUY 2400- �' Y Z T98 i GHISTOL Ct ry I Powered by Floocsource � Z PLACE L! � i 877,77,FL00D Qa ^ W www.floodsource,cam / CCAIRELf)r j ® 1999-2014 SourceProse Corporation. Ail rights reserved. Protected by U.S. Patent Numbers 6631326, 6678615. 6a42698, and 7038681. WARRANTY DEED MARRIED PERSON CONVEYING SOLE OWNERSHIP WITH SPOUSE'S RELINQUISHMENT OF ALL RIGHTS AND INTERESTS KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That I, Allen DUM 1 1 heralnaller Called Grantor, for and In consideration of the bum DI One Dollar {S1.1)0) and other good and valuable censlderatlon to me \ In hand peld by - Allen Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband and wife harainafter tolled Grantee, do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto lh! aaltl Oranloe and Granlee's hairs and ass[gns, the lollowing described land, alluale in S wa`.,h gtw ,� —_ County. Slate of Arkansas, to -wit: ( 11.r•'.: RUM '93 MflY 2J. -AM 9 `o rFR �0 Part of the Northeast Quarter {NVO of the Southwest Quarter (Salsa) of Section Thirty-six (36) in Township Seventeen (17) North of Range Thirty (30) west, beginning two hundred forty-five and vile -tenth (245.1) feet west and four hundred ninety --one (491) feet North of the Southeast corner of said forty (40) acre tract, and running, thence South 12 degrees Bill" west one hundred fifty-five (155) feet for a point of beginning to the lands herein described, and running, thence North 60 degrees 58'19" West two hundred five and seventy-five hundredths (205.75) feet, more or less to the Fast right of way line of the Old wire Road; thence South 20 degrees 65'11" West with said Fast line one hundred (100) feet; thence South GO degrees 58'19" Fast two hundred (20D) feet; thence Northeasterly one hundred (100) feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easements, rights -of -way and restrictive covenants, if any. .C. t.A. ,E A.NC- TO HO:w In,- sal_ lanos and ao0ur[Cn once} tn_aeur.lc. DelunYing unto the said G:anlet- an: Gracictr's ners and ast,ilns. :... _. And I. the sa,C Grantor, here7; Coyenar: thal 1 arr. Iawlvlfy SLIMD 0 Sc­- land anc premrw,_' Ina! Inc s Un,n:Urr,terec. ano Ihac : r P tdreyer warrant and delend the title 10 :he said land} against all ICQa; CIa:ms wna:e1-U. Ano I, At said Grar.tiil, hole;,; release and relinquish. unlc• :hc $aid Gramee my dowerlcurlesy an: nuMestead in and m sail linos Maryjx . Dunn _ _ _ _ _ _ - SPOVPP 01 SatC Grania:, de riVeby relealf and rehnqulsn unto ine Salo G ante( my 11"e•:tWiesy aad n", CSIPaG in and Io :aid Ion}: and quilr:a:m wntc• sand Granlea ani inieres:, rier+: and lille i md} nay; Inerev, WfTNES5 our nands ano seal! r.. :,at (J._Y/ --- da; of _..----Flay______—_—. - -, ----- . 19 93 THIS 114STRUTA=_NT PREFARcL- oy A d-t-4 e A0ress ...._.. Allen ACKNOWLEOGMENT �uu^t1 n' ._..Wdsll1Dgxon ' �yIM1 � . Oo- lhaLrrt Y.. day nlt5__93 Defore me. a nolart ,rtchc fir: sunaht aD:e:,ree I,nuwn le me to• satis:a[iwaI drp:r:d1 I, Dt the persons ofhp es ar ,ubs_riGed 1C S t !oie�ping, msi,ur:en: ano acknpy.le-_odd mai met nac a>^Cli:C.. :he S2mr for the rvi J- Ines rin Cr In In witness- whereof : t.ereun:r. Se: my nan: and 01::1v1 seal My eomm'won sgwe>, OFFICIAL SEAL i CHERYL THOMAS MILLER NOTARY Pt1IUC:-ARKANSAS i ----"-------WASHtNGT6N.00UN7Y.__----- }- WARRANTY D ]E E DODN 526 with relinquishment of dower and homestead KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That weq Fred Gulley s and FloyGulley---------- ---- -- his wife for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar and other valuable considerations - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - to us in hand - - - paid by Allen L. Dunn and Pary L. Dunn, husband andriife- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Al Ian L. Dunn and (Nary L. Dunn, husband and wife' and unto their - - - - heirs and assigns, the following described land, situate In Washington - - - - - - County, State of Arkansas, to -wit: I'll A i)1 ...:J Uo ooi y�tte: a tAis ep,,SbL C%L,11 t al U_0-r C1RQ? [,2 Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section thirty six (36) in To ntship seventeen (17) North of Range thirty (30) tiest, described as follousr Beginning two hundred forty five and one -tenth (245.1) feet (lest and four hundred ninety one (491) feet North of O the South East corner of said forty acre tract, thence South 1206'l1" hest fiftyaline and'salien tenths(59.7)feet for a place of beginning, and running, thence North B7'37'15' West one hundred ninety eight and eighty five hundredths (198.85) feet, more or less, to East line of Old dire Road; thence South 28e55' 141- West one and eight -tenths (1.8) feet with East right of way line of said road; thence South 609Se' 19" East too hundred five and seventy five hundredths (205.75) feet; thence North 12008111" East ninety five and three -tenths (95.3) feet to the place of beginning. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said lands and appurtenances thereunto belonging unto the said - - - - - - - - Allen L. Dunn and PAary L. Dunn, husband and wife, and unto their - - - - - - - - heirs and assigns, forever. And we .the said grantors, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - s - hereby covenant that we are lawfully seized of said land and premises; that the same is unlneumbered, and we will forever warrant and defend the title to the said lands against all legal claims whatever. And I, the said Floy Gulley - - - - - - - - - - wife of Fred Oulley - - - - - - - - - In consideration of said sum of money. do hereby release and relinquish unto the said Allen L. Dunn and !Nary L. Dunn, husband and wife, - ----------------- --- - --- - - - ail my interest, right, title and dower and convey my homestead in and to said lands. WITNESS our hands and seal a on this 22nd. - - - day of Juno, - - - - 1959 - [Seal] l� -[Seal) ACHN0WLEDGDIE NT STATE OF ARKANSAS County tlashin ton sa. 13E IT REMENIBERED, That on this day came before the undersigned, a Notary Public - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - within and for the County aforesaid, duly commissloued and act- ing, Fred Gu3'loy.arid;lloy Gulley, husband and wife, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - lo me well kndvgn aii'iht3,(ifantars in the foregoing Deed, and stated that they - - - _ - - - - - - - - had executed.�rie md)tor•&teTonaideration and purposes therein mentioned and set forth. this 22nd. - day of Witness.my n1) hlid sQ`.d 5a such Notary Public - - - - - - Jane, A.D. Z My Commish axCjree February 14y_y'.:'� .:_ ;� Notary Public. WARRANTY DEED with relinquishment of dower and homestead KNOW ALL MEN BY TIiLSE PRESIMTM: That we, Fred Gulley, and, Floy., Gu 1 ley, husband and wife---------------------------------------...----- ;� 3U04�. Do not,wrtta.la,thls.me for and In colisideration of the sum'of One Dollar ($1,00) °and,:• r 'r•` ir;i• wa:,,1 other good.andgvaluable considerations --------------- -- tosmz us in Wd paid by Allen' Dunn -and Ma L. F Dunn, husbanwi d:and'fe---------- -----------------_---- r c7 tm 0 do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Alien Dunn and M i � m Mary L. Dunn, husband and., -wife, and unto their --------- �' �' heirs and assigns, the following described land, situate in ry c' Washington County, State of Arkansas, to -wit: I . Part of the Last half of the Southwest quarter and part of the West half of. the' Southeast Quarter of Section 36, in Township 17 North, of Range 30 West,•deecr_ibed ��. as follows: Beginning at a point 1485 feet East and 805 1/3 feet North of the South West corner of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, and running thence North,0'10' East 1185.2 feet; then* North 89f West 220 feet., thence South;`33.`•36' Weet-_486.6 feet; thence South 42'6' West 127.6 feet thence.South 30'111lWest '1Z4 f6et;;:thence South 47' East 861.6 feet to the point of, beginning, containieg 9."7 acres; more or less. r n • i • I titi TO I']AVE AND TO HOLD the said lands and appurtenances thercunto belonging unto the said Alien Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband and wife, and unto their ------------------------------------ heirs and assigns, forever, And we , the said Fred Gulley and Ploy Gulley, husband and wifkN ------------------------------------------------------------------------ hereby covenant that we are lawfully seized of said land and premises; that the same is unineumbered, and we will forever wnrrant and defend the title to the said Innds against all legal claims whatever. And 1. the said Ploy Gulley ----------------------- wtfe of Fred Gulley ------------- in COnalderatlon Of Said sum of money, do hereby release and relinquish unto the saidAllen Dunn and Mary L. Dunn, husband and wife ------------------------------------ all my interest, right, title and dower and convey my homestead In and to said lands. -- - CVITNF.SS our hand s and seals on this -7-7 day of----- April --------- 1973. -- __.{Sea] 3 {Seal) __—(SenIj -_------ Acrcxow�,r;naalExT - STATE OF ARKANSAS Washin tonss County-....-...---�---------•- 13B IT REMEMBERED, That on this day came before the undersigned, &Notary Public ---------------- -------------------------------------- within and for the County aforesaid, duly commissioned and act. in, -,Fred Gulley and Flay Gulley, husband and wife ------ ---------------------------------- to me we)L known- as the Grantor in the foregoing Deed, and stated that --they had executed the same for the conside,yt; S 'rposes therein mentioned and set forth. ALL and seal as such----- Notary public -------- this 2-7 AP�'k� ±;; --- 1 day of GRE:E=R ARCTi�nf"T f�.—.�er,www ,..A.Y N ...­..Y 4:q V 4Rrd"7 i'wi-uI Washington County Report tr-r c3�24 tease Structure Itern Label Description Area A MaIr1 I wlrul Are•., 1895 ii MFA [7.,ratjr r,,,, alnry :ifiO hnlshed att CIF' Pon i1 tvl -11 g4 rlP Ffm h i)Iw-ii . Outbuildings and Yard Improvements Item Type Sue±D+m Unit Multi. Quality Age 45}jrl�]t! I IrIYS"Afly ,Xt •;tiflh:,t! f1r,,re•w�y �:,� r,,,y � Ft-M-r ctimrL W* 4 ^a 1 'NMI 4x4 Map Parcel: 765-16095-000 Washington County Report ID: 53824 Prev. Parcel: 149078-000-00 As of: 6/26/2014 Property Owner - Property Information Name. DUNN, ALLEN & MARY L Physical Address: 2634 N OLD WIRE RD Mailing Address: 2634 N OLD WIRE RD FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703-3771 Type: (RI) - Res. Improv. Tax Dist: (011) - FAYETTEVILLE SCH, FAY Millage Rate: 53.75 Extended Legal: PT NE SW .50 A Market and Assessed Values: Subdivision: 36-17-30 FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS Block ! Lot: S-T-R: 36-17-30 Size (in Acres): 0.000 Estimated Full Assessed Taxable - Market Value: (20% Market Value): Value: - Land: $42,750 $8,550 $8,550 Building: $92,950 $18,590 $18,590 Total: $135,700 $27,140 $27,140 Homestead Credit: $0.00 Note: Tax amounts are estimates only. Contact the county/parish tax collector for exact amounts. Land Land Use Size Units 1.000 House Lot r Not a Legal Document. Subject to terns and conditions. www.actDataScou .corn Page 1 Parcel: 765-16095-000 Washington County Report ID: 53824 Prev. Parcel: 149078-000-00 As of: 6/2612014 Deed Transfers: Date Book Page Deed Type Stamps Est. Sale 5/20/1993 93 27263 Warr. Deed 0.00 $0 3/29/1993 93 15833 FidDeed 0.00 $0 2/16/1993 93 20041 0.00 $0 6/30/1992 92 33142 Warr. Deed 0.00 $0 1/1/1985 622 135 0.00 $0 Grantee Code DUNN, ALLEN & MARY L. 2634 OLD WIRE RD DAVENPORT, RICHARD E. DUNN, ALLEN HENDRICKS, BERTHA E. TRUSTEE OF BERTHA E. HENDRICKS TRUST HENDRICKS, GLENN G. & BERTHA E. Type Details for Residential Card 1: Occupancy Story Finish 1st Liv Other Liv Total Liv Grade Year Age Condition Beds Area Area Area Built Single Family ONE Masonry 1895 0 1895 4+5 1963 47 Average NIA Veneer Exterior Wall: BV Foundation: Closed Piers Floor Struct: Wood with subfloor Floor Cover: Carpet & Tile Insulation: Ceilings Walls Roof Cover: Asphalt Shingle Roof Type: Gable Plumbing: Full: 1 Half: 1 Fireplace: NIA Heat 1 Cool: HotAir/F Basement: N/A Basement Area: NIA Year Remodeled: NIA Style: NIA DataScout, LLC F 2 0 J rf>ti 4 I36DI 4 • r,ly.T�) IB a 110 Not a Legal Document, Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 2 Parcel: 765-16092-000 Washington County Report ID: 53821 Prev. Parcel: 149075-000-00 As of: 6/26/2014 Details for Residential Card 1: Occupancy Story Finish 1st Liv Other Liv Total Liv Grade Year Age Condition Beds Area Area Area Built Single Family ONE Masonry 1567 0 1567 4+5 1961 49 Average NIA Veneer Exterior Wall: 8V Foundation: Closed Piers Floor Struct: Wood with subfloor Floor Cover: Carpet & Tile Insulation: Ceilings Walls Roof Cover: Asphalt Shingle Roof Type: Gable Plumbing: Full: 1 Half: 1 Fireplace: Type: 1 s Sgt. Heat I Cool: Central Basement: NIA Basement Area: NIA Year Remodeled: NIA Style: NIA DataScout, LLC i—'1 -- 1 GEP 1 0 116o) 0 1 Fr- P 1 i ll #3761 0 =i 31 MN crf'a Ii5671 2 13 1609) 9] 9 Base Structure: (II)OA1 4 Item Label Description Area A MN Main Living Area 1567 B MFA Garage - masonry 609 finished, att C GEP Porch, glass 160 enclosed D FEP Frame enclosed 378 porch E OP Porch, open 84 Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.co Page 2 Pait<•I 1,-w'--1r10"i`-0,K Washington County Report it,, Outbuddirugs and Yard Improvements Item Type SizelDim Unit Multi. Quality Age Fence r haiti lack d ! 68 1 Utility t ldq Avq. '-;td Glass AOX40 1 1000 (7rcivO i 1Il+ri^.way Frrt(:r. Vic) ni1 I,' 1;'f Duwew-ky c.urn- i-I[e c [hiwvywJy ti:clril.r.•[r• Map +y�i Parcel: 765-16092-000 Washington County Report Prev. Parcel 149075-000-00 As of: 6/26/2014 Property Owner Name: DUNN, ALLEN L & MARY L Mailing Address: 2648 N OLD WIDE RD FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703-3771 Type: (RI) - Res. Improv. Tax Dist: (011) - FAYETTEVILLE SCH, FAY Millage Rate: 53.75 Extended Legal: PT NE SW .75 A Market and Assessed Values: Estimated Market Value: $54,000 $114,000 $168,000 Homestead Credit: $350.00 Status: (F) -Fixed Deed Transfers: Property Information Physical Address: 2648 N OLD WIRE RD Subdivision: 36-17-30 FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS Block 1 Lot: S-T-R: 36-17-30 Size (in Acres): 0.000 Full Assessed (20% Market Value): $10,800 $22,800 $33,600 Note: Tax amounts are estimates only. Contact the county/parish tax collector for exact amounts. WOLU ouun rnyc wwwu lypw v►aniraa 4aa. %aw-c V-Pn LWV 6/22/1959 526 444 Warr. Deed 0.00 $0 DUNN, ALLEN L & MARY L Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com _v . yp. } ,r E t 5- "GO80 0 0. 0 Washington County Report Outbt»Idings and Yard Improvements Item Type Srze'Dim U1111 Multi. Quality Age OUSLILP-1di,q iranlF� ,3Q eo ral Purpu�e Ll.krr% 2N3.`_ Map- 1-- Parcel: 765-16080-000 Washington County Report ID: 53806 Prev. Parcel: 149063-000-00 As of: 6/2612014 Deed Transfers: Date Book Page Deed Type Stamps Est. Sale Grantee Code Type 1/1/1985 93 19847 Warr. Deed 4.40 $4,000 DUNN, ALLEN L. & MARY L. 2648 Insufficien OLD WIRE RD t Amount Details for Residential Card 1: Occupancy Story Finish 1st Liv Other Liv Total Liv Grade Year Age Condition Beds Area Area Area Built NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA NIA Exterior Wall: NIA Foundation: NIA Floor Struct: NIA Floor Cover: NIA Insulation: NIA Roof Cover: NIA Roof Type: NIA Plumbing: NIA Fireplace: NIA Heat 1 Cool: NIA Basement: NIA Basement Area: NIA Year Remodeled: NIA Style: NIA Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 2 Parcel: 765-16080-000 Washington County Report ID: 53806 Prev. Parcel: 149063-000-00 As of: 6126/2014 Property Owner Property Information Name: DUNN, ALLEN L & MARY L Physical Address: N OLD WIRE RD Mailing Address: 2648 N OLD WIRE RD Subdivision: 36-17-30 FAYETTEVILLE OUTLOTS FAYETTEVILLE, AR 72703-3771 Block I Lot: Type: (AM) - Agri UMisc Imps S-T-R: 36-17-30 Tax Dist: (011) - FAYETTEVILLE SCH, FAY Size (in Acres): 9.700 Millage Rate: 53.75 Extended Legal: PT W/2 SE PT E12 SW 9.7 A Market and Assessed Values: Estimated Full Assessed Taxable Market Value: - (20% Market Value): Value: Land: $1,700 $340 $340 Building: $500 $100 $100 Total: $2,200 $440 $440 Homestead Credit: $0.00 Status: (N) -No Adj Note: Tax amounts are estimates only. Contact the county/parish tax collector for exact amounts. Land: Land Use Size Units Pasture(15) 0.300 Acres Pasture(04) 0.540 Acres Pasture(13) 4.110 Acres Pasture(13) 4.750 Acres Not a Legal Document. Subject to terms and conditions. www.actDataScout.com Page 1 PART IV -ADDENDA 123 aXPOS E TIME Exposure time is the length of time the subject property would have been exposed for sale in the market had it sold at the market value concluded in this analysis as of the date of this valuation. The exposure times of Land Sales One and Three utilized in the Land Value section were 636± days and 1,264± days, respectively. The exact exposure time for Land Sale Two utilized in the Land Value section is not known. The exposure times of Improved Sales One through Three, and Five Through Seven utilized in the Sales Comparison Approach are 70± days, 72± days, 99± days, 71± days, 164± days, and 66± days, respectively. The exact exposure time for Improved Sale Four utilized in the Sales Comparison Approach is not known. Based on MLS data, the average exposure time for residential land sales in Benton and Washington Counties, greater than 1 acre in size, for the twelve months preceding the effective date of this report was indicated to be 395± days, while the median was indicated to be 1841 days; this is based on 328 transactions. Based on MLS data, the average exposure time for single-family residential sales in Fayetteville • for the twelve months preceding the effective date of this report was indicated to be 130± days, while the median was indicated to be 97±days; this is based on 1,235 transactions. As previously discussed in this report, the real estate market in Benton and Washington Counties remains in a correction period, particularly the commercial sector. Slow improvement in economic conditions prolonged the correction period; however, national and local economic conditions have improved over the recent past and continued improvement is expected. This has resulted in significant improvement in the overall residential sector. There have also been some positive signs in the commercial sector (declining vacancy rates and some new development); however, the commercial sector as a whole is still lagging. There is still a significant amount of Other Real Estate Owned (OREO) being held by financial institutions in Northwest Arkansas. The correction period for the commercial sector is expected to last through 2014, and possibly beyond. Exposure times have extended as a result of the correction period. The subject property is reasonably well located in an area with significant residential and special - purposes uses. The subject's proximity to Gulley Park is also a positive factor with respect to exposure time. In my opinion, an exposure time of one± year or less is considered applicable to subject whole property. 122 NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($970,000) The preceding value reflects terms equivalent to cash to the owner, and represents that for real property only. No personal property has been included in this valuation assignment. The preceding value estimate is based upon the following Extraordinary Assumptions: 1. That the subject and adjacent properties are in compliance with all applicable EPA regulations; 2. That the subject excess acreage does not need a second point of ingress/egress; 3. That the subject dwellings are structurally sound, and are not adversely affected by the presence of mold or other environmental issues; 4. That the plumbing, electrical, and HVAC systems in the subject dwellings are in proper working order; and, 5. That the subject land and dwelling sizes are approximately as indicated. If any, or all, of these Extraordinary Assumptions prove to be untrue, the preceding value estimate could be influenced. The reader is referred to additional Assumptions and Limiting Conditions appearing in the Introduction Section of this report. The estimated exposure time for the subject property is one± year or less. This was determined from an analysis of market conditions and comparable sales. At the request of the client, the contributory value of each of the subject parts to the market value of the subject whole property is broken down as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50± AC) _ $111,500 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75± AC) _ $218,500 9.7± ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 121 -- - Sales Comparison Approach— Certain principles are also basic to the Sales Comparison Approach: Substitution; supply and demand; balance; and, externalities. Again, the principle of substitution is very important. This principle states that the value of a specific property generally is set by the price necessary to acquire a substitute property of equivalent utility. In the Sales Comparison Approach, comparable improved sales were examined and analyzed for comparison purposes to the respective dwelling improvements. The unit of comparison was whole property. Adjustments were made to the sales based upon differences with respect to the respective subject dwellings. The market value of the respective subject dwellings was then estimated from within the adjusted range of the comparables. Finally, the contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) was added to the value of the subject dwellings to arrive at the estimated market value of the whole subject property by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount could be supported to the sum of the values of the improved subject homesites and the excess land. The strength of the Sales Comparison Approach is the availability of recent and reliable comparable sales. A weakness of this approach is that each of the comparables required adjustments; however, the adjustments were believed to be market supported. Overall, the reliability of the Sales Comparison Approach is considered to be good. Income Capitalization Approach The application of the Income Capitalization Approach is based on the operation of value influences and appraisal principles. The appraisal principles considered are: Anticipation and change; supply and demand; substitution; balance; and, externalities. Anticipation and change are very important. The principle of anticipation states that value is created by the expectation of benefits to be derived in the future. Income Capitalization methods attempt to forecast future benefits and estimate their present value. The Income Capitalization Approach also focuses on how change affects the value of income -producing properties. The Income Capitalization Approach was not utilized as this is not typically the basis upon which buylsell decisions are being made in this market on properties of the subject's nature. Application of the Income Capitalization Approach to Value was not considered necessary to produce credible appraisal results for the subject property. Final Value In the final value analysis both the Cost and Sales Comparison Approaches are given consideration. Most weight is placed on the Sales Comparison Approach due to the quantity and quality of evidence available to the appraiser.- however, some weight is still placed on the Cost Approach It is my opinion the market value of the fee simple estate of the subiect property, as of July 10, 2014, was: 120 ' RECONCILIATION . Reconciliation is the part of the valuation process in which the appraiser attempts to resolve differences among the value indications derived from the application of the approaches. The conclusion drawn in the reconciliation is based on the appropriateness, the accuracy, and the quantity of the evidence in the entire appraisal. Indicated Land Value "As Vacant": $765,000 Indicated Value by the Cost Approach: $974,000 Indicated Value by the Sales Comparison Approach: $969,000 Indicated Value By the Income Capitalization Approach: Not Utilized Cost Approach The Cost Approach is based, in part, upon the principle of substitution. This principle is basic to the Cost Approach and holds that no prudent investor would pay more for an existing property than the cost to acquire the site and construct improvements of equal desirability and utility without undue delay. Other appraisal principles that relate to the Cost Approach are: Supply and demand; balance; externalities; and, highest and best use. In the Cost Approach, the Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements were estimated, utilizing Marshall Valuation Service (national cost service) and a market derived entrepreneurial incentive. Accrued Depreciation attributable to the improvements was then estimated based upon the Economic Age -Life Method, and was subtracted from Replacement Cost New to arrive at Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the respective improvements. The estimated land value was then added to the Depreciated Replacement Cost New of the improvements to arrive at the estimated market value of the subject property by the Cost Approach. The estimated market value of the subject whole property was then allocated to each of the homesites, and the excess acreage. The strength of the Cost Approach is the availability of recent comparable land sales in estimating the market value of the subject site "as vacant" in the Land Value section, and the availability of cost estimates from Marshall Valuation Service. A weakness of this approach is the difficulty in estimating Accrued Depreciation of the older improvements. Overall, the reliability of the Cost Approach is considered to be average. IBFJ INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH In the Income Capitalization Approach, the current rental income is shown with deductions for vacancy and credit loss and operating expenses. A conclusion about the prospective Net Operating Income of the property is developed. In support of this Net Operating income estimate, operating statements for the previous years may be reviewed, together with available operating -cost estimates, An applicable capitalization method and appropriate Capitalization Rate are developed for use in computations that lead to an indication of value by the Income Capitalization Approach. The following definitions are necessary before applying the Income Capitalization Approach to the subject property: "Potential Gross Income (PGI) is the total income attributable to real property at jtll occupancy before vacancy and operating expenses are deducted. i20 "Effective Gross Income (EGI) is the anticipated income.front all operations of the real property after an allowance is made for vacancy and collection losses and an addition is made for any other income. i21 "Net Operating Income (NOI) is the actual or anticipated net income that remains after all operating expenses are deducted fr•onr effective gross income but before mortgage debt set -vice and book depreciation are deducted. Note: This definition mirrors the convention used in corporate finance and business vahtation for EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amor'li_ation). "22 "Overall Capitalization Rate (Ro) is an income rate for a lotal real property interest that reflects the relationship benreen a single year's net operating income expectancy and the total property price or value (Ro = 10"0)'"3 "Direct Capitalization is a method used to convert an estimate of a single year's income expectancy into an indication of ralrte in one direct step, either by dividing the net income estimate by an appropriate capitalization rate or by multiplying the income estimate by an appropriate factor. Direct capitalization employs capitalization rates and multipliers extracted or developed from market Bala. Only a single year's income is used. Yield and value changes are implied but not identified The Income Capitalization Approach is not utilized as this is not typically the basis upon which buy/sell decisions are being made in this market on properties of the subject's nature. Application of the Income Capitalization Approach to Value is not considered necessary to produce credible appraisal results for the subject property. 20 Appraisal Insritrae, 77te Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal — Fif1h Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 148. 21 Appraisal Institnle, Me Dictionary of Real Estate ApiZi risal -- Fifilt Edition. (Chicago: Appraisal InsNtrue. 2010). P. 65. 22 Appraisal inshnae, The Dictionary of Reat Esraie Appraisal - Fifth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal Institute, 2010), P. 134. 23. Appraisal Insriaae, Tlue Dicrioncoy of Real Estate AMJ raisal - Fifih Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal limitute. 2010). P. 141. 118 SUMMARY OF SALES -COMPARISON APPROACH 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50f AC) = $1 11,000 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75t AC) = $218,000 9.7f ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 Estimated Value Based on = S969,000 Sales Comparison Approach The preceding represents the indicated market value of subject whole property by the Sales Comparison Approach. No discount could be supported to the sum of the values of the improved subject homesites and the excess land. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 117 - -- and a downward adjustment of 5% to Sale Seven: -No-adjustment to Sale Four is warranted for dwelling quality. Next, garage/porch is considered. Subject includes a 372± SF attached garage, 460± SF attached shop, and a 210+ SF enclosed porch. Sale Four has a 420+ SF garage. Sale Five has a 567f SF attached garage and a 522t SF covered patio. Sale Six has a 490+ SF attached garage. Sale Seven has a 312+ SF attached carport. None of the sales include an enclosed porch. Based on Cost and Sales Analysis, an adjustment of $10 per SF is indicated for difference in garage/shop sizes, and an additional $5 per SF for difference between garage and carport. The indicated adjustment for the enclosed porch is $20 per SF. In comparison to subject: Sale Four requires a net adjustment of +$8,320; Sale Five a net adjustment of +$2,650; Sale Six a net adjustment of +$7,620; and, Sale Seven a net adjustment of-+-$12,000. Lastly, the "other" category is considered. This pertains to other buildings, as well as site improvements. Subject other improvements have previously been described in this report. The other improvements on the sale properties were previously described in this report in the sale narratives. Each of the comparable sales, and subject, are considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to site improvements and other buildings. No adjustments for the "other" category are warranted to any of the comparable sales. Conclusions: The following adjustment grid is indicated: - Sales Price S153,000 S135,000 $125,000 S101,000 Property Rights $0 $0 $0 $0 Financing $o $0 $0 $0 Conditions of Sale $0 $0 $0 $0 Market Conditions $0 $0 $O $0 $15.3000 25.�Q4:::.: Location $0 $0 $0 $0 Physical Characteristics Site Value 059,0001 $10,000 $10,000 $0 Dwelling Size (S2,695) $1.610 $1,715 $2,380 Dwelling Age/Condition ($,21-250') 53:i.7501 (.`+31.250 $0 Dwelling Quality $0 ($33375) (S 3.1?5} (S5.0501 Garage/Porch $8,320 $2,650 $7,620 $12,000 Other $0 $0 $0 $0 IndicafedsV.i4uelL`ut ,: r> .< $112;3355109,960,.->; :5110` 30"1 The range of the adjusted comparable sales is $109,960 to $112,375; the mean is $111,200 and the median is $111,233. Sale Four represents the most recent sale and is located nearest to the subject. Sale Seven received the lowest gross adjustment. Sales Four and Seven received the most weight. Each of Sales Five and Six also provide strong support. Based on the preceding analysis, it is my opinion the indicated market value of the subject improved homesite located at 2634 North Old Wire Road by the Sales Comparison Approach is: $111,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 301 Physical Characteristics: _ The categories of adjustment considered -under physical characteristics are site value, dwelling living area size, dwelling age/condition, dwelling quality, garage/porch, and "other". First, site value is considered. The value of the subject homesite (0.5± acre) has previously been estimated in the Land Value Section at $50,000. The estimated land values of the comparables are $58,000, $40,000, $40,000, and $50,000, respectively. The following adjustments are indicated: downward $8,000 to Sale One; and, upward $10,000 to each of Sales Two and Three. No site value adjustment is warranted to Sale Four Next, dwellingliving iving area size is considered. The subject (1,316± SF) is smaller in dwelling living area size than Sale Four (1,393± SF), and larger in dwelling living area size than each of Sales Five (1,270t SF), Six (1,267t SF), and Seven (1,248± SF). Sales and Cost Analysis supports a' size multiplier of $35.00 per SF. Therefore, in comparison to subject, Sale Four requires a downward adjustment of $2,695 (77f SF @ $35), Sale Five requires an upward adjustment of $1,610 (46± SF @ $35), Sale Six requires an upward adjustment of $1,715 (49± SF @ $35), and Sale Seven requires an upward adjustment of $2,380 (68f SF @ $35). Next, dwelling -a el condition is considered. Based on Assessment Records, this dwelling was originally constructed in 1963f. The dwelling has received minimal updates since its original construction, and is considered "dated" in appearance. This dwelling is considered to be in fair to average condition, -overall. The effective age is estimated to be 40f years. Sale Four was originally constructed in 1965f. The condition at the date of sale was average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30f years. Sale Five was originally constructed in 1965±. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30� years. Sale Six was originally constructed in 1966±. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30± years. Sale Seven was originally constructed in 1964�. The condition at the date of sale was fair to average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 40t years. Overall, each of Sales Four, Five, and Six is considered superior to subject with respect to dwelling age/condition, while Sale Seven is considered reasonably similar. Paired Sales Analysis utilizing Sales Four and Seven indicates, after adjusting for other differences, that Sale Four requires a 25%± downward adjustment for dwelling age/condition. The indicated dollar adjustment is-$38,250 to Sale One. Based on the preceding analysis, each of Sales Five and Six are also adjusted downward by 25% in comparison to the subject, or $33,750 and $31,250, respectively. No adjustment to Sale Seven is warranted. Next, dwelling quality is considered. Subject dwelling represents average quality construction. Subject dwelling is centrally heated and cooled, and includes 3 bedrooms and I bathroom. Subject also includes a fireplace and kitchen appliances. Each of the comparable improved sales is also considered to represent average quality construction and includes kitchen appliances. Sale Four has 3 bedrooms and I bathroom, Sale Five has 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, Sale Six has 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, and Sale Seven has 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. Overall, Sale One is considered reasonably similar to subject in dwelling quality, while Sales Five and Six each appear to be slightly superior, and Sale Seven is considered to be somewhat superior. Sales Analysis supports a downward adjustment of 2.5% to each of Sales Five and Six, 115 Date of Sale 06/20/2014 05/29/2013 05/05/2014 10/01/2012 Consideration $ l 53 000 $135,000 $125,000 $101,000 Dwelling Size SF 1,393 1,270 1,267 1,248 PricelSF $109.83 $106.30 $98.66 $80.93 Use Single -Family le-Famil Single -Family Single -Family Location ­Sin 2626 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville 814 E. Peel St., Fayetteville 707 E. Ash St., Fayetteville 2786 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville Property Rights: I am addressing the fee simple estate of subject in this report. Each of the sales involved the transfer of the fee simple estate. No adjustments are indicated. Financing: Each of the sales involved conventional financing at market terms. No adjustments for financing are indicated. Conditions Of Sale: Each of the sales appears to have been an arm's-length transaction. No adjustments for conditions of sale can be supported. Market Conditions: The respective sale date of each comparable appears on the summary table above. The sales occurred between the October 2012 and June 2014 time period. Market conditions during this time period were considered reasonably similar to those as of the effective date of this report. Based on data available to the appraiser, each of the comparable sales is believed to be representative of current market conditions. No market conditions adjustments are warranted. Location: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical address of this homesite is indicated to be 2634 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated just north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Sale Four is located on the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of Old Missouri Road; this location is two parcels to the southwest of the subject. Sale Five is located along the north side of East Peel Street, just east of Juneway Terrace; this location is approximately 0.81t mile southwest of the subject. Sale Six is located on the south side of East Ash Street, just west of Austin Drive; this location is approximately 1.25t miles southwest of the subject. Finally, Sale Seven is located on the south side of North Old Wire Road, just west of Azalea Terrace; this location is approximately 0.35f mile northeast of the subject. Each of the comparable properties, and subject, has an adequate location for their respective use. Overall, no separate location adjustments can be supported to any of the sales. Any necessary location adjustments are considered to be adequately reflected in the 'site value' category in the next section. 114 Lastly, the "other' category—is_.considered.- This pertains to other buildings, as well as site improvements. Subject other improvements have previously been described in this report. The other improvements on the sale properties were previously described in this report in the sale narratives. Each of the comparable sales, and subject, are considered reasonably similar to subject with respect to site improvements; however, are each considered inferior to subject with respect to other buildings. Based on Sales and Cost Analysis, each of the comparable sales is adjusted upward by $30,000; this is mostly reflective of the subjects superior "other buildings" situation due to the shop building. Conclusions: The following adjustment grid is indicated: Sales Price S175 000 $160 000 S136 50 S153 000 Property Rights so $0 $0 $0 Financing so $0 $0 $0 Conditions or Sale $0 $0 $0 $0 Market Conditions $0 $0 $0 $0 Ad'ijoeil:Sulcs;Pr�ce w .:... .: ..,:$la7,SS400<,�__.4 , a $. b a n '1.00;000� , :.0? 1- I'4136,150-.:: Location $0 $0 $0 $0 Physical Characteristics Site Value $30.000 $25.000 $10.000 $17.000 Dwelling Size $0 $0 (53.?55) $5,530 Dwelling Age/Condition (.$17,500) $0 $0 So Dwellin, Qua Iit $0 ($4,0041) $0 $3.825 Garage/Porch $7,400 $8.660 $3,240 $8,400 Other S30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Indicated Value/Lot S224,900 5219,000 S176,235 S217 755 The range of the adjusted comparable sales is $176,235 to $224,900; the mean is $209,638 and the median is $218,708. The mean is distorted by Sale Three which falls much below the indicated values by Sales One, Two, and Four; the reason for this is not clear. Sale Four represents the most recent sale and is located nearest to the subject. Sale Three received the lowest gross adjustment; however adjustments for dwelling age/condition and quality could not be supported by Paired Sales Analysis. Sale Four received the most weight, followed by Sales Me and Two. Sale Three is given the least amount of weight. Based on the preceding analysis, it is my opinion the indicated market value of the subject improved homesite located at 2648 North Old Wire Road by the Sales Comparison Approach is: $218,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. Next, the subject improved homesite located at 2534 North Old Wire Road is addressed with consideration to Sales Four through Seven previously presented. A summary of Sales Four through Seven is presented again in the following exhibit: 113 Next, dwell ine ape/condition is considered. -Based on Assessment Records, the subject. dwelling was originally constructed in 1961t. Discussions with the property owner indicated the dwelling was updated in the early 1990's. The subject dwelling is considered to be in average to good condition, overall. The effective age is estimated to be 28f years. Sale One was originally constructed in 1967f. The condition at the date of sale was good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 ± years. Sale Two was originally constructed in 1959=L:. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30f years. Sale Three was originally constructed in 1976f. The condition at the date of sale was average to good. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 20 to 25± years. Sale Four was originally constructed in 1965f. The condition at the date of sale was average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be 25 to 30f years. Overall, Sale One is considered somewhat superior to subject with respect to dwelling age/condition, while each of Sales Two and Four is considered reasonably similar, and Sale Three is considered superior. Paired Sales Analysis utilizing Sales One and Two indicates, after adjusting for other differences, that Sale One requires a 10%f downward adjustment for dwelling age/condition. The indicated dollar adjustment is-$17,500 to Sale One. Although Sale Three is considered superior to subject with respect to dwelling age/condition, no adjustment could be supported based on Paired Sales Analysis. No adjustments to Sales Two and Four are warranted. Next, dwell_ing_gualitY is considered. Subject dwelling represents average quality construction. Subject dwelling is centrally heated and cooled, and includes 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms. Subject also includes a fireplace and kitchen appliances. Each of the comparable improved sales is also considered to represent average quality construction and includes kitchen appliances. Sale One has 3 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, Sale Two has 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms, Sale Three has 4 bedrooms and 1.5 bathrooms, and Sale Four has 3 bedrooms and I bathroom. Overall, Sale One is considered reasonably similar to subject in construction quality, while Sales Two and Three each appear to be slightly superior, and Sale Four is considered to be slightly inferior. Paired Sales Analysis utilizing Sales Two and Four indicates a difference of near 5% between Sales Two and Four with respect to dwelling quality. Again, Sale Two is considered slightly superior to subject while Sale Four is considered slightly inferior to subject. Therefore, Sale Two is adjusted downward by 2.5% in comparison to the subject, while Sale Four is adjusted upward by 2.5% in comparison to the subject. Again, Sale Three is considered slightly superior to subject with respect to the dwelling quality category; however, no adjustment can be supported based on Paired Sales Analysis. Next, garage/porch is considered. Subject includes a 580f SF attached garage. Subject also includes a 340f SF enclosed porch. Sale One includes a 540± SF carport. Sale Two has a 456f SF carport. Sale Three has a 936+ SF detached garage with no electricity. Sale Four has a 420± SF garage. None of the sales include an enclosed porch. Based on Cost and Sales Analysis, an adjustment of $10 per SF is indicated for difference in garage sizes, and an additional $5 per SF for difference between garage and carport. The indicated adjustment for the enclosed porch is $20 per SF. In comparison to subject: Sale One requires a net adjustment of +$7,400; Sale Two a net adjustment of +$8,660; Sale Three a net adjustment of +$3,240; and, Sale Four a net adjustment of+$8,400. 112 Market Conditions: The respective sale date of each comparable- appears on the summary table on the preceding page. The sales occurred between the July 2012 and June 2014 time period. Market conditions during this time period were considered reasonably similar to those as of the effective date of this report. Based on data available to the appraiser, each of the comparable sales is believed to be representative of current market conditions. No market conditions adjustments are warranted. Location: The subject property is located along the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of North Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville, Arkansas; Washington County. The physical address of this homesite is indicated to be 2648 North Old Wire Road. The subject site is situated just north/northeast of Gulley Park. The predominant property uses in the Market Area are primarily single-family residential and special-purpose in nature. Sale One is located along the north side of North Crestwood Drive, just east of Shrewsbury Lane, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 1.51 miles south of the subject. Sale Two is located on the south side of North Old Wire Road, a short distance north of Mission Boulevard, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 1.40f miles southwest of the subject. Sale Three is located on the north side of North Old Wire Road, a short distance east of Old Missouri Road, in Fayetteville; this location is approximately 0.25± mile northeast of the subject. Finally, Sale Four is located on the southeast side of North Old Wire Road, just southwest of Old Missouri Road; this location is two parcels to the southwest of the subject. Each of the comparable properties, and subject, has an adequate location for their respective use. Overall, no separate location adjustments can be supported to any of the sales. Any necessary location adjustments are considered to be adequately reflected in the `site value' category in the next section. Physical Characteristics: The categories of adjustment considered under physical characteristics are site value, dwelling living area size, dwelling age/condition, dwelling quality, garage/porch, and "other". First, site value is considered. The value of the subject homesite (0.75± acre) has previously been estimated in the Land Value Section at $75,000. The estimated land values of the comparables are $45,000, $50,000, $65,000, and $58,000, respectively. The following upward adjustments are indicated: $30,000 to Sale One; $25,000 to Sale Two; $10,000 to Sale Three; and, $17,000 to Sale Four. Next, dwelling leg area size is considered. The subject (1,551ZL SF) Js smaller in dwelling living area size than each of the Sales One (1,568± SF), Two (1,566f SF), and Three (1,644f SF), and larger than Sale Four (1,393± SF). Sales and Cost Analysis supports a size multiplier of $35.00 per SF. Therefore, in comparison to subject, Sale Three requires a downward adjustment of $3,255 (93± SF a $35), while Sale Four requires an upward adjustment of $5,530 (158± Sr a $35). No adjustment can be supported to Sales One and Two for the small difference in dwelling living area size compared to subject. — ---- SUMMARY OF COMPARABLE -- - IMPROVED SALES The comparable improved sales are summarized as follows: Sale 2 3 4 Date of Sale 03/29/2013 07/05/2012 02/14/2014 06/20/2014 Consideration $175,000 $160,000 $136,250 $153,000 Dwelling Size SF 1,568 1,566 1,644 1,393 PricelSF $111.61 $102.17 S82.88 S109.83 Use Sin le-Famil Single -Family Single -Family Single -Family Location 1211 N. Crestwood Dr., Fayetteville 1500 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville 2763 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville 2626 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville Sale �5 °:. 6 7 Date of Sale 05/29/2013 05/05/2014 10/01 /2012 Consideration $135,000 S125,000 $101,000 Dwelling Size SF f 1,270 1,267 1,248 Price/SF $106.30 _ $98.66 S80.93 Use Single -Family Single -Family Single -Family Location 814 E. Peel St., Fayetteville 707 E. Ash St., Fayetteville 2786 N. Old Wire Rd., Fayetteville ANALYSIS OF SALES The preceding sales represent comparable improved sales in Fayetteville, all of which are in close proximity to the subject property. The unit of comparison is whole property. The elements of comparison are property rights, financing, conditions of sale, market conditions, location, and physical characteristics. First, Improved Sales One through Four are utilized in the adjustment process with respect to the dwelling situated at 2648 North Old Wire Road. Next, Improved Sales Four through Seven are utilized in the adjustment process with respect to the dwelling situated at 2634 North Old Wire Road. The contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) is added at the end of the Sales Comparison Approach to arrive at the indicated market value of the subject whole property by the Sales Comparison Approach. Property Rights: I am addressing the fee simple estate of subject in this report. Each of the sales involved the transfer of the fee simple estate. No adjustments are indicated. Financing: Each of the sales involved conventional financing at market terms. No adjustments for financing are indicated. Conditions Of Sale: Each of the sales appears to have been an arms -length transaction; however, Sale Three appears to have occurred at the lower end of the market range for a property of this nature. No adjustment can be supported to Sale Three; however, this will be considered in the reconciliation of the sales. No adjustments for conditions of sale can be supported. Me Q co O Q E 0) f0 f4 a 0 U tn N N d 'M Ji S — i >Mv ! a , IN— fr E —7LLL__11! rl 1r =� U N C3. �be O n.. Q m- m. r-'- �� J r JLn Q^ j <Y M LU of-1 act 'n ,—I'_ $ �� CL rl CL o ._ rnco ca p � ?ate-_•`� PE E--. '. a r � �a m CE r a�� n w O(2 01 co c2 G �H O r ]� Qn ¢o co �o m sro „4 m� d s O� N T�° -m u� E `m o � m U 4 m a$ �m �m mom �p �r gad `rodr U � oZ N w Paz mo go"o a Fp 0 C b Waa oo�W �5� �Z m §o� oRm �o ov4 a+ c n a� m m � mw m � Owz �c� pna `c9 'c3 m UU-5 and cedar exterior siding. The dwelling is indicated to contain 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms. The dwelling includes kitchen appliances. The dwelling is centrally heated and cooled. The overall construction quality of the dwelling is considered average; however, needed some updating. The dwelling is indicated to have been constructed in 1964±. The condition at the date of sale was fair to average. The effective age of the dwelling was estimated to be approximately 40t years. Additional improvements include: fencing; gravel driveways; landscaping; etc. The condition of the site improvements, overall, was considered average. Land value at the date of sale was estimated to be approximately $50,000t. 108 IIll I?r(PA Cd S:IIC .Nu. ,II{ ahioil: -7v� \, o 111 f )1LI \\ ItC lzf ud, 1 :i\ LttL'1 Me. IIIL't1n1 ( kpiltIt\ <;rallllu: \\ lill,lnl 11 & Itlrhara \ \ILINCr IMatt'!]fl sak- 4111 201-1 Idriurllrcl: ki)l�k 2111.' 1'.1L'L }L)tti:?: 1 1101 t riAl d)t i- '- 1012 I xgal Dc'-Cripiiun: i':Irt [ 11 I fic N Il , til I I ( )1 6- 17 yfl, I )OAIIL-II I L';':1l I )v,,� i II\1111ri Kept f )I1 I iIr � 5111�1(IL'i':iillill: � I r) I ,III If I 1'llCilll'1111r': 1 rtlClrll rl;il: VC 'NCHIM' .and site: I I (I %, 1 L' 1�►�cllilr� site: I . ' 1S N1 Pricc 1,,,F' *III `! Rum irk%: 1 ill'-. 111 11\11k I'- I, L.I[t1t Ill OIL "'Arh -1kiL ,d V11,h I IIk1 `\ I1L' R<'.Id. jU-*t \\Cwl iit \111C:[ I L'l1 ESL L': H11I I-'. 111-10 1, .11'j'r,•�. I111.II11' I! ', r:1114' 11, it rlli,l+I ,i1 ON, -,,111Wr I Illy IIC i� iIc,ir r11 _'1]1-Ir 7n ,11:111-_' Al Id 11.I. .. .t.��15 n,Ir'%L •11..II11 1 i14 t� I1, I.tph1 , 1.- 1.1'Idt 1? 11ul_ rjC.1r CI 1 1 L\111,,11 11\ IILIItrtL' .j .i% lli,i111.' r ,'I1,' '•It4 ills `i[L' I 111111t••\..1 «It1...I 'IIL.' -t •;-.Ilrl'4' !,011411�\C:iIII IIIAl11111-_' ,II1 �rid i,.i.otl i.,1 t IICI C ;1 ,II„' .1 •'IIL -L.II .111.1,Al ,I , „r'T1I111tt'.' Al'11-• \JITLIIti 1'. ' I -' I . A' t\ L'ii 1• 1 ''['l: ;'+'r. ,, ,I' i,j 1 1 i "1 'A .I . I hL' .I\1.II'!... 1 I„1, I) '1k tIii. -l I'i �%IIf1 t'rI \Lr,CCr ill�llIdCI L L1IIt4h1-, 11rC 1I1,11,T ,411111LIIC1I .J111111.11Lt:L'', I IIL' L1%kL'kllll,' iw I C11iI.11ls. IfC.ItL'4I LIL11: ,.'I+'.L.1! 5rk t'I;LII I.LIL1,,i I"uch,'I1 Lll::fllt4 .'I Ills t14+1:1 kIlit: I,, i4I15,' 114\c L IIIL;' 1•, IlldlV .IIL'l1 1 , 11;14 1;q`4'll ..;'Ir LI'LJ4-ti:lt ill I't4)0 111C .' Md16,.'Il At 11h. J.A' ) 1k- L'i L11%L`IIIII: 11:1L1 IL'i.L`IItI� Ilt:kII LL171l.ttt'.1 VI 111 1:0VtIY61 1).1ItII .111L1 '..II L- II1L' Llfi,IILt .It I'I t!,L 514~ �IIIIll� 54,1 Lwlilll:litLI III ht` :.ppl4l ilrr,lic`k4 11 4CLlr .. t14ILIIoIIaL'F11(2ll7ti Ili,1ilsll' JCIII f _'. sOIILTC 4 LIrI\w'S5x, 1.11141'-1 11,Illl' ;'1, WIC L-011I.J11111F1'It 1llt: w!iE' L% Jw L0h',1dLtCll AWI`A::C I :3F1Lk w.L11J4 41 111t dJIL III '-.4I4- \1.1', L 15I1JY.414`41 I,, 1}4` .L1�Iu "rJsll.:ll15 III IYI YIY Imisi•s►ticd Sale No). G -sF�.stitsu: 7117 I as,[ ;\,ht wtrctt. I .s�cttc� illy'- Ark.tn,,a,_ 1\,swlti11210n [ +FuntN [,Iado tipr: [ .Irol \mic %hr*h Granter- .famew Wiw Date (if MY M;t\ i- 201 } t, "+irilud.- M"'k 201 A 11'_'c 1 10241 1Ad%bw7,THI I.vgal Dc•rcriptimi: 1 +,t 22, .lu:° ti,ICU ler \ddiIi,lrt t;, tile' ( 11% III F al ttc% I l ls' [ ssts;iti�r:�ti+sn: 125AH"> FiF1a111:iII [: „I1\clltli,ttal: \rR1 w-1 L:n"t11 Vvrirlvtl: tielhn t A7ount Land Size- HAS- Wk. D%% llin+,.- Sim: 1.�(,7- wl PricsriSF D%%cllin,--: s9s, ,i, Remarks: I hill l,r+.+I,c-r[ti i, .,n Ow "'1101 "idc ++I I ,1,1 V', l ti[r+'4'I- ju,I ti "'l ;+1 \ll,lm I )rikv: 1111, I++c,tti,.lst 1" ,tpI,ru\1111clttlr 1.'� tllilc, ,+,ullMC,l „h tilc IL' lu•.tr ulm irl ,haf,C_ I I1C I, Ut1,,[U lltllt'-' r1:;lr- All rt_, w lltic, ari tt, ihl ,itC I1w tills I, implt'lLtd hill a ollc ,Kwj %In,'Ic-t, md, d«Amy v„I1t.trrlln__' ;111 111111 mid I. 67, ',I I Ilc•rt' k :II•,,, :1 att:lcllrtl c.:lr sf'.t {tistilllCdi cl,ntainttr_ :lhhr++vmalcl�-41+1): "I - ;t, %NCII a" -401,IL-C htlildirtc. I he -,k%Lih11L' i, ( la"-. 1) tl,Ittitretctl, st- 1ti Ills t}+ 41 c`wltiri45r. I hc:11%%Olill" i, illch'acd it, ':„rttmll mId I.� h-lt'll-M"11" 111C Lik�c11in'-2. 52�'- Sl patio :Hilt moll kllldilll!. I f1c Iti ( la,, `-I) t lltiirll�'[I,,II. t11i1: 1 lLk Eenuc1 silk Shod em rl+'r. II:c 'J%%clllfl_' I-, lflllil; %L` l Ili.) 4Oljt,rlfl ilCd'l11'+illti 'AIIJ �.5 1,,![ilrS5kF111. i he hI lIin" IrrtiludC'; kitJlcrl ,flll7lIaIIs`c1. I ilc 4I%wilim-, t�, 4'cwralll lll<`,lt,:4l ;4rl(I tl,i+ICLI. 1 11C ,r}L`r,rll 41111w[r!lwtitI11 Ill:riiI ,+1 111L• .JGkeIIir! � iS 111IdL'rCLi .I C rl''l`. 1 11C �it�C 11 ' i 111cli�;lt�t; [I.} ]1:It4` h�`Crl 4:1jrI,,[rl+t:[c`k1 ir! IL?h�-. I'll4' c011dnil,n at Ne daw 4ot MS aNCMg��� III ykhKL IIlti cIlc Kc ugc Ill'the ,Jtt�ihng two �`�tinl,lod h; i c oppn}wirry:aco +t:l• tcam. ` AddiliOIIJI jll lLId Iinuing: c"Wrw`tc ,lwpil,rl[ i;srlkk.opitl�_�, oc. I hL' 4L'r1411s1''1f,+t'[IlC4ltcllllllriilcnlillt'_ Itlriill.tw,l �l}iltil�ii`l'i�l lttr,lL'ti I ilIl I %dIUc.![ the kidiC {+I'',:lIL: ttJ�, tinl,+tw�.i I'' bw•:llIItir„\illl;ltLflw S'IIl,I)t)stt. lrttllrn►et1 Salle Nit. 5 l licatina: (:raniltr: (.ranIce: I )a tr ( )I .ti;4lr: 1. val Dr-wrilrli[kn: ( �k4trlkl�l':4t1[�n: 51:I'"! ,'IE,I. �i ,f.111rsI't+`11 � ,�afrlt�, l �illh+.l 11 \t41'��11 I�ll�iit: E' (_'.n•.I11,f I} a1 I i,1,I u t ,i I t,t+ her l+r .`srlrl \I.f� 'tt_ '111 ; lt,lt+h '01 t 1',!", 1 hlr l f i lil, h I \ rtll kI51' t �ffhtliti•ll'rl t, OIL' t lid w I :< Illllr }inancin�: 1 "1:�crrtl��11.11 1rIII i �r:'_til cri[ic[I; "ClI P N"Clli Land silt.; 11h c s1- -{I I{limark%: I Ill• I�f,',114II} I-, i,}.,t(Ct1 .111111 lilt- 11111111 ',1LIC +-t I :1'1 I'C'l'I 'I CCt, 111'A ['.Itit t t II1r1C1� 1% I rff;1 4: I h I ' I +I ,MI''II I' ,l;Tl �,IIII Qt2IN I1 N I - Illllt- 1+511111+1F III(' lls ,11ti I', nc.ir Ill mil,:; 4. ,ftttl 11 1', ,I JLL :,' 17.1.1 'h'tr I hI; tk 1•i Ill y 11 [ failil I%' , .us_ .t Lil,LI'IL' tl+ 014 -.Il, Ike ',IIC I� II71�'1Si�1�',! 544t11 .f i�11�-,i•.+I' ..,III'_'IL'-1:f11511'. tit\C}EIIIr t"II.,i'-rlilr_ ,111 ill�,llti.11kCf I.' 'Ir'I I k'ari i71 1 C14. , .ff .ttt.lE}I..l ,.1',II't I'Irli'l`;Cvll 'IIS.. ,lII!; tl'{`I'. ,Ilt!,i:4 'fi \} \14l1 ,1• ,1 III RI II �`\4'1­1,11 .IEIIrr!' IIII d%IC111111' I', 111di-911-d I-�'Itll,lnl I,cdt'1„III' ;}i,r1 I li}III}f,s III It1i mdud-,:, krl,h:r1 ic d cI IIta Iw ,c'r1Ir.11 4u',ItE'•l tr1.1 il' 11tit:lliIII F1141i1,11Vt% .`i thI 41LL:11111'= I,'..''11 EI::CI'11,l�:C�l2l' I!x 11}" i, I;ICIIit T'I.v.4''-C it •.'11 1Lll trtil in 1'00 111: I_Imdall.In .I( tht rl.lt: II! •.uis L�,r, d%:1-'I 1 I h: d\%l'III[1 I -it! t3C:[I I111%1,l[rr3 1I,II:tt, I I H 1 <<jr1��'t. '.%mA,I\t-., IL I Ilr s.'f1l'�[1L� ,..1 ,,{ Il.l 1L.1: 1T1_ i, 4' I IIr4,1C L'll G I ; .i; �r .I117..11: 1', it ;fl- '.E,Ir Vidilloll.11 ill] pw%Clllcrlt•z Im 111ti11. IiIII, III . it 11kt-:t1`,If1!1,111 1111L- --IIL' II11("1 ,}11111--'-[ ..E �r-11;_ `,L 1l ��..0 wl��li.1 1', CI,IL': ,lull % IItt::Yt III:Ii,ItC I + I w.dtL' 'n,II r',III11,Itl'L.1 I i I I}4' :11r11r+'\1111,1!:I.% S��.'"Il.1- (Illlllrivi'lA Sa1v Nil. 4 lowafil►n: 2626 %Ah t►ld \\ Irk' ROALl" ! :►\title\ ille. 1rk.►n�u,: AVa�llin�ll�n (_ k,11nh . n n nW: MUlin K. c- Rhonda Rckltic•ll Grantce- 1lauhr\\ B & \mianda ,It, Nic•h tw-, DaIv ( ) U 'Sc41e: June 21t_ 014 1 1kd June 24.�2014 Imp! I}e.criiuAn: I':lrt 1 ►i t he Nf- 1 4 t►f 36-1 --,11: Detailed l iptit+n Kcp1 f 1n 1 11e ('lll► i4lrratilFn: $15YWO i ina>I�cin;�: Comclltiollal: Ar-1ll-,,-1 rn-,til 1 Mol: Puhh Ilrel.,rcl, l.:►nd Sire: MY K:re 1h.'coin+;S41e: Phce sF Dw%c1h11 111tj ti {l'lll:ll"I. h hi, pr givrz4 I, Ioc:11�!t1 t+11 111t_' ti,outhea t tilde +,,I \,'rlll (►1t1 \, 1Te 1is+:itl ,i►lti1 ,w't,tlla\t',1 "I 3 11d I�ad: Ihll� ltl4',Ill,+rl Iw .1lil.,le111. 11' 111e ',+lkldl�\e,t ,lt Ille ',tll�j141e `,11c' IL, 11C,lr r�'t'I:LI1'LII:Lr nt ti11.117e. the Is+1l,+g'rapll\ I, tlRalIII:IttrlL:.rle:li lc%cl cil� ulih1ie1 are.t\:lil.tl le tt the ',ItC. I he bile iw irttl)1-0\4'J \\ ilia :l tine ,koy ,i11g1elamily t ucHin ' k,.'ni:liltirl; ,in ill►fiI,;ac,f 1. +`> * SI _ ! Ileri I, .l1�tr a I\\l, e:ll ,Ilt;,l'Ill'll I:tra.+e 1lilli��IteJ I II11,6nill ;tpl}r,I\ill1;1141\ i�Ii ' f+ M1 tiAL,-tecl I'dli"_ 1111' ll4tiellilw Iti (. [,I,,, --I) I}rIc'1* \411et'I" :arid •.1:t1 L:,, 111,:1Lid t:ti kiIL,III'r1 ,11111IIJri:c, I I11: ♦It\C 111�-, Iti LCIlil;fll\ IIC,IIt,1 .IIIi1 .,','-It'LI I ill' ,,tt'I,SII 111�IrlS'.i{ +II tlIIaIII\ +I Ilw d\\t'lIIII- I'- t,,II"I 3CICI (,' I?C .I\tiJ t' I Ill' lit, Lr1_' IIII+IIt,111(I 1 11,S4L 11 t:lII TUI Irl I }}. i Ilt` l 'rid IIli,l) Jt the ,lAc ,•1 �JI,-- \\,I 'I\,'I I"t' 1,'' ''+I„t1 flit "II II\l' 1 t '1 the J%%.cl III ' +\;I'. :",tItEI.IIt:k ? ' ii\ ,I II+\Ir11,11C1', 'll ti, L ,II Ncitlili,imII nupr,i4 iIIcnt tlI1,it'L! .1'.i}i1;t11 ,'titlt'4C +111\t'iiLI CI I,.EII'.' fl'+i`t.li llll' t'Ik III.' IddIII,'II.II illlPrt,\,'fl10l Il , 'LFIt":II I\ '\ t'It III .I\ c 1.11't' , i ,11,11 1, 111 1 ,Ind L,IILit. .}i I.fit' ""Irt`' r ."t I, '.t.l t" 1"".+1 C"I I,' i', .L I,I'1 11I11.11CII \h-' 10 II+. Awl �L or •.i"i ii�`!t __._'.G%J�'�ri3 i"��L'1Y^7': ej';Fty.. �iai���'�ii����,ice-llaa��i�+�_•riR`�k�.�-3: ::.8c bUi III I I IIL7 kjt% C1 I I I I t' II ( I j ', '. " " I ) " , I t I i ' , 11' 11 , t I I I 1 ; , [r I t I I ,I I t I L k % 1: f I Ct: r ;;;III % I I . % I %, , -[I Jliw_'k. I he d"CITNO K kon dwd v � wim"N 0 Iwh"l - I hc dmcHmu imloWN kk,hcn apphanw,A Iho AnHim i knm& WAWA A C d I h, A L7FJI I cl - 'I I I I I Lf 111 11j'. � �C Tj In .11 lhc o i- 1111 Ill I Ilk L I L' A,�L !hL' k`, L'I I 'A .1' L -11111 1.11 J )I'M It I -11, 11 11111 1 r It% C? I I c! I I, I I! C III' J.; I ' 'p1:rk'[C III j'I I,­'� I I I I I : L. i I. I , -t r' Iddii II !).]I IIITI + 1. CTI)CII! , 11;_'1u'r't'k "% III 312E'Wi t "IlIhl f' III I .1!'Lt % AIIJ4' il lh�: JAI[C - I 1.1i,: 'AA . L ".. [T'L_Z'Ld I' I hV ti"I'V A 1111,IZL 1 . I, ` { !. I -I I, I Impro'`ed Sale 1(0, 2 ze I 1+�-atil Fn: ���antnri {iranim. I ate 4 )f Sale- I{crlle'lled- I r+qal Pe riptioll: Iwllli \�'rlh (si�i 11,r�- It,�.l,1 f.1\ittitiilli. �1''•.;lll�;k�: tit ,iti1111I;'t� �tl ( �Illlt`. - [)4'n I J-,ir KIrl-. ti,,,.i'. I 11,.1 to: I rtic til.Irii I lrt�\ 1:,, 'E.0)1, 1 r,I ! ,, i 7 l\ �,illrl I 1 I{,IlI.1 lul, �- III I ilt:cl I111, 'J• 'III I't. I ot-, Iti. 31t, III \lcjjo4\ lo\ 1,Id4k'I1 I;+ rllc ('it, „f I .s\ \ilIt: , \11,.11i •.i,. I'Irianvinu- ( on, CI11V'llal. \1111 '--1 4.'ll 'lll WWI: N&Aw Ow I�}}i'lllll+ti sI/e: 1 Jim wi Pricc �4 lh%chin+R: S h c #emarLs: l h- I'r lvr['. K ; . Wa w n m mh .4 , 1 N, rtfl 11j,+ '\% Ir, k ,I,i .I _11 •It ,II'.r-nl,_C II—Ith ,.r 11. i '"t f1 *l:ii'.. I.1. 11! 1 .1'.,t%4' &" 1111' I 'w.111"17 Jf l"•`i\Illl�il:,]' 1 1,0 [' Ili 'U11}'•,ti I ,}I d14 •,III'li�t. 111C �iti I* I1i,1' !4,t,111,^I,l.sl IIf '•li.11',`, ili [ 1,," r.il5rfl lfl4111{.11111 1li•if 11t114,11 , ;f, llllhtlti, :;li` III,- .Ili I'• 11111,1',5)r.l Wilk ,I �'c --I I'•-IIIL'li-t,IIIIII_, d%, CII,[12 ,+ lltallltll!.' .III III,IIL:,IIL% l,�hi�- ,% I�Iw V I`. :Iltit' :I [\\+} iJl JlrII�llt'i.! 4J11„411 II;IIIII11L' apIII ,\Iilll:ty t�til �I .111k1 1„4r wl+'Fit�i sr:. I`,l la4 I1. I.yt[iI, I, „II Itl- ,cII k ,1n,1 tln',I fcri 11i1. lf. ... 1 4c'° III"i1,, ttl,rl! �•IiII1Jl," I il�' ,14tiill�i'!' �, I'l�; ..SiiJ 1, 4!?.4tr1 1�".If��,�111' .Elul � h,tfl'ir.,�+r''�. I 'V, I''•i11=sl_i r I h11i t '.ti.. -A 1`ti mr: 1a, J11,1 k11,hii .r; l ll,ill�i I�ti 1+ti:1'I?1-2 fl?f.: Ilti.11i,l .I!I,' r Iti-1 11ll '1!4?`u"I'.0 ,tu,rilt` 1 ;ll. .1',�cll:;'r_ ,:.'•it u _ ,:.era_, 11 .'4tiii Ct. I I L rttiJ iI•_i.;i! I t'� I Ii ^ I I11W I III i•_.ttC tr.I It.t� !li: k:rI • It'.tf t:�'k-,1 I lt_ •ILllli�lt ,1f I!Il-'I-11 i- 't -.f1�: -.1 .? l!ir ll?c', 1Vls .1; .. •! II1 �.!1l1 l!111 L' ', `•-1 -,i IC'„1<-J • ' ,fI lrlrlIILrr'.,II IIIII+Im,\kIII - III,• I •iiil::,l AII)IMk ,-'Il�lctl tIr1�411 1',` icIILIII I,tlIJ .al^.fY'_. SJ,Iltlr-11JI 11111�1t'tiIII, -Ilt`, '_LI!,!:III_, '1%Cr: ill AkL'f,1_'1: i+^rtJItl,--I1 1 .Illd hluE' :11 1111, 41,11C Ill '.,Ik, '0,1ti is' I+l' ,1;�1!fl'\II11.11t'l MCI} RII!ll, Iml}ri)%ed SaIc Nu. I !.turafiim I .' I I vslf 11 ( rl.'sr\Ni , l,l 1 )F I%V I';1\C11CN llli' I+4111t'. 4aIV: (.rarlfnr: 4 .tr, l n t E'I1sh {�ranlrc: K• h4lt I r ,�:. F,;:ri'rs \ f:r.En,l "l I'iri•[[rSlril: lil.,,ll..'tIl � I`.E_c IlLitl'+ I Ill:ll �I1111 ,, ,�I11 ` 1 t�itil I1Mi'�CI'111115[11; I "t 1 4, I`1 I L,l ,,I tiuhtlli I -I. �r: i' Ih� [ Ii� „I I ,E'• l-[Ir� iIIC_ Il�t.ul��3 I �.tl 111:*�rEl�ti'n ItiLj�r r ►t. } lIC Idrllclrlt'[I ('ow;idcr;IIinn: Fiur111611": 11%IL Arm I oln� Ih 4 cril"icII: ��IIIIIt.' 11'� Ilt Lail '%IlC: D"Ci in4, sitc: Prict- 'NI' 1> 4llin�„: •; 11,1 1{Clll;ll L.: 1 jll� ill,'I1CW, I I, , AN':kE .Il, lt'.' lilt' il—rlkl .l1!l . 'I111 l rL .1tt,,, .l 1)11\C. Ill' I 4'a •1 IIIL'14 yE 11llti 1 .Irl[. :11 j. 1`1:1(L'1111ti. Till', 1--itlllil I, �lEI �fRI\Ill l,stklll .` �Illll ,,1h4' `•111'Il'ti[ Ill' ',I[4' Iw rII:;II I C C I LII!-IIIAI III w113I)C 111ti t,+Iltl_'r.iE�h4 1's INllllli,ItIII I I C I' IC L'I 111 t`v ll[II1114:IR':13:t11:11�{� tlI [III x.I[L'. 111: �Ir4' i'. mirr1'tiL'4E 141111 ,1 , II, '•i lr'' `•Ir1,'i4 I.II11LI,, i11N4'III!".' .' IIi.iIII I'll ' ,3 \Ii11.11L'I % I. tt'-" *�'I I ; ,:rci. Iilir,. i i': I',4 .,it .O!'l, .. I,, „Ir_ II' ,.,,r„ :,I tij. ;,, ,il rl ill.l I ,t r� ,sli' �11k L'I Ck1'.1L .1rt:.1 I_�jf, Ni I '.11t1 l��il.l 1. 'I:, ,I llti i�fr' \j L4 „'4E ,Il':'I`. tl 111 I,t'r ��,E.1 II'L' t.`i rt'„ SALES eC9MPA ' SONAPP OACH' ,r:T In the Sales Comparison Approach, the subject property is compared to similar properties that have been sold recently or for which listing prices or offering figures are known. Data for generally comparable sale properties are used, and comparisons are made to demonstrate a probable price at which the subject property would sell if offered on the market. "To apply the Sales Comparison Approach, appraisers follows a systematic procedure: Research the competitive market for information on properties that are similar to the subjeC1 properly and that have recently sold, are listed for sale, or are under contract. Information on agreements of sale, options, listings, and bona fide offers may also be collected. The characteristics of the properties such as property type, date of sale, size, physical condition, location, and land use constraints should be considered. The goal is 10 find a set of comparable sales or other evidence such as property listings or contracts as similar as possible to the subject property to ensure they reflect the actions of similar buyers. Market analysis and highest and best use analysis set the stage for the selection of appropriate comparable sales. 2. Verify the in formation by confirming that thed data obtained is factually accurate and that the transactions reflect arm's-length market considerations. Verification should elicit additional information about the properly such as buyer motivation, economic characteristics (if the properly is income -producing), value component allocations, and other significant factors as well as information about the market to ensure that comparisons are credible. 3. Select the most relevant units of comparison used by participants in the market (e.g., price per acre, price per square foot, price per front foot, price per duelling unit) and develop a comparative analysis for each rout. The appraisers goal is to define and identify a unit ofcomparison that explains market behavior. look for differences behveen the comparable sale properties and the subject property rising all appropriate elements of comparison. Then adjust the price of each sale property, reflecting how it differs, to equate it to the subject property or eliminate that property as a comparable. This step typically involves rising the most similar sale properties and then adjusting for any remaining differences. If a transaction does not reflect the actions of a buyer who would also be attracted to the suhject property, the appraisershould be concerned about comparability. 5. Reconcile the various value indications produced fr•orrr the analysis of comparables into a vahie conclusion. A value opinion can be expressed as a single point estimale, cis a range of values, or in terms of a relationship (e.g., more or less Than a given amount). i19 The Sales Comparison Approach is utilized to estimate the market values of the improved subject homesites. The comparable sales utilized are presented on the following pages. The estimated contributory value of the excess land (from Land Value Section) is added to the estimated values of the improved homesites to arrive at the indicated value of the whole property 19 Appraisal hrsrirrrie, Pre Arnmraised of Real Estate — Fourteenth Edition, (Chicago: Appraisal lnslirute, 2013). P. 381-381. a] The -preceding -represents the indicated market value of the fee simple -interest -in --the subject whole property by the Cost Approach. Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. The preceding indicated value of the subject whole property is allocated as follows: 2634 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.50f AC) _ $1 14,000 2648 Old Wire Rd. Homesite (0.75f AC) _ $220,000 9.7± ACS of Excess Land = $640,000 Please see the Extraordinary Assumptions previously presented. 92 B. TYPE OF LOAN A SETTLEMENT STATEMENT (HUD.1) tI ❑ FHA 2 ❑ F1IMA 3 CONV UNINS 1. VA 5 CONY. INS �+ 6 FILE NUMBER 7 LOAM NUMBr:R ' � • 21d98-14 8 MORTGAGE ENS. CASE No C NOTE' This form is fumished to give you a statement of actual ser lemens Costs Amounts paid to and by the settlement agent we shown Items marked •( -o.c)" were aid outside the closi-, the ate shown here for infomsstional u es and are not included in the totals D. NAME & ADDRESS City of Fayeneville OF BORROWER: 113 West Mountain St., Fayetteville, AR 72701 E NAME & ADDRESS Mary L. Dunn OF SELLER: 2648 N. Old Wirc Road. Favetteville AR 72703 F. NAME & ADDRESS Cash OF LENDER: G, PROPERTY LOCATION: 2634 N. Old Wirc Road Fa etievillie, All 72701 H. SETTLEMENT AGENT: Bronson Abstract Co., Inc. PLACE OF SETTLEMENT: 3810 Front Street, Suitc 5. Fayetteville, AR 72703 479 442-2700 _...-,..,- ... »...... ...... ....,...,.,.. DrCAI III.SFMIENT DATE: 10110/2014 100. Gross Amount Due From Borrower: 400. Gross Amount Due To Seller: 101. Contact sales Pike 1144 000, 0 401 Contract salts rice 1 l0y 0 0000.00 102. Personal ecoperty 402. Personal PEPCn 103 Settlement charges to borrower: Oinc 1400 900. 403. i 104 404, _ .. 105 405 Ad ustments For Items Paid By Seller In Advance: Adjustments For Items Paid By Seller In Advance: 106, Ca hdwn taxes to 406, Ci !town rases to 107 comiry. taxes to 407 County taxes to 1 108. Assessments to 408. Assessments to _ i 109. 409. I141. l I 1 I 411. 112 412. 413. 120. Gross Amount Oise From Borrower: 203 EtisunR loans) taken Adjustments For items Unpaid By Seller: 210, CiryAown taxes to 211 Coun taxes 01101/14 to IOl10114 212, ASscssmCnta 213, Owner finammIl 215 2l6 217 218 219 220. Total Paid By1For Borrower• 100 n FromfTo Borrow 301 Gross amoual due from borrower pine 120) 302 Less amount paid b •!for borrower Oine 220) 303. Casts (YJFROM) iaO) Borrower: Previous Edition Is Obsolete Form No 1531 31M 415. [' 100,900.0Ut 416 r- 420. Gross Amount Due To Seller: 1 1,100,000.00 I 1 00.00 S O Reductions unt Put 10. Ner: 501 Excassdeposit see instructions I _ 502. Settlement char as to seller line 1400 46,150.34 503. Existing loans taken soh -act to 504. Payoff 1st Mtg- Ln. _ _ 505. Pavoff2nd %rltg La 506, De d To Seller _ 1,000.00 507 j�_.__ -_ __ 4 , 508 Adjustments For Items Unpaid By Seller: 50.Cltyhownraxes to 511, County taxes 01101/14 to 10/10/14 512. Assessments to 513. Owner financed ..__ 51 402 680 520. Total Reductions I 450,831,001 In Amount Due Seller: I 60, Caettlement FromEro Seller I00 900.001 601. Gross antoant due to seller ine 420 1 I00.000-00 402,680.661 602. Lass teductiom is amount due seller Qine 520 450,931.00 698,219.34 603. Cash [-�I'O) FROM) Seller: 649,169.00' SB-4-353E-WO-I HUD-1 (3-86) RESPA. HB 4305 2 Page I of 3 L. SETTLEMENT CHARCIES Escrcav 2149,.4-14 700. Total Sales.'BMker's Commission. Paid From Paid From Based On Price 5 nn n nn :6) 'e' Rorra%er'S Seller's 'vto of missi Mine 700 Ai E U • Funds Funds iv 4 QQ ;, E3v.sett_ Mitts kSSCCLI 3 -Inc At At Settlement Setllernent M3, Cowntsmorli at enlemenl —� -- - - - -- ! rL o 704. 20. Wit On;lnprign fog — L Q!,�puni—_ saduraiaj ftr to: - n5 [port to: — fin Ic>'e irls;cnion fee— �JI 06. jkvleage insura—c g nlication tee to - ---� Sc c - S4 n _ -- 1n---_ �— 814 SIR 819 -- -- - - — ono Q Interest frgm In— n� \l rtaaee insurancepremium for 4 FLxjj imurwicc premiumf t — — - non =' r Wit• l ^c r 0 m 'h aMonth— } I On? NIvrtgace InaiJrarss 0 months rr1', 10.00 n — i 0; wes n months S S n. — � L-SL2A. Court, propcBv IaSc- 00 ncr month I uu < c 0 months,a7 _ .e Omonlhs r l m7 Q t1=thO? S per morith 108 Adi I i109 .. �,t _ - - 11nn. Title 1101- Sefticmcnt nr clv,sJna fee ronm!3 AktuQt 'a Inc. 2251225.00 r ", rac c - < s to Far rsan Ah - Tnct Com r c 1 _ inn 0 l Title exaad�y Qt3m [Rl Titl5urnrwc bindct to— <'; [jo um.-ni (1.rg;amt16n to grnP.Sk� MCC CO. IRC - -- I� 06 ' + M:_('r< to — 1107. Anorney's fees to (includes above item Numbers: ) _ t I08, Title insurance to Bronson Abstract Company, Inc. (includes above item Numbers: ) 550.(1' - 550.0 1109 Lendcr= covva= S- 1110, ,+ l'= zo� gragg S 1. 100,000.00mium' S 1. 10000 061. Recordinz fees.ee .a 21110 Mon 'me j 0 00 Rcicas R 0.00 25 -- I rccttml< 0.30 Alart^nc �_ 5ralctaxrStats,gc I?eed5 0.40 :I�ftn�:=ts (U)o ion c „ <. I e}' To ?, Pesl ir.;nettiyn_n '-- i 692.911 V FxS. _Frame_ __;m� Ta,, to Wa;hminon Cnuan' Tax Call^ •tot- )Q �< tr15 -tr ax W t + unto n lee r_' f tc 253S..f7Z�5I� Q§. Prot,em, 1s., to SYasitinet tc Y to -2nl' _ ax S 7 !}0 '1'ntal 4R 1 S rlem nt ['harve (F+rtee nn line Mir. Secriorr 1- - hrrr 01 ti+ tr r - —� 5p.igl Form No. t 582 Page 2 of 3 SB-4-3538-ODD-1 SELL$R'S AND/OR BOiZROWER'S S"I'ATEMENT Escrow 21498-14 1 have carefully reviewed the HUD-1 Settlement Statetnant and to the best of my knowledge and belief, it is a true and accufatastatemMI ofall receipts and disbursements made on my account or by me in this transaction. 1 further certify that I have received a copy of the HUD -I Settlement Statement. Borrowers/Purchasers 1 City of f ^ slttel'ill Seilcrs 'y/ Dunn The HUD -I Settlement Statement which I have prepared is a true and accurate accuunt of Lhis transaction [ have caused or will ca%ist iltc funds lu br disbursed in accordant vith this sr r. rm. ` 10-)0 - )l Settlement Agent: 7� `L - Lela R. Davis, Bronson Abstract Co., Inc. WARNLNG: It is a crime to knowingly make false statements to the United States on this or any other similar farm. Penalties upon conviction can include a fine or imprisonment. For details set: Title 18 U.S. Code Section 1001 wid Section 1010. Page 3 of3 INDEMNITY AGI VEMi NT HE, 21498-14 DATE: October 10, 2014 PROPERTY ADDRESS: 2634 N. Old Wire Road, Fayettevillte, AR 7270t PARCEL NO.: 765-16092-000, 765-16080-000, 765-16095"000 LEGAL: Part of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter (NE14 SWA) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in three separate deeds recorded in Washington County deed book 526, page 444; deed hook 526, page 445; and deed book 543, page 176, and said part being more particularly described as follows: commencing at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly comer of the Logue tract first recorded in deed hook 534, Page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 249 feet [join the southeast comer of the said N1-114 SW/4 of Section 36; thence N35113'03"E 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, a set t12 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence N59010'35"W 208.28 feet to a point on the east file of (old Wire Road which lies 0.16' southeasterly from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30°29'02"E 148.23 feet to the southwesterly canter of the Phillips property as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence leaving the east line, along the southerly line of the said Phillips prtiperty, S59° 1 YOVE,, 220.56 feet, passing at 0.16 feet a I inch pipe, to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly comer of the Phillips tract; thence S35013'03"W 148.82 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 31,798 square feet, or 0.730 acres, Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (NE14 SW/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 3U West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in a deed recorded 41 Washington County document 93-27263, and said part being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly comer of the Logue tract first recorded in deed hook 534, page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast comer of the said NE14 S WA of Section 36; thence along die northerly line of die said Logue tmct N5901 I' 18'W 200.00 feet to the northwesterly corner of the Logue tract on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies southeasterly 0,06' from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east title of Old Wire Road N30°29'02"E 100.00 feet to a point which lies southeasterly 0.16 feet from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence leaving the east line S59°10'35"E 208.28 feet to a set 112 inch tebar and plastic cap; thence S35° 13'03"W 100.25 feet to tbt point of beginning, enclosing 20,409 square feel, or 0.469 acres. Part of the Southeast quarter and also part of the Southwest quarter, both in Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washinbrton County, Arkansas, said parts being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County Document 93-19847, and said parts being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies East 1,485 feet and North 805 and 113 feet from the southwest corner of the Southeast quarter of the said Southwest quarter of Section 36: t1tence NO2°33'59"E t65.43 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument at the southwest corner of the Azalea Terrace Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 80; thence, along the west line of the said Azalea Terrace, NO1°46'56"E 337.08 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument with brass cap at the northwest comer of Azalea Terrace; thence NO2' l 5'07" l; 692.71 feet to a 112 inch rebar along the south line of the Shadow Mills Subdivision as depicted on a plat tiled in Washington County plat book 7, page 4; thence, along the south line of the said Shadow Hills, N87°05'04"W 219.90 feet to a cross tie fence post at the northeast corner of the Phillips tract as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence, along the easterly line of the said Phillips tract, 336° 11'27"W 236.94 feet to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly comer of the Phillips tract; thence S35° 13'03 "W 249.07 feet, passing at 148.82 feet a set 1 /2 inch rebar and plastic cap, to a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37; thence S30129'02"W 248.25 feet to a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap at the southeasterly comer of the Shipley tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 179; thence along the southerly line of the said Shipley tract N59°41'44"W 33.84 feet to a wooden fence post; thence S44°5T50"E 867.74 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 440,780 square feet, or 10. 119 acres. WHEREAS, CLOSING AGENT is required to collect the county property taxes for prior years from the Seller, and prorate funds for the ye4, in order to satisfy title requirements, and WHEREAS, CLOSING AGENT'S information regarding said taxes is based on figures obtained from the records of the Washington COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S OFFICE; and said information available at the time of the closing of the transaction from the said Assessor's office is on some Occasions only an estimate of the taxes for the parcel of real property or said property may currently be or at some time in the future be reassessed. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of CLOSING AGENT closing this transaction fcr the BORROWER AND/OR SELLER based on information available to CLOSING AGENT, the BORROWER and/or SELLER agree with CLOSING AGENT as follows: I) in the event the funds collected to pay taxes for prior years and prorated taxes for the year 2014 as shown on the SETTLEMENT STATEMENT for the BORROWER and/or SELLER herein, are not sufficient to pay in full the actual real property taxes far said calendar years, the BORROWER andlor SELLER agree to hold the CLOSING AGENT harmless from any claims and demands from any leading institutions or other entities for payment of said taxes, and 2) If CLOSING AGENT is required to advance any of its own fiords to pay slid taxes, the BOR10UWf7R and/or SELLER will indemnify CLOSiNU AGENT for any such funds so advanced. 3) The SELLER will make an additional prorata payment of said tares based on the percentage 1`01 led on the respective SE'ITLEMFN'f STATEMENT regarding this transaction when advised by the CLOSING AGEN"l that the funds credited to the BUYER at the closing for payment of said taxes were not sufficient to pay same. 4) In the event that the COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S OFFICE fails to update the ownership of the tax parcels of the property subsequent to tic date of this document, the SELLER and/or BORROWER (if applicable), hereby release and hold CLOSING AGENT harmless from any claims and 6:iriands rnade to correct said failure PRIOR YEAR TAXES are based on amount reported by W ASHLNGTON COUNTY 'I AX COLLLCT'OR Q PRORATED TAXES are based on amount reported by WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR ❑ PRORATED TAXES credited to the BUYER arc based on an estimate, calculated as follows: PURCHASE. PRICE • 20% • MILEAGE RATE = ESTINIAT LI) TAXES. ❑ WASHINGTON COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR'S hooks ate currently closed. Prior year's taxes and prorated nixes may be based on prior year reporting. In the event the property is reassessed or l.-tx figures are adjusted, BORROWER and /or SELLER will be responsible for any difference between amount collected and the actual amount reported on the tax billing for the current year. THIS AGREEMENT shall be binding on the heirs, successors and asstgns of the parses hereto. BUYER: SELLER City of Fayetteville Mary L, Ounn SELLL'R'S FORWARDING ADDRESS 2648 N. Old Wire Road Fayetteville 72703 SELLER'S AFFIDAViT STATE OF: AR ANSAS COUNTY OF: WASHINGTON The undersigned, referred to as Seller (whether one or more) being first duly sworn on oath that the Seller is the owner of the following described lands, situated in Washington County, Arkansas. to -wit. Part of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter (NFV4 SW/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, is the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said pall being previously described in three separate deeds recorded in Washington County deed book 526, page 444; deed boom 526, page 445; and deed book 543, page 176, and said part being more particularly described as follows: commencing at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, Page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NE/4 S W/4 of Section 36; thence N35" I YO E 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence N59'10'35"W 208.28 feel to a point on the cast line of Old Wire Road which lies 0.16' southeasterly from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30"29'02"E 148.23 feet to the southwesterly comer of the Phillips property as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence leaving the east line, along the southerly line of the said Phillips property, S59'13'04"E 220.56 feet, passing at 0.16 feet a l inch pipe, to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35° 13'03"W 148.82 feed to the point ul beginning, enclosing 31,798 Square feet, or 0.730 acres. Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (NE/4 S W/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Merge 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County document 93-27263, and said pail being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly comer of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast comer of the said NF14 SW/4 of Section 36; thence along the northerly lime of the said Logue tract N59° 1 l' 18"W 200.00 feet to the northwesterly comer of the Logue tract on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies southeasterly 0.0G from a I inch pinch top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30'29'02"E W0A0 feet to a point which lies southeasterly 0A 6 feat from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence leaving the east line S59" 10'35"E 208.28 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic carp; thence S35° 13'03"W 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 20,409 square feet, or 0,469 acres. Part of the Southeast quarter and also part of the Southwest quarter, both in Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said parts being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County Document 93-19847, and said parts being inure particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies East 1,485 feet and North 905 and 1/3 feet from the southwest comer of the Southeast quarter of the said Southwest quarter of Section 36; thence NO2"3759"F 165.43 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument at the southwest comer of the Azalea Terrace Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 80; thence, along the west line of the said Azalea Terrace, NO1'46'56"E 337.08 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument with brass cap at the northwest. corner of Azalea Terrace; thence NO2°15'07"E 692.71 feel to a 1/2 inch rebar along the south line of die Shadow Hills Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 4; thence, along the south line of the said Shadow Hills, N87°05'04"W 219.90 feet to a crass tie fence post at the northeast corner of the Phillips tract as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence, along the easterly line of the said Phillips tract, S36" 11'27"W 236.94 feet to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35°13'03"W 249.07 feet, passing at 148.82 feet a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap, to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at tite northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37; thence S30'29'O2"W 248.25 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the southeasterly corner of the Shipley tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 179; thence along the southerly line of the said Shipley tract N59141'4411W 33.84 feet to a wooden fence post; thence S44°57'50"E 967.74 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 440,790 square feet, or 10, 119 acres. Seller further states the following facts are true: I, There is no adverse occupant of the property deacribcd above. 2. Seller and those, under whom Seller claims title, have been in peaceful possession or said lands fof mare than 7 years past 3. There are no unrecorded options to purcha::e, Sales Contracts or Least Agreements outstanding, which affects the property described above. 4. There have been no improvements made on the property described above during the put 130 days for which a Mechanic's and Materialmens' Lien may he filed. 5- No appliances have been iustailed in the property described above on deferred payments, +el6i;h are unpaid for 6, The property described above is not traversed by any roadways or easements, except those shown on record 7, There are no delinquent assessments due on the resident's association on the property described above, if applicable. &. That no money whatsoever is owed on subject property to any person, firm or corporation other than the tollowing: 9. There are no oulstanding judgments against Seller as a resuh of legal action to include, but not limited to, Tax Liens, Divorce, Bankruptcy or Foreclosure. 10. 'There are no pending litigations against Sellet which may result in a judgment. I I . That the marital status of Seller has not changed since thJey,acquired above described property. Wimess the hand and seal of the undersigned this tht* /b day of `«2014. �rlf� -, ..t •tr��-n.-,-, Mary l . Duftn I Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary l ublic, on this ! U day of 6, 20W. 7Ari'M My Cummission Erpues y ' . `d: a Diary- _N4: =' Please return this to Bronson Abstract Company, Inc., 3810 Front Slreel, Salee NS, Fayetteville, AJ2 72703 File Nutn ber: 21498-14 WARRANTY DEED Conveying all right, title & interest KNOW ALL MEN BY THESr PRr,';ENTI : That 1, Mary L. Dunn, (surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn, deceased), a single person, hereinafter called Grantor, for and in consideration of the suns ol'One Dollar ($1.00) and uther good and valuable considerations in hand paid by the City of lHaye"evitle, Arkansas, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called Grantee. do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Grrantce and Grantee's heirs and assigns, the following described land, situate in Washington County. State of Arkansas, to -wit: Description tieing the same as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. TO HAVE AND TO I [OLD the said lands and appurten..mces thereunto belonging unto the said Grantee and Grarttce's heirs and assigns, forever. And 1, the said Oranlor hereby eovenatst that 1 am lawfully seized of said land and premises, that the same is unencumbered, and that I will forever warrant and defend the title of said lands against all legal clauns whatsoever. Witness uiy hand and seal thdO day October, 2014. Mary i.. unn ACKN0WI.,E DCW,N7' STATE: OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASIi1NGTON) § On this day of October, 2014, before toe, a notary public, personally appeared Mary L. Dunu, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledge that she executed the same for the purposes and considerations therein set forth. In witness whereof 1 hereunto set my hand and official sea[. r Notary Public b � R p�l`lS blot", V"?� , Arlansas 1;31�111`JCrTit'vCDi�'�TY � Mail tax statements to: 113 W. Mountain Street, i,'ayetteville, AR 72701 Prepared through Bronson Abstract Cornpanp, Inc., 3810 N Front St., Ste 05, Fayetteville, AR 72703 1✓X}iI BFI " A" Part of the northewt quarter of the southwest quarter (NF./4 S W/4) of Section 36, 'township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in three separate deeds recorded in Washington County deed book 526, page444; deed book 526, page 445, and deed book 543, page 176, and said part being more particularly described as follows: commencing at a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly comer of the Lague tract first recorded in deed book 534, Page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feel from the southeast corner of the said NF/4 SW/4 of Section 36; thence N35*13'03" E 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, a set 112 inch rebat and plastic cap: thence N59O10'35"W 208,28 feet to a point on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies 0,16' southeasterly from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line oi'Old Wire Road N30°29'02"I; 148.23 feet to the southwesterly comer ofthe Phillips property as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence leaving the east line, along the southerly line of the said Phillips property, S59°13'04" F 220.56 feet, passing at 0,16 feet a I inch pipe, to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner Of the Phillips tract; thence S35° 13'03"W 148.82 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 31,798 square feet, or 11.730 acres Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (NF/4 SW/4) of Section 36,'Towuship 17 North, Runge 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part heing previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County document 93-27263, and said part being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly comer of the Logue tract First recorded in deed book 534, page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NV4 SW/4 of Section 36, thence along the northerly line of the said Logue tract N590l f' l TV 200.00 feet to the northwesterly corner of the Logue tract on the east line of Ole! Wire Road which lies southeasterly 0.06' from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the cast line of Old Wire Road N30"29'02'E 100.00 feet to a point which lies southeasterly 0,16 feet from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence leaving the east line S59° 10'35' E 208.28 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence S35013'03"W 100,25 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 20,409 square feet, or 0.469 acres. Part of the Southeast quarter and also part of the Southwest quarter, both in Section 36,'rownship 17 forth, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said parts being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County Document 93-19847, and said parts being more particularly- described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies East 1,485 feet and North 805 and 1/3 feet from the southwest comer of the Southeast quarter of the said Southwest quarter of Section 36; thence NO2°33'59"E 165.43 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument at the southwest corner of the Azalea "Terrace Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 80, thence, along the west line of the said Azalea Terrace, NOi°46'56"F 337,08 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument with brass cap at the northwest corner of Azalea Terrace; thence NO2° 15'07" E 692.71 feet to it I/2 inch rebar along the south lute of the Shadow Hills Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 4; thence, along the south line of the said Shadow Hills, N87°05'04"W 219.90 feet to a cross tie fence post at the northeast corner of the Phillips tract as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence, along the easterly line of the said Phillips tract, S36° I i'27"W 236.94 feet to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly comer of the Phillips tract; thence S35° 13'03"W 249.07 feet, passing at 148.82 feet a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap, to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37; thence S30°29'02"W 248.25 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the southeasterly corner of the Shipley tract fast recorded in deed book 534, page 179; thence along the southerly line of the said Shipley tract N59041'44"W 33.84 feet to a wooden fence post; thence S44°57'50"E 867.74 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 440,780 square feet, or 10.1 19 acres. - — - C011llllltlilcllt l()r Title Insurance ` - '-w First American Title ,some - I _ hirsi Amcric:ur'I'itle lnsutaner. C'omlluny _-. -�- --- - —" l First American lusty, _ Santa An:t,C'A 927t)7 Commitment I l ` � _ .--___---- --- -- w _ _ 1_-- le oration ("COIr"Pa"N FIRST AMERICAI �TITl,rto lit SUR �� Tkpc�ieies�oflc'le an Nebraska ase dInIt fted in Schedule A. Fnrfatior3of lrr the [-and described or TcferTtd to consideration. comnl e�tate or Proposed Insured named in Schedule 1, as owner nerms a rdnclrflgl es apduiltenm;Tliance Itc ith the nRe;uirements,. nil subject to the in 5ehetlule A. upon p . pro%isions of 5ched"Ies A and B and to the Con[tltlol'S Of tllig Cplilltllllllenl. 4>e Eeeotitnscrte,Ile%) tile 5cheduletA 4t;ttdterr like CompEanrpnseci Insured and the amount of 'he pulic. ur This Commitment shall d in policies contntittcci for ha%e b nll liahiltt% and obligation tutted for _5'hallttll!"ll t -%'% l l 'Ise '111d to fS 1nate ided that tile efailure to issu etiNe Date ile�polic%of t or the polic,, or policies carom Policies 15 not the fault of the Cornpan> The Company will provide a sample of the policy Conn 111)431' request. s., ho aftIXP.R t',': IIS dUI ltd :L1TtIESS ::HEi?ECF FirstRmeficanTitlslnsuranceCOInpatlphascauseollscwtiu authorised afticsrs an the Effective Data sho�,vn in 5cnedul2 r+. First American Title Insurance company 6", '� a �a •r.�i:m=�, ; �:� yy'; sue^ S:`-»e: = jay n e� s.•-2 �•ai• TG»ta: s,s ., of :.iva•��=_is:x=nsa4y inc �r 7.iiuli]2n i4,ci�a ::=r,_r.•. AL.TA ,ommilment (6-17-06) Pa e 1 of 7 Arkansas (Rev. t-27-09) Form 5011605 (7-1.14) 9 8. Subject to variations in fence lines with property lines, easements, right of ways and other matters as are shown on the plat of survey by McClelland Consulting Engineers, Ina, dated Octoker 3, 2014, FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned: Bronson Abstract Company, Fac 44i. J&- - - Winfield S. Bronson, Jr. Validating Officer or Agent, Agent License 4 27157, State License # 325303 Forth 60116MBI (8.1-09) Page 7 of 7 ALTA Commitment (6.17-061 ♦tit A-Ia, f,{ FirstAmerican Title' 4V S 4( Commitment Commitment for Title insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company First Ana, CA 92707 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Nebraska corporation ("Company"), for a valuable consideration, commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the Proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges and compliance with the Requirements; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions of this Commitment. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the Proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A by the Company. All liability and obligation under this Commitment shall cease and terminate 6 months after the Effective Date or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that (tie failure to issue the policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. The Company will provide a sample of the policy form upon request. IN ;ATNESS WHEREOF, First American Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name to be affixed by its duly authorized officers on the Effective Date shown in Schedule A. First American Title Insurance Company Den nisJ.0 imp-e President �" 0. AWA,��� j freJ s F.00 Sao" ses-etsfy. IThis Cbmmrtmmt:s w 1d u0 wtvam Scne uba_ A snd 6 are sit5rhsdj This jackal•waaereated*19draniraiteanAmaneidut"an j>*naldaaunsni {5e, rrprd taC4.1M ga!ertsn tans 71W Astmistar. Al! Oats rM Ned. r-9 At:' :-'3'0'-ti s mr� c^.:e .. F_"rA :t-se:s e-a .t',i :7:V3 -, a: rs•c -e ss A re ]G` ps6 qA-'- =s _-Csi � .--s_ •4^'� ='e w-:-:r• -_:-e F: � rssc:::Cc Form 5011605 (7-1-14) Page 1 of 7 ALTA Commitmeni (6-17-Ub) Arkansas (Rev. 1-27-09) CONDITIONS The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquired actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company -shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to paragraph 3 of these Conditions. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and Conditions and Stipulations and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. This Commitment is a contract to issue one or more title insurance policies and is not an abstract of title or a report of the condition of title. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or tnay bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. Forth 5011600-61 (7-1-14) Page 2 of 7 ALTA Commitment (6-17-06) Schedule BI �""'•� FirstAmerican YR16 " Commitment for Title Insurance 355Ufia 9Y First American Title Insurance Company [—Schedule A Bronson Abstract Company, Inc., 3810 N. Front Street, Suite #5 Fayetteville, AR 72703 (479) 442-2700 Fax (479) 442-8475 File No.: 21498-14 NOTICE TO CONSUMERS Please read the exceptions and the terms shown or referred io herein carefully. The exceptions are meant to provide you with notice of matters that are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. This report is a written representation as to the condIdan of title jar purposes of providing title Insurance and 11sts all liens, defects, and encumbrances filed of record within the last thirty (30) years that have not been released of record or that are not statutorily expired No title insurance agent or any other person other than a licensed ArAansas attorney may provide legal advice concerning the slates of Bile to the property described in the title commitment 1. Effective Date: October 3, 2014 at 7:OOAM 2. Policy (or Policies) to be issued AMOUNT a. x ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) ❑ ALTA Homeowner's Policy of Title Insurance (Rev. 1-1-08) $1,100,000.00 Proposed Insured: The City or Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation b. ❑ ALTA Loan Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06): ❑ ALTA Expanded Coverage Residential Loan Policy (Rev. 1-1-08) $ Proposed Insured: 3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is fee simple. 4. Title to the fee simple estate or interest in the land is at the Effective Date vested in: Mary L. Dunn (surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn a/k/a Allen Dunn, deceased), a single person 5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows: Part of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter (NE/4 SW/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in three separate deeds recorded in Washington County deed book 526, page 444; deed book 526, page 445; and deed book 543, page 176, and said part being more particularly described as follows: commencing at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, Page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NE/4 SW/4 of Section 36; thence N35' 13'03 "E 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence N59°10'35"W 208.28 feet to a point on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies 0.16' southeasterly from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30029'02"E 148.23 feet to the southwesterly corner of the Phillips property as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence leaving the east line, along the southerly line of the said Phillips property, Form 501160"1 (7-1-14) Page 3 of 7 I ALTA Commitment (6-17-06) Schedule BI S59013'04"E 220.56 feet, passing at 0.16 feet a 1 inch pipe, to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35° 13'03"W 148.82 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 31,798 square feet, or 0.730 acres. Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (NE/4 SW/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County document 93-27263, and said part being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NE/4 SW/4 of Section 36; thence along the northerly line of the said Logue tract N59° 1 I' 18" W 200.00 feet to the northwesterly corner of the Logue tract on the east line of Old Wire load which lies southeasterly 0.06' from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30029'02"E 100.00 feet to a point which lies southeasterly 0.16 feet from a l inch pinch -top pipe; thence leaving the east line S59° 10'35"E 208.28 feet to a set 112 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence S35013'03"W 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 20,409 square feet, or 0.469 acres. Part of the Southeast quarter and also part of the Southwest quarter, both in Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said parts being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County Document 93-19847, and said parts being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies East 1,485 feet and North 805 and 113 feet from the southwest corner of the Southeast quarter of the said Southwest quarter of Section 36; thence NO2°33'59"E 165.43 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument at the southwest corner of the Azalea Terrace Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 80; thence, along the west line of the said Azalea 'Terrace, NO I "46'56"E 337.08 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument with brass cap at the northwest corner of Azalea Terrace; thence NO2° 15'07"E 692.71 feet to a 1/2 inch rebar along the south line of the Shadow Hills Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 4; thence, along the south line of the said Shadow Hills, N87°05'04"W 219.90 feet to a cross tie fence post at the northeast corner of the Phillips tract as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence, along the easterly line of the said Phillips tract, S36°11'27"W 236.94 feet to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35° 13'03"W 249.07 feet, passing at 148.82 feet a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap, to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37; thence S30°29'02"W 248.25 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the southeasterly corner of the Shipley tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 179; thence along the southerly line of the said Shipley tract N59°41'44"W 33.84 feet to a wooden fence post; thence S44°57'50"E 867.74 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 440,780 square feet, or 10.1 19 acres. Form 5011600-BI (8-1-09) Page 4 of 7 ALTA Commitment (6-17-06) FkstAmerican Title" Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUEDFIY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BI File No.: 21498-14 RE' OUI REM ENTS The following requirements must be satisfied: 1. Payment of the necessary consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. 2. Pay all premiums, fees and charges for the policy. 3. Documents creating the estate or interest to be insured, must be properly executed, delivered and recorded, as follows: a) Proof of death of Allen L. Dunn. b) Warranty deed conveying herein described from Mary L. Dunn, (surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn, a/k/a Allen Dunn deceased), a single person, to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation. c) Payment in full of2013 general real estate taxes. Form 5011600-131 (8-1-09) Page 5 of 7 ALTA Commitment (6-17-06) h A FirstAmerican Title" Commitment for Title Insurance ISSUED BY First American Title Insurance Company Schedule BII File No.: 21498-14. EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. 2. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by all inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public Records. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed Insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 2. Real estate taxes for 2014 and subsequent years, amount of which is not ascertainable, due or payable. 3. Those taxes and special assessments, which become due and payable subsequent to Date of Policy. 4. The recitation of acreage contained in the description of the land herein is for identification purposes only. 'Therefore possible discrepancies, if any, between the quantity of acreage as indicated in the description of said land and the actual acreage which would be shown by and accurate survey thereof are excepted. 5. Loss arising from oil, gas or other minerals, conveyed, retained, assigned or any other activity caused by the sub- surface rights or ownership, including but not limited to the right of ingress or egress for said sub -surface purposes. 6. Subject to a right of way grant from Fred Gulley and Floy Gulley, husband and wife, to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, filed April 18, 1972 and recorded in book 830 at page 952. 7. Subject to a right of way grant from Fred Gulley and Floy Gulley, husband and wife, to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, filed February 25, 1969 and recorded in book 754 page 362. Form 5011600-BI (8-1-09) page 6 of 7 ALTA Commitment (6-17-06) 8. Subject to variations in fence lines with property lines, easements, right of ways and other matters as are shown on the plat of survey by McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 3, 2014, FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE, COMPANY �Countersigned: Bronson Abst ct Company, Inc. t'� Winfield S. Bronson, Jr. Validating Officer or Agent, Agent License # 27157, State License # 325303 Fort 5011600-BI (8-1-09) Page 7 of 7 ALTA Commitment (6-17-06) dog Szvx'u,%� LUIL LyI %)1 2,1 Iq • City of Fayetteville Staff Review Form • 2014-0361 Legistar File ID 8/19/2014 City Council Meeting pate - Agenda Item Only N/A for Non -Agenda Item Parks & Recreation / Alison Jumper 8/11/2014 Parks & Recreation Department Submitted By Submitted Date Division Department Action Recommendation: Approval of the purchase of approximately 10.95 acres of land including two single family residences adjacent to Gulley Park for $1,100,000 and approval of a Budget Adjustment. 2250.9255.580S.00 Account Number 14017, 1 Project Number Budgeted Item? No Does item have a cost? Yes Budget Adjustment Attached? Yes Budget Impact: Parks Development Fund Gulley Park Land Acquisition Project Title Current Budget Funds Obligated Current Balance Item Cost Budget Adjustment Remaining Budget S - $ 700,000.00 $ 700,000.00 [ V20140710 Previous Ordinance or Resolution # Original Contract Number: a Approval Date: a — Comments: Funds proposed in the 2015 Capital Improvement plan for 2015 and 2016 will be utilized to fund this project. The Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association has committed to raise the remaining $130,000. $270,000will be paid in 2016. • -77tle ?nsuranee Rent! R,state Closing 3810 Front St- Suite 5 Fayetteville, Arkansas 72703 479-442-2700 Fax 479-442-8475 www.bronsonabstract.com THE ONLY NAME YOU NEED TO KNOW IN THE LOAN CLOSING AND TITLE INSURANCE BUSINESS Owner's Policy of Title Insurance Please find attached your Owner's Title policy from Bronson Abstract Company, Inc. Keep this with all of your closing records in a safe place. When you sell or refinance this property, you may receive a discount on your title insurance premium. If you own other properties and your choose to sell or refinance them, you can also receive a discount on the title insurance premium at that time when you provide our firm with a copy of the title insurance policy or policies regardless if they were initially issued by our firm. To take advantage of these discounts, please advise your realtor or loan officer that you prefer Bronson Abstract Company, Inc. Should you have questions concerning this policy or any other questions concerning any your title insurance, please contact us at 479-442-2700 or refer to your website at www.bronsonabstract.com. We try to provide the best service to our customers and we thank you for your business. Why are there separate title policies for owners and lenders? There are two types of title insurance: owner's title insurance, called an Owner's Policy, and lender's title insurance, called a Loan Policy. Most lenders require a Loan Policy when they issue you a loan. The Loan Policy is usually based on the dollar amount of your loan. It only protects the lender's interests in the property should a problem with the title arise. It does not protect the buyer. The policy amount decreases as you pay down your loan and eventually disappears as the loan is paid off. An Owner's Policy is usually issued in the amount of the real estate purchase. It is purchased for a one-time fee at closing and lasts for as long as you have an interest in the property. Only an Owner's Policy protects the buyer should a covered title problem arise. Possible hidden title problems can include: Errors or omissions in deeds, mistakes in examining records, forgery and undisclosed heirs An Owner's Policy provides assurance that your title insurance company will stand behind you — monetarily and with legal defense if needed —if a covered title problem arises after you buy your home. Owner's Policy of Title Insurance l 'irstAmerican Title" ISSUED 9Y First American Title Insurance Company Owner's Polk] POLICY NUMBER 5011405-0010344e Any notice of claim and any other notice or statement in writing required to be given to the Company under this policy must be given to the Company at the address shown in Section 17 of the Conditions. COVERED RISKS SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE CONTAINED IN SCHEDULE B, AND THE CONDITIONS, FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Nebraska corporation (the "Company") insures, as of Date of Policy and, to the extent stated in Covered Risks 9 and 10, after Date of Policy, against loss or damage, not exceeding the Amount of Insurance, sustained or incurred by the Insured by reason of: 1. Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A. 2. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the Title. This Covered Risk includes but is not limited to insurance against loss from (a) A defect in the Title caused by (i) forgery, fraud, undue influence, duress, incompetency, incapacity, or impersonation; (ii) failure of any person or Entity to have authorized a transfer or conveyance; (iii) a document affecting Title not properly created, executed, witnessed, sealed, acknowledged, notarized, or delivered; (iv) failure to perform those acts necessary to create a document by electronic means authorized by law; (v) a document executed under a falsified, expired, or otherwise invalid power of attorney; (vi) a document not properly filed, recorded, or indexed in the Public Records including failure to perform those acts by electronic means authorized by law; or (vii) a defective judicial or administrative proceeding. (b) The lien of real estate taxes or assessments imposed on the Title by a governmental authority due or payable, but unpaid. (c) Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land. The term "encroachment" includes encroachments of existing improvements located on the Land onto adjoining land, and encroachments onto the Land of existing improvements located on adjoining land, 3. Unmarketable Title. 4. No right of access to and from the Land. (Covered Risks Continued on Page 2) In Witness Whereof, First American Title Insurance Company has caused its corporate name to be hereunto affixed by its authorized officers as of Date of Policy shown in Schedule A. First American Title Insurance Company Dennis J. Gilmore President4u, A F1 Jeffrey S. Robinson Secretary (This Policy is valid only when Schedules A and B are attached) For Reference: File #: 21498-14 Issued By: Bronson Abstract Company, Inc. 3810 Front Street, Suite 5 Fayetteville, AR 72703 Lic # 325303 This jacket was created electronically and constitutes an original document Copyright 2006-2009 American Land Title Association. All rights reserved.The use of this forth is restricted to ALTA licensees and ALTA members in good standing as of the date of use. Ali other uses are prohibited, Reprinted under license from the American Land Title Association. Form 5011405 (7-1-14) Page 1 of 5 ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) Arkansas Policy # : 5011405-0010344e COVERED RISKS (Continued) 5. The violation or enforcement of any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (a) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (b) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (c) the subdivision of land; or (d) environmental protection if a notice, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records setting forth the violation or intention to enforce, but only to the extent of the violation or enforcement referred to in that notice. 6. An enforcement action based on the exercise of a governmental police power not covered by Covered Risk 5 if a notice of the enforcement action, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records, but only to the extent of the enforcement referred to in that notice. 7. The exercise of the rights of eminent domain if a notice of the exercise, describing any part of the Land, is recorded in the Public Records. 8. Any taking by a governmental body that has occurred and is binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without Knowledge. 9. Title being vested other than as stated in Schedule A or being defective (a) as a result of the avoidance in whole or in part, or from a court order providing an alternative remedy, of a transfer of all or any part of the title to or any interest in the Land occurring prior to the transaction vesting Title as shown in Schedule A because that prior transfer constituted a fraudulent or preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws; or (b) because the instrument of transfer vesting Title as shown in Schedule A constitutes a preferential transfer under federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws by reason of the failure of its recording in the Public Records (i) to be timely, or (ii) to impart notice of its existence to a purchaser for value or to a judgment or lien creditor. 10. Any defect in or lien or encumbrance on the Title or other matter included in Covered Risks 1 through 9 that has been created or attached or has been filed or recorded in the Public Records subsequent to Date of Policy and prior to the recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. The Company will also pay the costs, attomeys' fees, and expenses incurred in defense of any matter insured against by this Policy, but only to the extent provided in the Conditions. EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion 1(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion 1(b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. 2. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. 3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Form 5011405 (7-1-14) Page 2 of 5 Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. 4. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. 5. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) Arkansas Policy # : 5011405-0010344e CONDITIONS DEFINITION OF TERMS The following terms when used in this policy mean: (a) "Amount of Insurance": The amount staled in Schedule A, as may be increased or decreased by endorsement to this policy, increased by Section 8(b), or decreased by Sections 10 and 11 of these Conditions. (b) "Date of Policy": The date designated as "Date of Policy" in Schedule A. (c) "Entity": A corporation, partnership, trust, limited liability company, or other similar legal entity. (d) "Insured': The Insured named in Schedule A. (i) The term "Insured" also includes (A) successors to the Title of the Insured by operation of law as distinguished from purchase, including heirs, devisees, survivors, personal representatives, or next of kin; (B) successors to an Insured by dissolution, merger, consolidation, distribution, or reorganization; (C) successors to an Insured by its conversion to another kind of Entity; (D) a grantee of an Insured under a deed delivered without payment of actual valuable consideration conveying the Title (1) if the stock, shares, memberships, or other equity interests of the grantee are wholly -owned by the named Insured, (2) if the grantee wholly owns the named Insured, (3) if the grantee is wholly -owned by an affiliated Entity of the named Insured, provided the affiliated Entity and the named Insured are both wholly - owned by the same person or Entity, or (4) if the grantee is a trustee or beneficiary of a trust created by a written instrument established by the Insured named in Schedule A for estate planning (e) (Q (9 ) (h) purposes. (ii) With regard to (A), (B), (C), and (D) reserving, however, all rights and defenses as to any successor that the Company would have had against any predecessor Insured. "Insured Claimant": An Insured claiming loss or damage. "Knowledge" or "Known": Actual knowledge, not constructive knowledge or notice that may be imputed to an Insured by reason of the Public Records or any other records that impart constructive notice of matters affecting the Title. "Land': The land described in Schedule A, and affixed improvements that by law constitute real property. The term "Land" does not include any property beyond the lines of the area described in Schedule A, nor any right, title, interest, estate, or easement in abutting streets, roads, avenues, alleys, lanes, ways, or waterways, but this does not modify or limit the extent that a right of access to and from the Land is insured by this policy. 'Mortgage": Mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument, including one evidenced by electronic means authorized by law. "Public Records": Records established understate statutes at Date of Policy for the purpose of imparting constructive notice Form 5011405 (7-1-14) Page 3 of 5 of matters relating to real property to purchasers for value and without Knowledge. With respect to Covered Risk 5(d), "Public Records' shall also include environmental protection liens filed in the records of the clerk of the United States District Court for the district where the Land is located. (j) "Tide": The estate or interest described in Schedule A. (k) "Unmarketable Title": Title affected by an alleged or apparent matter that would permit a prospective purchaser or lessee of the Title or lender on the Title to be released from the obligation to purchase, lease, or lend if there is a contractual condition requiring the delivery of marketable title. 2. CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE The coverage of this policy shall continue in force as of Date of Policy in favor of an Insured, but only so long as the Insured retains an estate or interest in the Land, or holds an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given by a purchaser from the Insured, or only so long as the Insured shall have liability by reason of warranties in any transfer or conveyance of the Title. This policy shall not continue in force in favor of any purchaser from the Insured of either (i) an estate or interest in the Land, or (ii) an obligation secured by a purchase money Mortgage given to the Insured. 3. NOTICE OF CLAIM TO BE GIVEN BY INSURED CLAIMANT The Insured shall notify the Company promptly in writing (i) in case of any litigation as set forth in Section 5(a) of these Conditions, (ii) in case Knowledge shall come to an Insured hereunder of any claim of title or interest that is adverse to the Title, as insured, and that might cause loss or damage for which the Company may be liable by virtue of this policy, or (iii) if the Title, as insured, is rejected as Unmarketable Title. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Insured Claimant to provide prompt notice, the Company's liability to the Insured Claimant under the policy shall be reduced to the extent of the prejudice. 4. PROOF OF LOSS In the event the Company is unable to determine the amount of loss or damage, the Company may, at its option, require as a condition of payment that the Insured Claimant furnish a signed proof of loss. The proof of loss must describe the defect, lien, encumbrance, or other matter insured against by this policy that constitutes the basis of loss or damage and shall state, to the extent possible, the basis of calculating the amount of the loss or damage. 5. DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION OF ACTIONS (a) Upon written request by the Insured, and subject to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions, the Company, at its own cost and without unreasonable delay, shall provide for the defense of an Insured in litigation in which any third party asserts a claim covered by this policy adverse to the Insured. This obligation is limited to only those stated causes of action alleging matters insured against by this policy. The Company shall have the right to select counsel of its choice (subject to the right of the Insured to object for reasonable cause) to represent the Insured as to those stated causes of action. It shall not be liable for and will not pay the fees of any other counsel. The Company will not pay any fees, costs, or expenses incurred by the Insured in the defense of those causes of action that allege matters not insured against by this policy. ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) Arkansas Policy # : 5011405-0010344e CONDITIONS (Continued) 6. (b) The Company shall have the right, in addition to the options contained in Section 7 of these Conditions, at its own cost, to institute and prosecute any action or proceeding or to do any other act that in its opinion may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title, as insured, or to prevent or reduce loss or damage to the Insured. The Company may take any appropriate action under the terms of this policy, whether or not it shall be liable to the Insured. The exercise of these rights shall not be an admission of liability or waiver of any provision of this policy. If the Company exercises its rights under this subsection, it must do so diligently. (c) Whenever the Company brings an action or asserts a defense as required or permitted by this policy, the Company may pursue the litigation to a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and it expressly reserves the right, in its sole,discretion, to appeal any adverse judgment or order. DUTY OF INSURED CLAIMANT TO COOPERATE (a) In all cases where this policy permits or requires the Company to prosecute or provide for the defense of any action or proceeding and any appeals, the Insured shall secure to the Company the right to so prosecute or provide defense in the action or proceeding, including the right to use, at its option, the name of the Insured for this purpose. Whenever requested by the Company, the Insured, at the Company's expense, shall give the Company all reasonable aid (i) in securing evidence, obtaining witnesses, prosecuting or defending the action or proceeding, or effecting settlement, and (i) in any other lawful act that in the opinion of the Company may be necessary or desirable to establish the Title or any other matter as insured. If the Company is prejudiced by the failure of the Insured to furnish the required cooperation, the Company's obligations to the Insured under the policy shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation, with regard to the matter or matters requiring such cooperation. (b) The Company may reasonably require the Insured Claimant to submit to examination under oath by any authorized representative of the Company and to produce for examination, inspection, and copying, at such reasonable times and places as may be designated by the authorized representative of the Company, all records, in whatever medium maintained, including books, ledgers, checks, memoranda, correspondence, reports, e-mails, disks, tapes, and videos whether bearing a date before or after Date of Policy, that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. Further, if requested by any authorized representative of the Company, the Insured Claimant shall grant its permission, in writing, for any authorized representative of the Company to examine, inspect, and copy all of these records in the custody or control of a third party that reasonably pertain to the loss or damage. All information designated as confidential by the Insured Claimant provided to the Company pursuant to this Section shall not be disclosed to others unless, in the reasonable judgment of the Company, it is necessary in the administration of the claim. Failure of the Insured Claimant to submit for examination under oath, produce any reasonably requested information, or grant permission to secure reasonably necessary information from third parties as required in this subsection, unless prohibited by law or governmental regulation, shall terminate any liability of the Company under this policy as to that claim. Form 5011405 (7-1-14) Page 4 of 5 7. OPTIONS TO PAY OR OTHERWISE SETTLE CLAIMS; TERMINATION OF LIABILITY In case of a claim under this policy, the Company shall have the following additional options: (a) To Pay or Tender Payment of the Amount of Insurance. To pay or tender payment of the Amount of Insurance under this policy together with any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment or tender of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of this option, all liability and obligations of the Company to the Insured under this policy, other than to make the payment required in this subsection, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. (b) To Pay or Otherwise Settle With Parties Other Than the Insured or With the Insured Claimant. (i) To pay or otherwise settle with other parties for or in the name of an Insured Claimant any dairn insured against under this policy. In addition, the Company will pay any costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay; or (ii) To pay or otherwise settle with the Insured Claimant the loss or damage provided for under this policy, together with any costs, attomeys' fees, and expenses incurred by the Insured Claimant that were authorized by the Company up to the time of payment and that the Company is obligated to pay. Upon the exercise by the Company of either of the options provided for in subsections (b)(i) or (i), the Company's obligations to the Insured under this policy for the claimed loss or damage, other than the payments required to be made, shall terminate, including any liability or obligation to defend, prosecute, or continue any litigation. S. DETERMINATION AND EXTENT OF LIABILITY This policy is a contract of indemnity against actual monetary loss or damage sustained or incurred by the Insured Claimant who has suffered loss or damage by reason of matters insured against by this policy. (a) The extent of liability of the Company for loss or damage under this policy shall not exceed the lesser of (i) the Amount of Insurance; or (ii) the difference between the value of the Title as insured and the value of the Title subject to the risk insured against by this policy. (b) If the Company pursues its rights under Section 5 of these Conditions and is unsuccessful in establishing the Title, as insured, (i) the Amount of Insurance shall be increased by 10%, and (ii) the Insured Claimant shall have the right to have the loss or damage determined either as of the date the claim was made by the Insured Claimant or as of the date it is settled and paid. (c) In addition to the extent of liability under (a) and (b), the Company will also pay those costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses incurred in accordance with Sections 5 and 7 of these Conditions. ALTA Owners Policy of Tine Insurance (6-17-06) Arkansas Policy # : 5011405-0010344e CONDITIONS (Continued) 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY (a) If the Company establishes the Title, or removes the alleged defect, lien, or encumbrance, or cures the lack of a right of access to or from the Land, or cures the claim of Unmarketable Title, all as insured, in a reasonably diligent manner by any method, including litigation and the completion of any appeals, it shall have fully performed its obligations with respect to that matter and shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused to the Insured. (b) In the event of any litigation, including litigation by the Company or with the Company's consent, the Company shall have no liability for loss or damage until there has been a final determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, and disposition of all appeals, adverse to the Title, as insured, (c) The Company shall not be liable for loss or damage to the Insured for liability voluntarily assumed by the Insured in settling any claim or suit without the prior written consent of the Company. REDUCTION OF INSURANCE; REDUCTION OR TERMINATION OF LIABILITY All payments under this policy, except payments made for costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses, shall reduce the Amount of Insurance by the amount of the payment LIABILITY NONCUMULATIVE The Amount of Insurance shall be reduced by any amount the Company pays under any policy insuring a Mortgage to which exception is taken in Schedule B or to which the Insured has agreed, assumed, or taken subject, or which is executed by an Insured after Date of Policy and which is a charge or lien on the Title, and the amount so paid shall be deemed a payment to the Insured under this policy. PAYMENT OF LOSS When liability and the extent of loss or damage have been definitely fixed in accordance with these Conditions, the payment shall be made within 30 days. RIGHTS OF RECOVERY UPON PAYMENT OR SETTLEMENT (a) Whenever the Company shall have settled and paid a claim under this policy, it shall be subrogated and entitled to the rights of the Insured Claimant in the Title and all other rights and remedies in respect to the claim that the Insured Claimant has against any person or property, to the extent of the amount of any loss, costs, attomeys' fees, and expenses paid by the Company. If requested by the Company, the Insured Claimant shall execute documents to evidence the transfer to the Company of these rights and remedies. The Insured Claimant shall permit the Company to sue, compromise, or settle in the name of the Insured Claimant and to use the name of the Insured Claimant in any transaction or litigation involving these rights and remedies. If a payment on account of a claim does not fully cover the loss of the Insured Claimant, the Company shall defer the exercise of its right to recover until after the Insured Claimant shall have recovered its loss. Form 5011405 (7-1-14) Page 5 of 5 (b) The Company's right of subrogation includes the rights of the Insured to indemnities, guaranties, other policies of insurance, or bonds, notwithstanding any terms or conditions contained in those instruments that address subrogation rights. 14. LIABILITY LIMITED TO THIS POLICY; POLICY ENTIRE CONTRACT (a) This policy together with all endorsements, if any, attached to it by the Company is the entire policy and contract between the Insured and the Company. In interpreting any provision of this policy, this policy shall be construed as a whole. (b) Any claim of loss or damage that arises out of the status of the Title or by any action asserting such claim shall be restricted to this policy. (c) Any amendment of or endorsement to this policy must be in writing and authenticated by an authorized person, or expressly incorporated by Schedule A of this policy. (d) Each endorsement to this policy issued at any time is made a part of this policy and is subject to all of its terms and provisions. Except as the endorsement expressly states, it does not (i) modify any of the terms and provisions of the policy, (ii) modify any prior endorsement, (iii) extend the Date of Policy, or (iv) increase the Amount of Insurance. 15. SEVERABILITY In the event any provision of this policy, in whole or in part, is held invalid or unenforceable under applicable law, the policy shall be deemed not to include that provision or such part held to be invalid, but all other provisions shall remain in full force and effect. 16. CHOICE OF LAW; FORUM (a) Choice of Law: The Insured acknowledges the Company has underwritten the risks covered by this policy and determined the premium charged therefor in reliance upon the law affecting interests in real property and applicable to the interpretation, rights, remedies, or enforcement of policies of title insurance of the jurisdiction where the Land is located. Therefore, the court or an arbitrator shall apply the law of the jurisdiction where the Land is located to determine the validity of claims against the Title that are adverse to the Insured and to interpret and enforce the terms of this policy. In neither case shall the court or arbitrator apply its conflicts of law principles to determine the applicable law. (b) Choice of Forum: Any litigation or other proceeding brought by the Insured against the Company must be filed only in a state or federal court within the United States of America or its territories having appropriate jurisdiction. 17. NOTICES, WHERE SENT Any notice of claim and any other notice or statement in writing required to be given to the Company under this policy must be given to the Company at First American Title Insurance Company, Attn: Claims National Intake Center, 1 First American Way, Santa Ana, California 92707. Phone: 888-632-1642. ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance (6-17-06) Arkansas FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Forth 1402.06.A ALTA Owners Policy (6-17-06) Policy Number: 5011405-0010344e Issued Simultaneously with Policy #: Endorsement(s): $ SCHEDULE A Amount of Insurance: $1,100,000.00 Date of Policy: October 10, 2014 at 3:43PM Insured:. City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation 1. Title to the fee simple estate or interest in said land is at date hereof vested in: City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation File Number: 21498-14 The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Schedule covered by this policy is fee simple in City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation, by warranty deed filed October 10, 2014 at 3:43 PM, recorded as instrument #2014-00026243 of the records of the Circuit Clerk and Ex-Officio Recorder of Washington County, Arkansas. 2. The land referred to in this Policy is located in the County of Washington, State of Arkansas, and described as follows: Part of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter (NE/4 SWA) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in three separate deeds recorded in Washington County deed book 526, page 444; deed book 526, page 445; and deed book 543, page 176, and said part being more particularly described as follows: commencing at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, Page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NEA SWA of Section 36; thence N35°13'03"E 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence N59010'35"W 208.28 feet to a point on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies 0. 16' southeasterly from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30°29'02"E 148.23 feet to the southwesterly corner of the Phillips property as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence leaving the east line, along the southerly line of the said Phillips property, S59°13'04"E 220.56 feet, passing at 0.16 feet a 1 inch pipe, to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35013'03"W 148.82 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 31,798 square feet, or 0.730 acres. Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (NE/4 SWA) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County document 93-27263, and said part being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NEA SW/4 of Section 36; thence along the northerly line of the said Logue tract N5901 PI8"W 200.00 feet to the northwesterly corner of the Logue tract on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies southeasterly 0.06' from a I inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30029'02"E 100.00 feet to a point which lies southeasterly 0.16 feet from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence leaving the east line S59°10'35"E 208.28 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence S35°13'03"W 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 20,409 square feet, or 0.469 acres. Part of the Southeast quarter and also part of the Southwest quarter, both in Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said parts being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County Document 93-19847, and said parts being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies East 1,485 feet and North 805 and 1/3 feet from the southwest corner of the Southeast quarter of the said Southwest quarter of Section 36; thence N02033'59"E 165.43 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument at the southwest corner of the Azalea Terrace Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 80; thence, along the west line of the said Azalea Terrace, N0I'46'56"E 337.08 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument with brass cap at the northwest corner of Azalea Terrace; thence NO2° 15'07"E 692.71 feet to a 1/2 inch rebar along the south line of the Shadow Hills Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 4; thence, along the south line of the said Shadow Hills, N87°05'04"W 219.90 feet to a cross tie fence post at the northeast corner of the Phillips tract as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence, along the easterly line of the said Phillips tract, S3601 1'27"W 236.94 feet to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35°13'03"W 249.07 feet, passing at 148.82 feet a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap, to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37; thence S30°29'02"W 248.25 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the southeasterly corner of the Shipley tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 179; thence along the southerly line of the said Shipley tract N59°41'44"W 33.84, feet to a wooden fence post; thence S44°57'50"E 867.74 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 440,780 square feet, or 10.119 acres. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SCHEDULE B Policy No. 5011405-0010344e File Number: 21498-14 This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: STANDARD EXCEPTIONS: a. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. b. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. c. Encroachments, overlaps, discrepancies or conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, or other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate and complete survey or inspection of the premises. d. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 1. Real estate taxes for 2014 and subsequent years, amount of which is not ascertainable, due or payable. 2. The recitation of acreage contained in the description of the land herein is for identification purposes only. Therefore possible discrepancies, if any, between the quantity of acreage as indicated in the description of said land and the actual acreage which would be shown by and accurate survey thereof are excepted. 3. Loss arising from oil, gas or other minerals, conveyed, retained, assigned or any other activity caused by the sub -surface rights or ownership, including but not limited to the right of ingress or egress for said sub -surface purposes. 4. Subject to a right of way grant from Fred Gulley and Floy Gulley, husband and wife, to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, filed April 18, 1972 and recorded in book 830 at page 952. 5. Subject to a right of way grant from Fred Gulley and Floy Gulley, husband and wife, to the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, filed February 25, 1969 and recorded in book 754 page 362. 6. Subject to variations in fence lines with property lines, easements, right of ways and other matters as are shown on the plat of survey by McClelland Consulting Engineers, Inc., dated October 3, 2014. FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Countersigned: Bronson Abstract Co any, Inc. it- • s, Winfield S. Bronson, Jr., Validating Officer or Agent, Agent License Number: 27157, State License Number: 325303 Arkansas Insurance Department Contact Information: (800) 852-5494 (501) 371-2640 Consumer Services Division 1200 West Third Street Little Rock, AR. 72201-1904 BRONSON ABSTRACT COMPANY, INC. 3810 N. Front Street, Suite #5 Fayetteville, AR 72703 479-442-2700 Privacy Information We Are Committed to Safeguarding Customer Information In order to better serve your needs now and in the future, we may ask you to provide us with certain information. We understand that you may be concerned about what we will do with such information — particularly any personal or financial information. We agree that you have a right to know how we will utilize the personal information you provide to us. Therefore, together with our subsidiaries we have adopted this Privacy Policy to govern the use and handling of your personal information. Applicability This Privacy Policy governs our use of the information that you provide to us. It does not govem the manner in which we may use information we have obtained form any other source, such as information obtained form a public record or from another person or entity. Bronson Abstract Company, Inc., has also adopted broader guidelines that govern our use of personal inform regardless of its sources. Bronson Abstract Company, Inc. calls these guidelines its Fair Information Values. Types of Information The type of nonpublic personal information that we may collect include: Information we receive about you on appraisal requestslengagement letters, real estate contracts, forms and in other communications to us, whether in writing, in person, by telephone or any other means. Use of Information We request information from you for our own legitimate business purposes and not for the benefit of any non-affiliated party. Therefore, we will not release your information to non-affiliated parties except: (1) with written permission by the client/lender, or (2) as permitted by law. We may, however, store such information indefinitely, including the period after which any customer relationship has ceased. Such information may be used for any internal purposes, such as quality control efforts or customer analysis. Former Customers Even if you are no longer our customer, our Privacy Policy will continue to apply to you. Confidentiality and Security We will use our best efforts to ensure that no unauthorized parties have access to any of your Information. We will use our best efforts to train and oversee our employees and agents to ensure that your information will be handled responsibly and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and Bronson Abstract Company, Inc's, Fair Information Values. We currently maintain physical, electronic, and procedural safeguards that comply with federal regulations to guard your nonpublic personal information. Fair Information Values Fairness -We consider consumer exceptions about their privacy in our business. We only offer products and services that assure a favorable balance between consumer benefits and consumer privacy. Public Record - We believe that an open public record creates significant value for society, enhances consumer choice and creates consumer opportunity. We actively support an open public record and emphasize its importance and contribution to our economy. Use - We believe we should behave responsibly when we use information about a consumer in our business. We will obey the laws governing the collection, use and dissemination of data. Accuracy - We will take reasonable steps to help assure the accuracy of the date we collect, use and disseminate. Where possible, we will take reasonable steps to correct inaccurate information. When, as with the public record, we cannot correct inaccurate information, we will take all reasonable steps to assist consumers in identifying the source of the erroneous data so that the consumer can secure the required correction. Education - We endeavor to educate the users of our products and services, our employees and others I our industry about the importance of consumer privacy. We will instruct our employees on our fair information values and on the responsible collection and use of data. We will encourage others in our industry to collect and use information in a responsible manner. Security - We will maintain appropriate facilities and systems to protect against unauthorized access to and corruption of the 3 WARRANTY DEED Conveying all right, title & interest KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS. - Doc ID: 015933390003 Type: REL Kind: WARRANTY DEED Recorded: 10/10/2014 at 03:43:35 PM Fee Amt: $25.00 Pape 1 of 3 Washinpton County, AR Kyle Sylvester Circuit Clerk File2014-00026243 That 1, Mary L. Dunn, (surviving spouse of Allen L. Dunn, deceased), a single person, hereinafter called Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations in hand paid by the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, a municipal corporation, hereinafter called Grantee, do hereby grant, bargain and sell unto the said Grantee and Grantee's heirs and assigns, the following described land, situate in Washington County, State of Arkansas, to -wit: Description being the same as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said lands and appurtenances thereunto belonging unto the said Grantee and Grantee's heirs and assigns, forever. And I, the said Grantor hereby covenant that I am lawfully seized of said land and premises, that the same is unencumbered, and that I will forever warrant and defend the title of said lands against all legal claims whatsoever. Witness my hand and seal this(O day October, 2014. Mary L. 15unn ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF ARKANSAS COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) § On this day of October, 2014, before me, a notary public, personally appeared Mary L. Dunn, known to me to be the person whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledge that she executed the same for the purposes and considerations therein set forth. In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand and official seal. LI.ELA R. DAVIS Notary Public - Arkansas WASHINGTON COUNTY ommission Expim February 15, 2015 r Notary Public Mail tax statements to: 113 W. Mountain Street, Fayetteville, AR 72701 Prepared through Bronson Abstract Company, Inc., 3810 N. Front St., Ste #5, Fayetteville, AR 72703 Part of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter (NE/4 SW/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in three separate deeds recorded in Washington County deed book 526, page 444; deed book 526, page 445; and deed book 543, page 176, and said part being more particularly described as follows: commencing at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, Page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NE/4 SW/4 of Section 36; thence N35° 13'03"E 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, a set 1/2 inch rcbar and plastic cap; thence N59°10'35"W 208.28 feet to a point on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies 0.16' southeasterly from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30°29'02"E 148.23 feet to the southwesterly corner of the Phillips property as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046; thence leaving the east line, along the southerly line of the said Phillips property, S59° 13'04"E 220.56 feet, passing at 0.16 feet a 1 inch pipe, to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35°13'03"W 148.82 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 31,798 square feet, or 0.730 acres. Part of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter (NE/4 SW/4) of Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said part being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County document 93-27263, and said part being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies at the northeasterly comer of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37 and which also lies West 330 feet and North 248 feet from the southeast corner of the said NE/4 SW/4 of Section 36; thence along the northerly line of the said Logue tract N5901 l'18"W 200.00 feet to the northwesterly corner of the Logue tract on the east line of Old Wire Road which lies southeasterly 0.06' from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence along the east line of Old Wire Road N30029'02"E 100.00 feet to a point which lies southeasterly 0.16 feet from a 1 inch pinch -top pipe; thence leaving the east line S59°10'35"E 208.28 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap; thence S35013'03"W 100.25 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 20,409 square feet, or 0.469 acres. Part of the Southeast quarter and also part of the Southwest quarter, both in Section 36, Township 17 North, Range 30 West, in the City of Fayetteville, Washington County, Arkansas, said parts being previously described in a deed recorded in Washington County Document 93-19847, and said parts being more particularly described as follows: beginning at a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap which lies East 1,485 feet and North 805 and 1/3 feet from the southwest corner of the Southeast quarter of the said Southwest quarter of Section 36; thence N02033'59"E 165,43 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument at the southwest corner of the Azalea Terrace Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 80; thence, along the west line of the said Azalea Terrace, NOi°46'56"E 337.08 feet to a 6 inch concrete monument with brass cap at the northwest comer of Azalea Terrace; thence NO2° 15'07"E 692.71 feet to a 1/2 inch rebar along the south line of the Shadow Hills Subdivision as depicted on a plat filed in Washington County plat book 7, page 4; thence, along the south line of the said Shadow Hills, N87°05'04"W 219.90 feet to a cross tie fence post at the northeast corner of the Phillips tract as recorded in Washington County document 2012-00026046, thence, along the easterly line of the said Phillips tract, S36° 11'27"W 236.94 feet to a 4 inch diameter concrete -filled fence post at the southeasterly corner of the Phillips tract; thence S35'13'03"W 249.07 feet, passing at 148.82 feet a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap, to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the northeasterly corner of the Logue tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 37; thence S30°29'02"W 248.25 feet to a set 1/2 inch rebar and plastic cap at the southeasterly corner of the Shipley tract first recorded in deed book 534, page 179; thence along the southerly line of the said Shipley tract N59°41'44"W 33.84 feet to a wooden fence post; thence S44057'50"E 867.74 feet to the point of beginning, enclosing 440,780 square feet, or 10.119 acres. o DD7821wrrapn 97' Grantee: Mailing Address: Grantor: Mailing Address: STATE OF ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION MISCELLANEOUS TAX SECTION P.O. BOX 896, LITTLE ROCK, AR 72203-0896 Property Purchase Price: Tax Amount: County: Date Issued: Affidavit ID: Affidavit of Compliance CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE 113 W. MOUNTAIN STREET FAYETTEVILLE AR 727010000 MARY L. DUNN 2648 N. OLD WIRE ROAD FAYETTEVILLE AR 727030000 WASHINGTON 10/10/2014 1037811712 $1,100,000.00 $0.00 File Number: 21498-14 The grantee/grantor claims the following exemption to the Real Estate Transfer Tax: A transfer to or from the United States, the State of Arkansas, or any of the instrumentalities, agencies, or political subdivisions of the United States or the State of Arkansas. I certify under penalty of false swearing that documentary stamps or a documentary symbol in the legally correct amount has been placed on this instrument Grantee or Agent Name (printed): Grantee or Agent Name (signature): - t� �"�""' Date:_ rO4o Address: / 0 W. Ni&- City/state/Zip: �'l/�/ 1;76� 4 - Washington County, AR I certify this instrument was filed on 10/10/2014 03:43:35 PM and recorded in Real Estate File Number 2014-00026243 Kyle Sylvest Circu't Cler by