Okay, I would like to call the Tuesday, December 16th meeting of the Fayetteville City Council to order.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Moore.

Here.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Here.

Mr.

Berna?

Here.

Ms.

Bunch?

Here.

Ms.

Turk.

Here.

Minister Jones.

President.

Mr.

Stafford.

Here.

Dr.

Jones?

Here.

Mayor Ron.

Here.

Please join me as we recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

Okay.

First up.

We want to recognize a beloved and influential member of our community who passed away recently.

Mr.

James, better known as Jim Blair.

Dr.

Jones, do you have any words that you would like to say?

No.

Okay.

You don't have to.

You don't have to.

I wanted to give you the I wanted to have an opportunity if you want to wanted to.

So he made meaningful and lasting contributions throughout our city and changed the landscape of Fayetteville and Fayetteville politics and state politics and somewhat it would say even national and global politics as well.

And so we appreciate his tremendous service and love of family.

And those of us who knew him are certainly better for it.

Mr.

Stafford, if you would like to go ahead with that, please.

Thank you, Mayor.

The nominating committee recommends the following candidates for appointment.

For active transportation advisory committee, Cody Wales for the bicycle advocate term ending in December 31st, 2027.

Corey Gargus for resident at large term ending December 31st, 2027.

For the airport board, reappointment of John Hawley to an aeronautical representative term ending December 31st, 2030.

For animal services, we had no applications received for the unexpired licensed veterinarian term ending June 30th, 2028.

For the audit committee, Benjamin Farsley, Citizen at Large Term ending December 31st, 2028.

Christopher Herrera, resident large term ending December 31st, 2028.

For the Fayetteville Arts Council, Andrew Blackwell, working artist term ending June 30th, 2029.

For Parks, Natural Resources and Cultural Affairs Advisory Board.

Coleman Warren, public at large term ending December 31st, 2028.

David McNeil, public at large term ending December 31st, 2028.

Josh McGee, public at large term ending December 31st, 2028.

Thank you.

Oh that's right.

Go ahead.

For the Urban Forestry Advisory Board, uh Carolyn Walgreen for University of Arkansas Representative term ending December 31st, 2027.

And Devin Spears for land development representative term ending December 31st, 2027.

And we receive the uh following nominations for the Board of Health for Mayor.

Natalie Hardin, an expired resident at large term ending December 31st, 2029.

Brittany Kelly, resident at large term ending December 31st, 2030.

And from the Housing Authority, uh we received uh for the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners, uh Charles Russell, unexpired public at large term ending December 28th, 2027, and Trisha Moore, public at large term ending December 28th, 2030.

And I would make a motion that we uh approve those nominations.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll on those uh on the nominations?

Ms.

Moore, yes, Mr.

Wiedaker, yes, Mr.

Berna?

Yes, Ms.

Bunch, yes, Ms.

Turk, yes, Minister Jones, yes, Mr.

Stafford, yes, Dr.

Jones, yes.

Okay, that passes.

Thank you very much, members of the nominating committee for your work in that regard.

We will now move on to the consent agenda.

Beginning with A1, approval of the December 2nd, 2025, City Council meeting minutes.

Thank you to the clerk's office for your hard work on those each and every each and every meeting.

A two, vehicle parts, tear down, inspect and repair services.

A three, Sam Sarah Telematics Master Agreement for Vehicle Assess Asset Management.

A4, Community Access Television, a resolution to approve an amendment to the professional services contract with community access television.

A five, recognizing community access television trust revenue.

A six, a district court technology purchase.

A seven, HR learning management software purchase.

A eight, approval of area agency on aging of Northwest Arkansas contract.

A nine, recognizing parks donation revenue.

A 10, recognizing and allocating animal services donation revenue.

A11, approval of the lease of a lease agreement with the Arkansas Air and Military Museum.

A 12, I believe needs to be pulled from consent at staff request.

Is that correct, Keith?

That's correct, Mayor.

We would like to pull this item and we will be bringing it back to you in January.

We found an administrative error in the uh supporting documentation.

So A13 is amendment to Inframark LLC contract, a resolution to approve amendment number one to the contract with infrark.

A 14 bid 25-51 with grant garrett excavating incorporated.

A 15 amendment to craft and toll and associates contract.

A 16 approval of an agreement with Johnson Controls.

A 17, release of notice for property located at 2301 West Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard.

A 18, approval of a contract with Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce.

A 19, approval of an agreement with downtown Fayetteville Coalition.

A 20, approval to purchase fuel station equipment.

A21, approval of police department policies, and that is our consideration.

Second, we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxon, we please call the roll.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Weedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Burner?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Okay.

So the consent agenda passes.

That brings us to Section B of unfinished business.

Um, as we spoke about at the agenda session, the applicant for RZN 2025-46 North Penelope Lane has requested that we table.

I'll see a lot of our friends from the Chamber of Commerce in the back.

Thank you so much.

And uh we look forward to working with you.

Thank you for being here.

Congratulations.

Um Jonathan, do you have clarification on the request to table?

Is it to the first meeting in January?

Yes, Mayor.

I did hear from the applicant that or sorry, not yes.

Yes, the applicant would like it to be tabled, but to the January 20th meeting specifically, and Mayor Tracy Hoskins is here if the council does have questions for him.

Okay.

Do we need to table or just hold it here?

Is that always for the question?

Can you clarify procedurally if we need to actually take motion to table or if we may just hold it?

It take action to table, excuse me.

It just depends how long you want to table it for.

If you want to just leave it for the next meeting, uh you could do that if it would, unless it had gone to the third and final reading.

This was a I believe the request from the applicant is for the January 20th meeting.

So uh is that do I interpret that as a motion to table?

It does need a motion to table because it's on final reading right now.

Yeah, so we have a motion and a second to table until the January 20th meeting.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Moore, yes, Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Okay, so that brings us to item two of new business, rezone 2025-48 on North Marks Mill Lane, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025 48 for approximately 26.7 acres, located south of North Marks Mill Lane in Ward 3 from RSF 4, residential single family for units per acre and UC Urban Corridor to P1 institutional.

At our last meeting on December 2nd, this ordinance was left on the second reading, so it is now on the third reading.

Thank you, Mayor.

Be ordained by the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Section 1.

The City Council of the City of Tableau, Arkansas here by change the zone classification of the property shown on the map, exhibit A.

And the legal description, exhibit B, both attached to the planning department's agenda memo from RSF4 residential single family four units per acre and UC Urban Corridor to P1 institutional.

And section two that the City Council of the City of Faith, Arkansas, hereby amends the official zoning map of the City of Federal collective change provided in Section One.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

Jonathan Kurt, Development Services Director.

I do want to take the opportunity to touch on an item that I brought up to the City Council at your agenda session and then segue into summarizing the elements of the memo that I issued to City Council in response to several inquiries that you all had left with staff at the last city council meeting.

Starting with the first item that I brought up at the agenda session last week.

The first and most common reason that staff or the city attorney or others recommend that council not consider uh specific development items is that projects can change.

Uh somebody can come to you all saying they want to build two houses and they end up building three.

Uh we recognize that that specific uh uh factor is not necessarily at play here.

Uh, you all understand the institutional actor who's the applicant, so the specific project is very well defined and likely going to happen.

Which brings us me to the second uh main reason that staff uh advises caution when considering development level details with rezoning requests, and that's because development is an iterative process.

Uh, as a application as a project work their way through the development review process and navigate federal, state, and local standards.

Uh, there are often a multitude of changes that have to be made to projects in response to those prior to them being entitled.

Uh, as a result, uh, I do want to caution again here and now uh that the council uh give uh be uh careful, be cautious uh uh against uh uh hinging any votes or decisions tonight based on uh very specific development details that you've uh had shared with you uh during this process.

With that in mind, uh there were four issues I wanted to uh circle back to.

Uh I did share a memo with you over the weekend in an effort to respond to some questions that the council had uh raised to staff at the last city council meeting.

Uh the first of which was a a question of of what uh kind of floodway permitting or floodplain permitting would be required with this project.

Uh for those council members who are not uh fully familiar with why that was asked.

Uh, their portion of this property uh adjacent to College Avenue is where Sublit Creek runs parallel to College Avenue before passing under it.

It does have a an area of associated floodway and floodplain and that portion of the property.

In evaluating what kind of permitting requirements are required with our floodplain uh engineering staff.

Uh we did find that local floodplain standards are more stringent than federal requirements.

Our local floodplain standards require that the development demonstrate uh that they're not only increasing or they're not only not increasing the base flood elevation, apologies for the double negative, but also not uh increasing channel velocities or flood flows in in those particular areas.

Uh, from what we understand with this proposal, uh, this is where the main entrance of the property will lie, and the goal is to exercise or modify an existing uh driveway that crosses sublitt creek there.

Uh we do not currently have concerns uh that this project can is unable to meet local uh permitting requirements and is unlikely to accordingly have to go through floodplain or federal floodplain permitting.

Uh, more simply uh on the stormwater damage liability.

Um the question was posed whether the city holds any stormwater, any liability for damages caused by stormwater when a project approved under our standards may not adequately accommodate the stormwater that occurs during a rain event and goes off site and damages a neighboring property.

Uh, in evaluating this request of both our engineer staff and our legal department, uh the answer shortly is no.

Uh, the city does not hold any legal liability in in those instances.

Uh the city does have robust uh sets of drainage standards uh that we hope to uh see the elimination or minimization of any stormwater impacts, but the fact that we have those and that we review for those does not make us liable uh if they are not able to handle an exceptional storm event uh or something of that nature.

Uh the third item I want to touch on was a question of cost share proposals.

Uh the council had expressed reservations or concerns that a development of this scale may have uh off-site impacts and that the applicant may be coming before the city council to request cost sharing of some infrastructure improvements to date.

Uh, during our first review round of the project's large scale development, we have seen no requests for cost share development.

Uh, there is a proposal to partner with the city.

Uh I'm not uh trying to uh manipulate words there, but to partner with the city on the installation of a street light at college and poplar.

That is something that the city is currently planning on doing uh as part of our 71B corridor plan uh to make that a signalized intersection, and the school district's proposal is to add a fourth leg to that and uh make their contribution contribution accordingly uh to access their property more safely and efficiently.

Uh finally, uh staff did receive a revised traffic impact analysis uh that was forwarded on to city council yesterday uh and evaluating uh the the uh the the updated information on that uh analysis.

Uh ultimately we came to the same determination we did on the last traffic impact analysis, and that there is not currently a dangerous traffic condition, and that we do not feel that this project will compound uh dangerous traffic condition, which uh are ultimately what the city council are charged with considering when it comes to rezoning requests.

Uh finally, as a reminder to council, staff is recommending in favor of this request.

Uh the planning commission forwarded it to the city council by vote of seven to one.

Um happy to take questions, uh, but perhaps before that, mayor, uh Dr.

Mulford uh with the Fayville Public School District is making as a presentation to make.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jonathan.

I appreciate that.

Um, Dr.

Oh, yes, uh, Minister James.

Thank you.

I have a question for Jonathan before we move on to any presentations.

Jonathan, in you made two comments in the floodway plane.

You said it still has to go through FEMA for approval.

What happens if they don't get FEMA approval?

Uh I'm sorry if I misspoke.

They do not have to go through FEMA permitting under the scope though that we've that we've reviewed the project to this date.

Uh in this instance, this particular circumstance where there is an encroachment into the floodplain and floodway, which is the entrance to the the where Foremosa restaurant used to be.

Uh, if you're familiar with that intersection of Poplar in college, there's an existing encroachment into the floodplain.

And if the engineer for the project, the the school's project can demonstrate that they're not uh aggravating the existing situation and that it can be local standards.

There would not be a requirement for FEMA federal permitting.

But that's only if they can demonstrate there won't be any aggravation.

What happens if there is?

That's a good question.

Uh, I may I think I'll have to defer that question to uh our our city engineer who's present tonight.

Uh believe that it depending on how that ends up, it may be that they have to go to local variants or they may have to go through FEMA permitting.

But um, Mayor, if Justin Bland is available and you'd like to have him come up, I think he may be able to answer that better than I am.

Thank you.

Minister Jones, would you like to hear from Mr.

Bland?

Yes.

Yes.

Justin, are you here?

Oh, here you are.

Hey, good evening.

Justin, how are you?

Yeah, good, thank you.

Um, yeah, so as part of this, the the applicant will have to do a flood study to analyze what is being proposed in this area.

And um, we understand that they've already done that and shown that there's not going to be so there are three metrics.

They can't raise the base flood elevation, they can't um increase the velocity, and uh they have to accommodate for any storage they take out of the floodplain.

So we the preliminary uh results are if they're gonna meet those, which would allow them to get the permit from the city and would not require additional FEMA permitting.

What was the third thing?

I'm sorry, um, cannot accommodate what so if you fill in a floodplain, uh the city has a requirement that you have to uh provide compensatory storage.

So if you fill in one area of the floodplain, you have to excavate in another area so that the total volume of the floodplain doesn't change.

Okay.

No, it makes sense.

Thank you.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Mr.

Vernon.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, Jonathan, I just want to clarify on the stoplight that is going to be there on college.

That was going to that was going in with the uh upgrades to College Avenue, whether this passes or not, that stoplight is going there.

That's correct.

Okay.

So the only cost uh in excess of uh for this project would be the arm that would handle the light for the fourth uh for the fourth lane.

That's correct.

And that would be on the schools.

That's school's responsibility.

Yes, that's correct.

Thank you.

Okay.

Dr.

Mulford, would you like to um present as the applicant?

Good evening, Mayor City Council.

So our presentation tonight is really uh responses to the questions you all asked last meeting.

Yeah, so uh tonight I have with me Kelly Freeman.

He's our owner's representative that's been hired uh for this project.

One of the questions asked last meeting was who's having the hard questions with architects and engineers.

Yeah, so that that answer is simple.

It's our owner's representative.

And um, so uh Kelly's with Connect Advisors.

They are a team of architects, engineers, and construction managers who work on behalf of a client, which is us to it may basically be a third set of eyes and to make sure we are being protected uh as the project moves forward.

So Kelly's going to come and speak to the questions you asked.

Jonathan already answered some of those things, and he also mentioned that the updated traffic study was sent yesterday, I think late this afternoon.

A one-page summary of the additional geotechnical boars was sent.

We have a representative from GTS that is here that can speak to that if you have questions.

So I'm going to turn it over to Kelly, let him go through those questions, and then we'll both be available if you have additional questions afterwards.

Thank you, Dr.

Mulford.

Madam Mayor, City Council, good evening, everybody.

I'm going to start tonight, and I want to read this verbatim because I think it's important to get the words right.

We want to offer a respectful acknowledgement of the opposing voices in this rezoning effort.

We recognize the opposition are educated people with expertise in various fields.

Their voices are respected, and their viewpoints and concerns have been an education for many on the RAMI project team.

As a citizen, I hope we never lose that passion for our community and the peaceful opportunity that we have to debate these things.

Also, I want to recognize the mayor and your staff and to the city council for their role in making hard decisions for our future in this community.

I also want to commend the city staff for all their consistent professional engagement throughout this process.

You're all a part of what makes Fayetteville second to none.

So tonight we're here to advance the request for rezoning of this parcel that's RS4 for a public school.

To that end, I want to walk you guys through some of the pertinent facts that we've learned as we've tried to answer some of the questions and concerns from the council.

So slide one, RAMI is a school in the forest.

That's a view from the from the uh area where the kids will be dropped off.

Next slide, please, Jonathan.

Traffic study.

This is hot off the press.

Uh Nathan just issued this report earlier.

Uh the big takeaway there is that with the signal at Pop Hart in North College that the school is not going to contribute to an unpleasant traffic situation on North College.

Approximately two-thirds of the school's traffic will be coming from College Avenue, and about one third of it will be coming from Ash Street.

Next slide, please.

Um slide two.

I'm sorry, slide three.

Ash Street and Marksmill Lane.

These are the junctions on the north and south side to the school's property.

The current plan shows a connection to Ash Avenue.

Again, for Jonathan's comment, this is an iterative process.

Large scale development has not seen this, subject to change, but we would certainly love to have that connection there.

The Mark Mill connection, the plan currently shows a pedestrian connection, a sidewalk that comes through there.

On each of these issues, when it goes through large scale, the school will follow the city's uh requirements for all of those uh connections.

Slide four, please.

The traffic light, the infrastructure costs.

Jonathan has already touched on this.

The the fourth leg for that traffic intersection that benefits the school would be paid for by the school as a part of the project.

Um slide five, uh, parking and queuing.

This issue is so important.

We have two slides for it.

Uh the main takeaway on the queuing and parking situation is that there's going to be no queuing on North College due to Rami School.

We have 2,750 lineal feet of queuing on site, an additional 1,300 lineal feet on the north side of the drive for events if needed.

The site will have 130 dedicated parking spaces and up to 20 uh overflow or auxiliary parking that will be on the southeast corner where there's a pervious surface.

Uh for comparison, the current RAMI has 760 students, 36 cars of queuing.

Current Woodland has 800 students, 18 cars of queuing.

McNair Vandergrift, 1200 students, 120 cars.

So with the 160 uh car queue at the new RAMI, we far we're far access of what we're doing in the other facilities.

Uh the next slide, please.

I think I'm just one more past that, Jonathan.

This is a this is a photograph of the site.

You guys have seen this before.

This demonstrates the way that the queuing is going to work around this school.

The two lanes in blue that's to the south and to the east, those are the 2750 feet of queuing containing 600 cars.

So that's kind of what we're showing there tonight on that.

Uh, next slide, please, Jonathan.

Tree removal.

Um, I want to say for certain before the council that the trees removed from this site will not be wasted.

They're gonna be reused in accordance with the site's certification requirements.

Um the canopy requirements for this site will be met.

Matter of fact, the current design, the current design actually exceeds those requirements.

The remaining forest, and and Councilman Stafford, you and I discussed this earlier.

We feel like there's gonna be around six acres of undeveloped property there that will remain forest.

Fable public schools will use that to their advantage, and they will use that uh to manage that forest well and use it as a teaching opportunity in the educational environment.

Um slide nine.

The construction site.

Uh this is the big one.

This is the this is a uh new piece of information tonight.

The geotechnical report borings have been completed, and a summary report has been issued.

It indicates that that site is very buildable, it's very suitable for construction of the type we're talking about.

Uh, the site generally is three stratum.

Stratum one is an organic heavy topsoil layer that can be stripped and reused on site.

Stratum two is a good quality clay material that beds between six and ten feet deep on average across the site.

Below that we have weathered shale, and a few feet below the weathered shell, we have competent shell for building foundations.

Next slide, please.

Uh what this means is that we will optimize these foundation elements for the soil conditions on site.

Matter of fact, we're finding out now we may actually be able to use spread footings and continuous footings as shallow foundations.

Next slide, please.

One of the things that sites does is a is a building um certification system, is it rewards you for using as much material that's on the site currently as possible to that end?

A lot of the cut that we make on the site will actually go back into fill.

At the current levels, at the current levels of elevations of the buildings and structures and elements, we feel like we may have an export in the range of 13,800 cubic yards, which represents about 863 truckloads.

Uh, the design team is actually working to reduce that right now.

It looks like that that material being of the quality it is, it's gonna lend itself to that kind of uh optimization.

Next slide.

Retaining walls, we've had a lot of discussion about that.

Currently, the design team are looking at walls in the range of 30 feet or so.

Uh, there's a lot of tall walls around town.

This wall here, because of the importance of it, will be uh well designed to withstand the forces involved.

We will offset these walls in a terrace manner where we we can effectively do that to reduce the height.

Uh and the district hopes that these walls will turn out uh natural looking to match the environment that the building's in.

Next slide.

Storm drainage, our storm drainage system will collect all the surface water, it'll channel it into pipes underground where it'll flow into detention ponds where it'll be uh retained, treated before it's released into Sublit Creek.

So the storm drainage system is going to make sure that our neighbors to the east there aren't continually receiving so much clay onto their property.

We've already talked about the FEMA permit, one won't be required.

Although I will say that school is going to uh let the consultants uh make sure that we update all the hydraulic engineering centers river analysis system so that compliance can be maintained with the city permit.

These next three slides are of the outline of the new Ramby Junior High School on the hill side in question.

And we can talk about this.

You can see it's behind the canopy there in the summertime, it'll be hard to see.

You can see a little bit of the third floor peaking above the canopy there.

Um but while we're looking at how that looks from North College, let me just say I want to thank you guys for the diligence and attention to all the detail you're paying to this.

We've talked a lot about potential site problems out there and issues with this site and the school, and that's all good and fine.

But we've not discussed as much what an amazing project this will be for the city.

This is gonna be an iconic world-class facility that is built in midtown Fayetteville on the side of that hill.

If you guys approve this rezoning, you're gonna be giving us a chance to show you what can be done right there.

The school believes the kids who are in the forest for their school are gonna protect way more forests than just this one.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

I will um turn it over to uh more clarifying questions from the council before we do public comment.

And Minister Jones, you're up first.

Yes, Kelly, I had a couple of questions on um slide three.

You said that Mark Mill is not um in the current site of the plan.

Why wasn't it included in the site plan?

Well, Mark Mills originally the connection there is protected by a covenant, and the city attorney can speak more to that.

Uh originally we had shown an interconnecting emergency vehicle only access through a gate.

If we go through large scale development and we can have the connection to ash, we don't need that.

But it may still be in the city's interest at large scale to have a pedestrian connection, but there would probably have to be some work done by this by the city to ensure that happens.

Okay.

On slide number seven, there was you were showing the exit.

Jonathan, if you can pull a slide number seven back up.

You were showing where they were exiting just like you said on Poplar and they were exiting somewhere else.

But didn't you did not show you see the blue lane?

You didn't show you.

Oh, yeah.

Where they were they were going to be able to exit.

If you notice the blue is in the inside of the red, and it almost like it circles and loops.

Where is the the red line is a bypass line?

So when you drop your child off, if you're done with the with delivering the payload, you can get back into the fast lane and get on around the school and onto your life.

And if you can't, they just keep circling.

If you yeah, the the line will move forward as the kids disembark, and as they disembark, they'll be able to go around.

Well, so it and and this is just what what would be the safest way for blue and then and I'm thinking, and then just asking because I don't understand it, is where would the buses be?

Are the buses inside in blue or the buses outside in the wheel?

Let me bring up our first guest speaker of the evening.

Mr.

West Burgess with Crafton Toll, he can tell you exactly what's going on with those buses.

Okay.

I can tell you that the bus entry up there onto Ash is a is not the only plan.

If we don't get the ash street, we got another plan.

Okay, I was just trying to understand it.

As you were going through it, I didn't know.

Mr.

Burgess, are you able to speak to Minister Jones' question about buses?

Yes.

So you'll see between the blue lines and the red line, there's a yellow line.

I see it right there.

That's the bus lane.

So the buses will queue right there, and then they'll the kids will get out and and we'll load there.

So the bypass lane will go around the drop off for both buses and and cars.

So is the blue lane a drop-off lane?

Yes, the blue lanes are the car drop-off lanes.

The yellow lane is the bus drop-off lane.

And so for safety, you're telling me that kids will cross through the blue lane where parents are dropping off.

Yes.

Now, typically the school staggers that so yeah, and they'll have crossing guards and and everyone there.

So the blue, the bus kids, the whole all the traffic will stop as the bus gets off.

They they generally will get off first before the kids are or vice versa before the the cars.

And so I I understand what you're saying.

So my next question is if the parent lane backs up, does the um the does the route is it a able to sustain the backup traffic a parent drop-off?

Because that's your biggest backup is a parent drop off.

So you have the blues there, the the yellow there, and that's fine.

That looks like it fits buses, but the blue doesn't look like they could absorb into the red ones.

It does.

The the red line is continuous, so the parents queue up in the two two lanes that are blue.

Okay.

The red line is free, people can drive around the outside of the site.

The length of those two blue lines, as Kelly referenced, is based on the traffic study, is in excess of what the traffic engineer recommends and far in excess of any other school, comparable school in town.

So not only do we feel like we've got more planned queuing lane than the school will need in those two lanes, but then if it were to overflow, if there was some other event, there's an additional 1300 linear feet that could be overflow and backup if if those were lanes weren't adequate.

And I just have one last question about that one, and I have one more.

In this red overflow, the plan is for buses to get in the same line with parent drop-off until they break out.

So every the the buses are fighting the parents to get in line to get into this breakout lane.

Is that correct?

Well, the buses will come, you know.

They'll they will be the red lane is continuous.

So when cars are all backed up, the red lane you can still go around.

So there we don't anticipate any scenario where buses would be blocked by parents' cars.

So where is this show this on the map?

I guess I'm confused because the red, I guess I'm looking at what is the width of that red continuous where buses can pass instead of getting in line behind parents.

Yeah, so there's so the red, the the two lanes, the blue lanes are two full width lanes, and then the red is a third full width lane.

Okay, and then so those three lanes go all the way around the on the east side and the south side, and then those will ultimately turn, they'll eventually it's two lanes and then becomes three lanes before you get to the to the queuing zone.

And then those will ultimately turn, they'll eventually it's two lanes and then becomes three lanes before you get to the to the queuing zone.

Okay, thank you.

And I just add one thing to that.

So that the double Q is representative of parent pickup in the mornings, it would just be a single lane drop-off, and then the buses would drop off in that same spot.

We would obviously be controlling traffic at the point of entry up there to allow kids to cross safely from the buses.

So that that does represent just the afternoon, and we'll have that passing lane for traffic to flow freely.

I think I'm looking for traffic control before they get to the lane breakout.

Because if you look on the bottom portion coming up from Popular, if that's a two-lane entrance for buses and parents, who's doing the traffic control to keep the buses on this side and the parents on this side and buses and so it's a lot like all of our other campuses that you had to train parents on how it works, right?

So that's that's what we usually spend the first week or two of school doing, sending information out, having extra hands on deck, training people how it works, and so there would be a component of that, but I don't want to ignore the fact that those two blue lines represent 2750 linear feet.

That is far more QA than we have on any existing campus.

So it's got a we would have to have an extraordinary day to even be backed up to that point, much less past that point.

So we just don't foresee that being an issue.

But we'll have those extra hands on deck.

Okay, I had one last question, Mayor, if you don't mind.

Um I guess I was asking about the the detention ponds, and you said the detention ponds will make sure that the flood flood floodplain doesn't change for the neighbors to the east.

Do you anticipate that changing for any other name neighbors east, north, south, or west?

No, for anyone who's seen that site, and and some of them, but some of you guys have toured it, there's a lot of erosion going on right now.

That canopy is so dense there's no understory, no route protection of that soil, so it washes to the east down towards Sublit Creek.

Okay.

The new system, as that is that precipitation falls and collects into the gutters and the downs and the and the underground piping for the stormwater, it'll be delivered into basins that will retain and restrain that flow for a period of time so that materials can settle out of it, and then there'll be a treatment system that uh the city has found successful on a lot of these sites to treat that stormwater before ultimately it's released into Sublit Creek.

It will um it will be able the system will be able to store the first initial burst of a down of a downburst, and it will minimize that peak flow event.

Okay, uh, but eventually the water will be able to get to Sublit Creek in a treated form, which means it won't be carrying those products of erosion like soil and organics into the neighbor's yards and into the creek.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, hi, I have some questions about the geotechnical report, just a little summary that you provided in the packet.

Um so my first question is what's the status?

Is it completed?

Have they completed all the boring up there?

The boring is complete.

What you saw today from David Berry was a two-page summary of what the data is showing.

Now, eventually, his company will produce a complete geotechnical engineering report with recommendations.

We're still waiting on that report, but the summary and the data that they've collected indicates that that site is a very good candidate for building on.

All I have is this one-page report.

I don't have a two-page report, and so um I don't have any specific or details other than what you presented.

Um when do you anticipate that report being uh available to see the complete analysis?

Everything is always two weeks away.

This time of year it's three weeks away.

It'll be after the first of the year before we get that report, but I will bring you a copy of it, Ms.

Turk.

I read the letter that you wrote to the ADEQ on the the CAFO uh hog farms on the on the Buffalo River.

You did some good research.

I I appreciate so much your effort in protecting that that piece of our world.

Well, I'd like to be thorough as as you probably know.

So um I have a couple more questions.

We we have David Berry with GTS here tonight.

He can speak directly to the data he's seen from the board.

And sir, and if you will direct that, who is it that you have that you would wish to speak?

David Barry, he's a professional engineer.

This is the geotechnical engineer of record for the homie site.

He's here.

Okay.

I I'd rather see it in writing rather than hearing about it.

You know, I'd like to take a look at it a little bit more thoroughly.

Absolutely.

So um understand that.

So yeah, that would be helpful.

Um, I want to kind of change um a uh questions here.

Um, where is um the parking for staff?

Uh I I have not seen that in your diagram.

I'm sure it's there somewhere.

I just haven't heard about it.

Could you show us where that is?

Look at the plan up there.

The parking areas are to the uh inside of the lane that goes around the school.

All of those uh those uh rhomboid looking geometries there, those are 130 individual parking spaces adjacent to the roadways.

In addition to that, at the far southeast corner, you see the kind of uh teal green colored area there.

That is a pervious area for overflow or auxiliary parking that can handle, we think around 20 cars.

So that will be made pervious.

I don't I think that's just a field right now, right?

Right.

It's a field right now.

Okay.

It'll be it'll be covered with grass, but it'll be able to drain.

And then if you're not able to um if the city requires you to have access through the Mark Mills area, um, I'm guessing that you're gonna have to actually create a um uh a road in there, a paved road in there, so that fire uh emergency response can have access through that area.

If we don't have the connection to ash, then code is very likely going to require an emergency only access through there.

It can be improved surface, it doesn't have to be hard surface, it can be some type of improved surface with a locked gate that that emergency services can use, but it won't be for general public use.

So you don't have to have a paved surface for a really heavy bladder truck that weighs, I don't know how many thousands of pounds.

Well, we may elect to pay it.

That's a that's a decision for a future time, but you can build anything with uh geo grid to support a truck like that.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, I guess engineers can can do it all.

They can they really can counteract Mother Nature.

Okay.

Um excellent.

Okay, well, thank you very much.

That's all I have right now.

Yes, ma'am, thank you.

Okay, Miss Moore, do you have any clarifying questions for either Jonathan or one of the applicants before we open it up to public comment?

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, back on the parking.

Sorry, I tried to catch you before you left.

Oh, oh, yep, that one.

Thank you.

Um, I just wanted to um ask on the pedestrian connection for the bicycle and pedestrian, the green dotted lane.

I just was trying to understand for that connectivity for those folks that are coming in.

Um, how do they actually access the academics and athletics buildings?

I'm not seeing those dot connections, so trying to understand those interactions because we talked about buses and cars and the parking spots for the staff.

I just wasn't sure since a lot of the talk two has been about with our traffic study and um looking at where this is going to be located, trying to really encourage that mobility, just wondering how they're gonna access.

I just see it around the outside, not how they get all the way to their buildings.

I I think I understand your question.

Of course, the drawing you're looking at here is just for cueing information.

So there's other drawings we have that indicate interconnected trails that uh as a matter of fact, Dr.

Mulford, you may speak to this a lot more clearly than I can.

Uh but there is an interconnecting trail system that's proposed for this site that will breed the trail that's uh across North College back up the hill there parallel to Ash.

Okay, so the thinking is just a diversion over to the trail system that then will get close enough to the building.

That's so that they'll have a separation from the automobile and the bus traffic.

Is that okay?

Just wanted to double.

Yes, ma'am.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Stafford, I just have a real quick question.

We're given another piece of information up here.

I didn't know where it came from.

There's no is this from the city or the schools or uh or a citizen um the uh rain event uh one sheet.

Keith, can you address that?

Yeah, that's a handout that I believe that one of the public speakers is going to reference here in a moment.

It is not, it is uh, and just for clarification, we'll do a better job of of uh that.

I don't love it when handouts come in last minute and we can't say who they're from, but if they're from the city, we will always put a cover page saying that it's from staff and put it in memo form.

So I think someone from the public is gonna address this.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, if we don't have any more questions uh for the applicant or for Jonathan, I'm gonna open it up to public comment.

Thank you very much.

Thank you all so much.

Yes, thank you.

Okay, um just a reminder most of you are familiar with this.

We ask that you stick to the three-minute time limit.

I will cut you off.

Um you have one turn at the mic.

And let's please keep it respectful.

Thanks so much.

Please come on up and state your name and address.

Dr.

Christopher Johnson, the principal of Raimi Junior High School, uh 495 North Coral Kenya Loop, Apartment 110.

So I rise this evening to speak about the importance of passing the rezoning ordinance for Ramon Junior High School.

The proposed rezoning of the land will help favor public schools in a number of ways.

First, it will assess in creating equity within the school system by ensuring families that may face poverty or financial hardships are not zolved for a particular feeder pattern.

Second, the feeder pattern would develop neighborhood schools where scholars would be less likely to choose school choices.

They will remain with their cohort.

Currently, each ramy, each year, Remy loses roughly 50, 60 scholars to uh our partner school, Woodland.

The main reason is to remain with their friends from the middle school.

The third, third reason, the new location will allow Remy to continue to provide outdoor spaces for teachers to uh instruct and scholars to learn.

At the current RAMI, the science team has successfully integrated the adjacent trail system in Woods into their curriculum to provide scholars with meaningful hands-on outdoor learning uh experiences directly supporting the ecosystem standards.

The initiative transformed the local environment into an accessible living laboratory, provide scholars with direct engagement with real world ecological concepts.

Some of the key science activities include field studies conducting science studies on avionic and biotic biotic factors, ecological observations, searching for examples of symbosis and nature conservation, identifying basic species and their impact on native uh ecosystems.

Not only with the new location benefit the science department, but extends into the other areas of other areas in scholar life.

Various school clubs will utilize space to practice and refine primitive skills.

We're currently our corrective reading uh class, which is our lower reading group, uh recently utilized Remy's area by implementing a primitive skills unit.

This uh brought units of study to help scholars build meaningful context while learning critical skills for human survival, making their learning experience more meaningful.

Lastly, according to the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, the new Raming campus will be designed to be a living laboratory in that enabling scholars to engage directly with the five key focus areas identified by the Arkansas Game and Fishing Commission.

Outdoor education and water quality.

Students scholars will conduct hands-on research uh and monitoring, fostering and deep understanding of local water quality and safety, recreation and wellness.

The campus will serve as a hub for real-world exploration of hiking and biking trail, development and management, promote a healthy active lifestyles, natural resources.

Scholars will study fishing and conservation of aquatic habitats alongside programs dedicated to observing and protecting wildlife, I'm sorry, watchable wildlife, turning theoretical lessons to tangible conservation experience.

The Ramie project will not only enhance the academic experience, we'll also create a unique resource that aligns with the Arkansas Game Fish Commission's statewide mission producing scholars ready to become the next generation of environmental stewards and outdoor recreation leaders.

Thank you for your consideration.

I'm right on time.

Great job.

Thank you.

All right, y'all have a good evening.

Okay, next step, please come on.

Hi, my name is Beth Bowen Shock.

I'm a ward four resident, and I own and operate a business in Ward 3, where my husband and I also own property.

The property we own is actually about due west, just across college on Green Acres from this site.

I know you've all heard from me a lot, and I'm so appreciative of all of your time and the diligence, but um I think at the end of the day, we all care so much about this property in Fateville.

I'm obviously I'm a root mom, I'm a faithful high mom, I'm a host hall mom, and I have one in college.

So from here, I'm running a business, I'm raising kids, and I think in general, I think we all um would agree that at the end of the day, we don't want AD homes on this hillside.

And I um I think because we feel so strongly about the school, it's been easy to get sidetracked from that.

But at the end of the day, the best use of this property is not residential.

Um, and and I know I have so much respect for people who have been in Fateville for so long, and um I have fond memories of coming here as a child.

Um, my grandfather's name is on the senior walk.

So we have very strong ties to this community, and I know it's really hard to see change happen, but I I know we all 100% do not want homes here.

So I really encourage you to um vote for this rezoning.

We would really appreciate it, and then I think um the school will be a good steward of the land, and I think if it comes to pass that they're not able to do that, I really have a lot of faith in Dr.

Mulford that he'll then make the next right decision.

Um but at this point, we really really don't want it to be homes.

So thank you so much for all of your time.

Thank you.

Hi, Leanne Yurgan.

I'm in Ward 3 on Windswept Lane.

I'm not an expert on anything, but I don't think you need to be an expert tonight to know that this is not a good idea.

On October 25th or 28th of this year, there was a student who was run over on her foot while in a crosswalk at Holt Middle School.

And I think we all remember in February of 2019, the tragic death of a student at the University of Arkansas on Garland who was hit by a car, and that was a street that also has a median.

These were accidents that occurred while a student was in a crosswalk.

And now the school is proposing that we have a crosswalk on 71 across five lanes of traffic, the busiest inner section or straight a length of highway in the city.

Attempts to mitigate this risk are not enough.

Stop lights, crosswalk are not enough.

Ash Street is still a problem.

Obviously, they've eliminated one entrance in the new proposal at the top of the hill.

They still have not addressed how cars are going to safely enter and exit that steep of a hill with a 90-degree turn.

Even if ash is widened and other improvements are made, it's not going to change the steep of the hill.

It's not going to change the 90-degree turn.

I like you got a chance to look at the traffic study yesterday.

I'm still digesting it.

I know you haven't had an opportunity to look at it.

I will tell you this.

One thing that's stands out to me is 55% of the students who are going to attend the school are going to ride a bus.

That means about 405 students are going to be in a car.

So I ask that you deny this rezoning.

It is not suitable property.

There are too much, too many traffic and safety concerns.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Well, Michael Cochran, 232 West Adams Street in Fable.

I've had 40 years' experience in architectural design.

I taught architecture design at the University of Oregon for 12 years and worked in construction administration and commercial architecture in Austin, Texas.

So last meeting, the question was raised why the fuss about this simple rezoning project.

Typically, a developer would come in for a rezoning and assume all the financial risk.

In this case, we the public, the not so silent partners are going to put the bill for this venture.

My concern is about cost, both financial and environmental.

I have direct experience in building on hillsides in this region, and it's always more expensive on a 16 or so percent grade.

There's a much higher likelihood of cost overruns from underground water, especially, which I've had unfortunate experiences with, and aberrant soil conditions.

I don't think an 80,000 square foot football field on this kind of grade is really a wise land use practice.

I have to deal, uh you have to deal with stormwater in the ball fields and roughly 62,000 square foot footprint of the buildings and all the pavement around it.

It's true that the stormwater can be dealt with detention ponds.

Detention ponds can't be built on a slope, so that's more deforestation and uh and more excavation.

So last week, I'm sure you're aware of a New York Times article pointed out the favorable ones.

Special recognition for including nature-based solutions such as protecting wetlands and forests.

It also pledged to improve natural habitats to mitigate flooding and reduce what's known as the heat island effect, where cities are warmer because of pavement and buildings absorb heat.

This project includes roughly 4,600 linear feet of roadway, besides the permeable park parking encircling the site, which is approaching 100,000 square foot feet of pavement generating heat and stormwater runoff.

We're not really just talking about trees here on the hillside.

A nice thing to look at.

It's many acres of uh lost ecosystem.

It's many acres of uh lost ecosystem.

You can't just insert a building of this scale into the forest.

Everything around the buildings, the fields, the roads will be stripped bare before relandscaping.

In the past 50 years, we've lost 73% of our wildlife worldwide.

Bird populations have decreased 50%.

Insect populations are found to decline by an average of 6.6% a year, a 72% drop in two decades.

We depend on insects for food production, and they're critical in the whole healthy ecosystem.

It's not a green building if you remove precious habitat for buildings and ball fields.

That's time.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Hello.

Hi.

Hi.

I'm Mary Cheng.

I'm in War II.

Do you need my address?

Or plenty.

Okay.

As a root elementary employee, the root PTO treasurer, community member, and most importantly, a parent.

I'm here to express my strong support for the new Rami school development as currently proposed.

I fully support a walkable community where students can safely bike or walk to school.

This design is not only practical, but essential for fostering independence, responsibility, and healthy habits in our children.

For my own family, the fact my six-year-old and 10-year-old children can bike to Root Elementary and McNair Middle School has been incredibly impactful.

It gives them the confidence, encourages daily physical activity, and helps them arrive at school ready to learn.

Plus, they get to sleep in not needing to ride a bus across town.

As we all know, walkable schools also improve safety and quality of life for the entire community.

Reducing car traffic during peak school hours lowers congestion, improves air quality, and creates safer streets for students, families, and staff.

Thoughtful planning that prioritizes sidewalks, bike accesses, and neighborhood connectivity benefits everyone, not just those with children in the route school district.

Additionally, placing schools within walking neighborhoods promotes equity by ensuring all families have safe and reliable access to education regardless of transportation availability.

This proposed location supports working families and strengthens neighborhood connections.

Investing in RAMI reflects a long-term commitment to healthy, connected, and sustainable communities.

For these reasons, I strongly, strongly urge the council to support the RAME development as proposed and to continue prioritizing walkable school-centered neighborhoods in our city planning decisions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

My name is Melissa Upchurch.

I live at 1840 North Woolsey, that's within the gravitational pole of Woodland Junior High.

And I I see this as a as a balance as a balance issue and an ethics issue.

Animals and insects and water and things that we require for quality of life don't have a voice.

You know, with intention development as opposed to leaving things alone.

The second thing I want to address is the football field.

Trees have already been cut to build that one at Woodland.

Why can't the schools share that football field?

The third thing I wanted to address is the 863 truckloads of debris that's supposed to be trucked out of this building project.

Who's going to monitor 863 truckloads?

They said roughly 863, but who's going to monitor that to make sure it's not 2,063?

So I have concerns about that.

Fourth, you should get everything in writing before you make any decision.

As Ms.

Turk pointed out a while ago, she likes to have things in writing, and I think that's just good business.

Fifth, I had my house recently, the foundation had to be fixed again on us at the foot of Wolsey.

Foundation specialties did the work.

And he said, the engineer said, sure, you can build anywhere.

But the fact is you're building on clay, and what does clay do?

It expands and contracts and it moves around like it's at a disco.

I had to have Pierce sunk down to 15 to 30, uh 15 to 20 feet to hit bedrock for my structure to stop doing this and doing this.

And that's all over town.

The engineer said that, and he ought to know because he's been fixing things all over town.

So uh those are the things that I wanted to put to bring to your attention, but mainly do things with a sense of balance.

If you end up building the school, use a football field that already exists so we don't lose as much of the of the ecosystem that's already there.

Um thank you for your time and thank you for listening.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Leah Jacobs.

I live at 2389 Camelette Place.

These are all three of my kids.

My husband was at a work dinner, and they're the beneficiaries.

They'll be going to Remy.

Um thank you for the thoughtful work you have invested in evaluating the proposed rezoning plan.

My support for this rezoning is rooted in practical considerations of geography and access.

The proposed change better aligns neighborhood boundaries with the realities of how families move through and experience this area.

It promotes accessibility and continuity for students, which are essential factors in long-term educational success.

I have great confidence in the leadership in educators at RAMY, and I believe that placing families within a strong established school community benefits not only individual students, but the broader district as well.

While I understand that your decision is not about constructing a new school, but rather about whether this land should be designated P1 or RS4, that distinction is precisely why this rezoning matters.

Thoughtful land use decisions shape educational access for generations.

Although my family would directly benefit from this change, my support extends beyond personal interest.

I believe approving the rezoning represents a responsible, forward-looking choice that prioritizes efficient land use, student access, and the long-term needs of our community.

I respectfully urge you to approve this rezoning in the best interest of our students and our future families.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

Is that Bluey and Bingo?

It is.

Do you have both Bluey and Bingo?

Can you hold them up for me to see?

Yeah.

You did a very good job helping your mom out tonight.

Yes.

I know, right?

How do you follow bingo and bluey?

Chris Frankie, good evening.

Um, ward three, my address 2474 East Victoria Lane.

So I wanted to first thank you, Mayor and Council members, for taking the time to uh truly listen to all of us.

Um I want to also ask for your support tonight in the rezoning.

Clearly, there's a lot of passionate feedback on both sides of this.

Um, you know, the district was asked to essentially create a unicorn, find a school location that has a consolidated centralized feeder pattern, improves equitable access for resources and education for all of its students, and does it in a way that conforms with development codes, city planning, all of the feedback you've heard over the last several meetings.

There's been a number of issues brought up from traffic to safety, uh courtesy with the neighbors in the area, environmental concerns, all of which will be considered debated and designed in due time as part of long-term development.

The thoughtful and the comprehensive planning that we've seen tonight and previous meetings shows us a design for a school in the forest.

I can only help but think that the district will find the most efficient way to transport its school buses to the site to drop off kids before and after school.

They'll look at things like pedestrian safety, crosswalks, trail connectivity to ensure that our kids can safely ride their bikes to school every day.

They've built a design that has outdoor classrooms with intentional design elements built all throughout the campus so that our children grow up with a love for nature and creates common use space for all uh after hours.

Uh honestly, I'm kind of really wishing that I had a school with this kind of intentional design growing up as a kid as an environmental practitioner.

But the decision before you tonight is just simply about rezoning from RS4 to P1.

With the site being currently zoned, RS4.

I think the one thing we can all agree on is that we would hate to see this land go the way of 80 plus private single family homes.

We all lose.

P1 restricts that residential development and helps our district continue to excel with a sustainable future.

Thank you again for your time and I urge you to vote in favor of rezoning to P1.

Thank you.

All right, my name is Duncan Sciles.

I'm in ward two, corner of uh Olive and Maple.

Uh I grew up here and I moved away for better part of 20 years.

And then I came back in 2021 after I had a kid.

And um is because I had a great childhood here in Fayetteville, and I wanted to offer that to them as well as be closer to my family.

And what I loved about Fayetteville among many other things is that it's walkable, and uh it feels like the neighborhood that I live in now is just very accessible, especially for a kid.

And I I think that that is the direction I'd like to see the city continue to go in.

Um we have neighbors who put their kids on a bus at like 6 45 to go to middle school.

And I have trouble enough getting my daughter to Washington by 8 10, and she's definitely not going to do the 645 bus very well.

So I like the idea of the school being close.

Um they could potentially bike there, and if they're not up for biking, like just reduced driving time, it has a huge environmental impact as I understand it.

The reduced driving hours would outweigh the um the carbon uh capture of the trees many times over.

Uh on top of that, I do think the plan is extraordinary.

Uh, it's um a magical setting for a school.

I think our children would be very lucky to go there.

And um I've I'm I support it, and I appreciate you taking the time to listen to me.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Ashley Melburn.

I live at 848 East Rockwood Trail, Ward 3.

I am a root parent.

I have my root child here, Anna McNair parent.

And I am so excited for my kids to join the feeder pattern that will go into place when we get these new school facilities constructed.

I'm so excited for them to go to school with kids from Happy Hollow and Leverett and Washington.

I am so excited for them to go to Raimi Junior High, regardless of where it is located.

I am super excited for them to go to Raimi Junior High in this location that is being proposed.

A location that is walkable for us, prioritizing proximity, reduces sprawl, and reducing sprawl is great for families, enabling us to spend more time with each other versus on trips to school.

And it also is good for the environment if it can take more people out of cars and more people off of miles on the road.

And this location for us is a bikeable location.

I really, really hope this passes tonight.

Otherwise, my children are going to age out of this opportunity.

They are very close to the cutoff of having the opportunity to go to these new school buildings as soon as they're constructed.

So thank you very much for all of your work listening to the community on this matter, and I hope you will vote to pass the rezoning for the new RAIME tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, council.

My name is Jana Drennan, and this is my son Emmett, and we live in Ward 3.

And I wanted to come here tonight to remind everyone here who is so passionate about this issue that while discussing the ins and outs of the proposed campus, ultimately, this is a rezoning issue.

And I think we can all agree that a unregulated resident residential area on this 26 acres is not going to benefit anyone except for the developer who may purchase it in the future.

Ultimately, I ask very kindly and with appreciation for the amount of time that you have put into listening to our community members to please vote yes on this rezoning.

I think the opportunity for the new Remy campus will only further the community that I have been lucky enough to be a part of, being a part of the Fayetteville public school system with just my first child.

I've made lots of friends with neighbors, and I think having a community school that feeds through places that make sense, Washington, Route, et cetera, will only further the ability for parents to connect children to make lifelong friends and benefit the incredibly rich community that is Fayetteville.

So please vote yes.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Good evening.

I'm a parent to one root first grader and three future district enrollees.

Likewise, I'm I'm very excited about this project.

And I'm a I'm a local residential architect, very intimately familiar with RSF4.

I have three projects currently going through that.

And I mean, I'll be the first to say nobody wants to see this hillside go the way of an RSF4 development.

The hand of residential development is not one that concerns itself intimately with you know context tree maintenance.

Um just just kind of cuts.

So I urge you to vote in favor of this rezoning as a way to encourage smart and contextually sensible development in our city's new urban corridor.

Um that is forward-looking and insulated against you know future growth patterns of the city.

Um notwithstanding the amazing school that would be built there.

Thank you for your time.

Um thank you.

Thank you.

Hi guys.

Uh little intimidating.

Uh, usually I'm a Zoom attendee, so you'll have to forgive me if I seem a little nervous.

Uh my name is Drew Connor.

I live at 497 East Ozark View Drive inside the Summit Place neighborhood.

Uh, this is my six-year-old daughter Brady, who currently attends Root.

Um, Mayor Molly, real quick before I get into this, you are her hero.

So thank you for being a woman in leadership.

You're amazing.

Um this whole thing comes down to a pretty simple choice.

And I know there's a lot going on, but really in my mind, simple.

This is a rezoning hearing.

Um, this 26-acre parcel is currently zoned, RSF4, as you're aware, um, allowing 80 plus single-family homes by right, meaning that no further council input is required if this doesn't pass and is sold to a developer.

None.

Um, yeah, really, uh someone said it earlier.

If that happens, everyone loses, completely uh believe that, and that a P1 institutional rezone is the responsible option, as this land, uh this land will be developed either way.

The question is whether it's done with intentionality, like what we're seeing from Fayetteville Public Schools, or just by default.

Um, and so that said, uh, we urge you to approve the zone request.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, and thank you, Brady.

Thank you for coming out and being here.

Thank you.

Uh hello.

First of all, thank you for all your time in this.

You guys are amazing for being here and listening to everybody.

Uh my name is Justin Jones.

I live at 1830 North Woolsey Avenue, which is located in Ward 4.

Uh, and I'm the newest member of the Fayetteville School Board, and I have a fourth grader who attends Root Elementary.

I'll keep my remarks brief, as you've already heard many thoughtful points and passionate uh, excuse me, from passionate and knowledgeable members of our community.

Uh, my first job as a teacher was in an alternative high school, uh, which was a very challenging job.

And the decisions we made carried real weight for our students and the broader community.

So I understand how important this decision is.

My school's principal, along with my fellow teachers, always told me to make decisions that are best for the kids.

Because if you do that, you'll never regret the choices you made.

Over the last three months of the school board, I've listened carefully to both sides of this issue, and I believe each side has raised valid points, and I truly appreciate everyone's willingness to be involved and engaged in this process.

I too had my own concerns in the building of the new Remy Junior High on this proposed site.

But since this proposal was put before the city council, Dr.

Mulford and his team have proven to me their dedication to addressing the public's concerns.

While it's a very difficult choice, I believe in my heart that approving the rezoning of this property is the best decision for the children of our community.

The same children the board and I are here to serve.

As we move forward, I encourage all of us to keep those students at the center of our decisions.

I respectfully urge for your vote of yes in approving the rezoning of this property.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Landon Trock and a property owner at 2025 Green Acres Road, just kind of west of 71 from this proper property.

Uh I didn't anticipate speaking this evening, but listening to some of the comments and other meetings via Zoom, I felt compelled.

Uh I'm the father of five.

My oldest daughter is a freshman at Barnard College at Columbia University in New York.

I have an FHS student, one at Osall, and two root elementary students.

But specifically, and I ask that you support rezoning today.

And I do I'm grateful for the Fayetteville Public School and the detailed plan that they presented for not only my kids but many generations.

And I live in Fayetteville when I I moved to an adjacent community 20 years ago.

And within the first month, I visited the Fayetteville Public Library.

And I knew I wanted to live here.

It was just a community that invests in a space, a public space, open to hull, is where I wanted to be.

But I wanted to address the floodway.

The property I own is in the map that's been presented.

I think I saw it last week.

I'm not concerned about it.

Our parking lot isn't, I think the 1500-year floodplain.

I have confidence in city staff to mitigate any downstream risk.

The other aspect of being a property owner, not that I anticipate uh rezoning that parcel.

We are adjacent, I think, to the corridor rezon.

We're not that zoning.

But there's been a lot of discussion about uh like geotechnical analysis at this phase.

Is that just whether you pass it or not?

I think as a service to Fayetteville commercial industrial property owners, is our geotechnical analysis required at this phase?

Because I mean, I if I wanted to consider a rezone, like just clarity around do I need to spend 5,000, 10,000, 20,000 to maybe perform that or maybe not before you get the large-scale development.

So I just want to thank the the Fayetteville Public Schools again.

I thank you for serving our community.

Uh and uh I ask that you support the rezone.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

Would it be okay for me to show a couple of slides while I speak?

Keith, is that if they already have do they already have them in advance for Nicole Edwards?

As of now, that's still allowed in our rules.

So yes.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um, I'm Nicole Edwards, 517 West Hawthorne Street, Ward 2.

During the December 2nd council meeting and even comments tonight, there seems to be broad agreement that residential development of this site would be the worst possible outcome.

The argument for approving a P1 rezoning is that it would prevent that result.

However, P1 zoning eliminates options while retaining the current RSF or zoning at this time, preserves viable and responsible alternatives.

The rezoning decision carries a significant contingency.

Approval of a P1 zoning would trigger purchase by the school of an adjacent seven acres for an additional 1.2 million dollars, committing further tax dollars before unresolved concerns related to safety and traffic are adequately addressed.

Currently, the Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association has the ability to purchase the forested property.

The additional 1.2 million dollar expenditure would impact this possibility of preservation.

Voting for P1 effectively eliminates this option.

It's okay if they don't show it.

No, it needs no, it needs to show.

So can we can't we make sure it stays on the screen, please?

Thanks.

Okay, go ahead.

Um, second slide.

There's been an insistence of urgency to rezone now to not delay the project's schedule.

But from the Fayetteville Public School website, the new Ramey campus is scheduled to open in August 2029 with the possibility of an earlier opening in August 2028.

And we need to be on the second slide.

Keith, I was still on the first.

Thank you.

Acceleration of the project completion to 2028 is largely dependent upon approval of a six-year millage extension to be voted on in March 2026.

Rezoning isn't the key factor in meeting the accelerated timeline.

Funding is.

Given the unresolved safety concerns alone, this rezoning request should be given careful and deliberate consideration.

The council should not be compelled by an artificial sense of urgency surrounding this.

About last slide, please.

The current zoning of RSF4 is not in danger of being used.

Fayetteville Public School owns the property, which protects it from residential development.

This provides adequate time to further evaluate site safety conditions, ingress and egress options, and potential costs to the city without the risk of residential construction proceeding in the interim.

Let's also not forget this land was owned by a residential developer for 10 years and was never developed, likely due to the extraordinary cost to do so.

It speaks to the unsuitability of any project being forced onto this site.

The doubts about the property suitability for development are shared by many.

The doubts about the property suitability for development are shared by many, and council member Bunch spoke to the low risk of residential development on this site at the 1118 council meeting, as her comment is on the slide and her quote about the houses would need to cost about five million dollars to be feasible.

I respectfully ask you to vote no to the P1 zoning request or at minimum table the vote until the unresolved questions are appropriately addressed.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Hello.

Hi.

I'm Susan McDonald.

I live on North Wheeler Avenue, which is behind the forest, and I moved there because of that forest.

And I've heard the creek be called a flood zone.

And I started thinking, you know, I think we're ignoring on this planet that we are part of nature.

You know, we've got major flooding going on in other parts of the world.

And I've thought, what would happen when they only have 150 of those dump trucks hauling stuff out and it starts pouring rain?

I mean, it's gonna be it's potentially a horrible mess.

And the idea of what goes on in my head is having it be this protected forest that Fayetteville Natural Heritage Association wants to buy.

Hauling out dirt, hauling out rocks, trees, there are animals in there.

There are like ecosystems that that we don't even know about yet, that students could ride the bus to the heritage place and walk and study in those 20-something acres of woods.

And if you look at like New York City, Central Park is a it's it's that they love it.

We would love this park.

The school can go elsewhere.

I I never have understood why it's not why wasn't it just woodland?

It's there.

If you want to build that beautiful building, do.

But will the woodlands there if there, if if it's I understand it's supposed to be for a grade school, but there's so many options.

So if anything, please table this and let's I really appreciate my community.

You know, I lived in Boulder and it got too big.

I lived in Taos in Santa Fe, it got too big.

I moved here because my mother was here, and so I have had I've wanted I've wanted to run.

My grandkids are here now.

So I can't go anywhere.

So I am here to be a part of this community.

And I thank you all.

Thank you.

Good evening.

I'm Dot Neely.

I live at 1244 North Mission.

Glad to see y'all again.

Just real quick on this uh potential rezoning for RSF4.

I have notes from an April 2015 planning commission meeting where Blue and Associates came forward to advocate for uh an development on this 16.6 acres.

And the applicant uh George DeCain was described the terrain as very steep and meeting he had meetings with the fire department.

The fire department would not accept the street connection to college as a second fire route due to the grade.

So sprinklers for each home were the only option.

So the developer said that would just increase his costs to develop to the point that it wasn't viable for him to try to build houses up there.

So this is just another point that's in the planning commission notes from April 2015.

Uh also I'm here to speak on the behalf of uh Dr.

Tom Paradise, who has spoken before the planning commission before.

Dr.

Paradise has been with the Department of Geosciences at the University of Arkansas since 2000, and he's also uh 35 years consultant for natural hazards, disasters and risks, and is often consulted for uh situations like this.

He provided a an excerpt from the hydrology of urban runoff from the transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Volume 125, issue one, pages 1308 to 1333, 1355.

Um, and it was published in 2021.

Um, in water resource management, urban landscapes with concrete and asphalt like school settings have been repeatedly proven to speed the flow of water 10 to 20 times that of similar forest settings with the same slope and configurations.

This is a concipic significant concern with the tree removal and transformation of the proposed rainy hillside, where 20 to 30 acres would prove inadequate to accommodate uh precipitation of up to five.5 inches in a half an hour.

Um, depending on the amount of rain in one event or storm, since ground cover determines the speed at which water rushes down onto College Avenue, forest cover would slow it down to minor flooding along with while semi-to imper impermeable surface surfaces like would be with the construction up there, would cause runoff to run off at a rate of 20 to times 20 10 to 20 times faster than the forested area due to the trees slowing down the rainfall.

Oh, all right.

Well table, please.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I have a question before we go on to the next one.

Yes, uh Ms.

Is this the slide?

Is this the slide?

Dot, was this from you?

Yes, Miss Dina.

Okay, okay.

That's what we thought.

It was making sense.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Just yes.

And we have the copy of it.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Yes, please go ahead.

And can we reset the clock to three minutes, please?

Because that was not his time.

That was us talking.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Mayor and esteemed council members.

Good evening.

My name is Ross Tompkins of 1701 North Holdwire Road.

If I may, there's a PowerPoint slide scorecard that I sent.

The scorecard uses nine purposes and goals provided by Kit Williams when evaluating zoning.

My analysis has strived to be objective, grounded only in professional studies, expert testimony, and community feedback we've all received.

I will not reread the specific goals that they've been thoroughly discussed.

However, I want to briefly share a critical moment of self-reflection that occurred to me late last night.

Reviewing the revised traffic study with 103 cars per hour going past Sycamore on up college to take a right and navigate an on-site half-mile loop.

I question the human element.

Is it realistic to assume that drivers are going to do this?

We have simpler street neighborhood drop-off like going up Walmart and letting them off there would work.

Then I stopped.

I said, Ross, really, are you just making stuff up here?

Let's be objective.

Okay.

So to rigorously test these goals, I use three leading AI analytical tools, Gemini, Grok, and Chat GPT.

While some of you AI with skepticism and complex multidimensional problems such as land use zoning, it serves as a powerful unbiased tool.

The consistency of the results was compelling.

All three systems create an articulate summary of the entire record, all the way back from the original socioeconomic leveling studies done by the school board all the way to the current traffic data.

Chat BTGT maintained a neutral stance, yet concluded that four key points required mitigation before approval could even be considered.

So a no.

Better aligns with a balanced sustainability and protection priorities in Fayetteville's own planning framework.

Gemini provided the most granular assessment finding strong scores on goal six and goal seven.

However, it found critically weak scores on goal four safety, goal two, appropriate and best use of land, and goal nine, wise expenditure of funds.

Gemini's final caution echoing other assessments was stark.

Given the documented serious concerns surrounding safety and long-term financial stability of building on a steep hillside, which conflicts with fundamental planning goals, the recommendation is no.

It's clear and objective that this looking at the nine points that we're presented with for rezoning, no is the answer.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Hello, I'm Sarah Rack in Ward 2 on Lafayette Street.

I know you've heard from me before, but I wanted to share one brief perspective as you head into a final vote.

Recently I had a conversation with a friend who opposes this zoning change.

It started with saving the trees, but as we talked, it shifted to something else.

Kids riding bikes to school, being independent, and feeling connected to where they live.

And I realized something important.

We actually want the same thing.

With RAIMY at this site, my daughter could ride her bike to school.

It's a just over a mile from our home.

The heat map shows that many families would be significantly closer to this location than the alternative that would come if you vote no.

If RAIMI is pushed to the outskirts of the city, that kind of access disappears.

Kids aren't biking, families aren't walking.

The school becomes something you travel to, not something you're part of.

Placing RAMI at the current site supports exactly the kind of city Fayetteville says it wants to be.

One where kids can move safely, families stay connected, and schools are integrated into daily life.

I appreciate the time and care you've given this process.

And I urge you to vote yes on this zoning change.

So RAIMI can be placed where it best serves students, families, and the city as a whole.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi.

I'm Mary Lauren Wilson.

I'm a Ward II resident at 503 East Lafayette Street.

And I also serve as the Washington Elementary PTO president.

I know that this council has heard a wide range of perspectives on this zoning request, and I really appreciate you doing your due diligence in listening to so many Fayetteville residents.

Through my work at Washington, I see firsthand how important it is to our students, their families, as well as our teachers and staff to have a school in the heart of Fayetteville.

My daughter's second grade class just walked, just got to walk to Mayor Ron's office to hand deliver letters and donate uh cans to a food bank.

A centrally located school strengthens connections between students, families, educators, and the surrounding city.

Schools that are embedded in the community create greater engagement and long-term success.

I support this zoning change.

I support the move to P1 and the placement of Remy Junior High at this location.

Thank you so much for your service to Fayetteville and your commitment to the future of our schools and our students.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Fettville City Council, Mayor Molly, and thank you for your time.

Shelby Rogers, 228 North College, 2190 North College.

I believe the city is going to incur a huge amount of expense from the Hillside site.

I really greatly appreciate Mary Molly's balanced budgets.

And I think that there will be at uh a very big disadvantage to be balanced in the future with the unexpected cost of sidewalks, street improvements, and a street uh light added at Ash and Old Wire.

I also believe that the new traffic study receiving D's and E's is a reason to deny the rezoning.

The quote in the report says overall intersection level of service D or E or better was considered acceptable.

How can this be acceptable when D is defined as unstable flow waiting more than one light signal and E is described as intolerable delay?

I can't see where that is considered acceptable.

I also believe that there's a real safety concern for citizens as well as the students with the hillside on Ash Street coming down with a blinding sun in the afternoon and going up the hill with blinding sun in the morning.

I also believe that the council should wait until all of the evidence is in before voting on this rezoning because the rush to start the school construction is really uh artificial as Fettville Public Schools enrollment has been stable for the last five years and is projected to be stable for the next three to five.

Lastly, I still want to advise this council as well as everyone listening.

We have the money to purchase this from the Fettville school system.

The Federal School system controls this until that point in time.

There's no way this is going to be a housing development.

It's it's going to be a park if the school is not there.

If you rezone this and the seven acres is purchased to the south, that is going to be another million two added to this expense.

And it also makes it very formidable for us to continue to raise funds to try to save this forest.

We'll do it if you'll not rezone it.

Please consider.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Clark Eccles, and I live at 95 East Madrid Street.

Uh I was born here in Fayetteville, uh, born and raised.

I graduated from RAMI and FHS.

Uh, and I also have a two-year-old who uh, you know, future district student.

I support this rezoning and I urge you to support it as well.

Um, I don't think RSF4 is an appropriate use of an appropriate zoning for this um this parcel.

And I I'm not really sure that it belongs anywhere uh in the city center of Fayetteville.

And uh the school district has long been criticized for criticized for inducing suburban sprawl, and I see this as a uh a step in the right direction to uh be really intentional about balancing the demographics of the student population and access and walkability uh with uh good location and and infill development.

Um the city's taking big bets on the uh has taken big bets with the rezoning of college avenue and the school be an anchor institution that drives residential and mixed use development along the whole corridor.

It's a chance to build up public transit service along the corridor.

Uh junior high school students are certainly old enough to use it.

In fact, the Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission has added bus rapid transit to its uh along business 71 to its 2050 plan uh further expanding access along the corridor.

I'm also excited about the the opportunity for pedestrian and cycling connection and access.

I would love to see a tunnel underneath College Avenue for more safe uh to more safely connect to the school if anyone's listening.

Um I also appreciate that the district and developers have taken significant efforts to keep sustainability in mind with the design of the school and the layout.

Um while I am sad to see any loss of canopy in the city.

I'm excited about the the amount of canopy that would be preserved but protected uh for public access.

Uh I'm also excited about the potential climate benefits of of the reduction in congestion and vehicle miles traveled.

I do question the choice to build a practice field on such a difficult site, and uh especially when there's one uh so nearby, snow so nearby right down the hill at Woodlands.

Um I understand the logistical challenges of moving students back up and down.

You know, I think having practice sports practice at the beginning and end of each day uh is better uh and and could help uh make that more efficient.

Um and I think doing this would demonstrate the district's commitment to protecting the as much canopy as possible, and and uh I think would be a fine a better move financially as well.

Uh however, if the practice field is built on the site as planned, I hope the district does consider turning some of turning the current woodland practice field into affordable workforce housing for district's employees and other vital uh members of our city.

Uh thanks for your time and consideration.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members.

My name is Kirsten Mormon, 1165 Ridge Ray Drive.

I'm a Fayetteville parent and longtime community member.

I want to thank you for the care you've shown throughout this rezoning process.

I recognize recognize rezoning decisions are not easy and come with strong public opinion, but your role requires you to rise above volume and a motion and instead rely on adopted policy, staff and planning commission expertise, and focus on long-term planning.

The rezoning request aligns with the Fayetteville 2040 comprehensive plan.

Rezoning this land for institutional use supports smart growth, walkability, connectivity, and responsible civic investment.

Exactly the principles this body is charged with upholding.

I sincerely appreciate your commitment to evidence-based decision making and thoughtful governance.

When council acts grounded in policy and planning, it protects the integrity of the zoning process and builds public trust.

I respectfully ask you to vote yes on the rezoning request and allow the process to move forward in alignment with the city's adopted plan.

Thank you for your service and thoughtful consideration.

Thank you.

All right, Devin Spears, 3255 Coach Road, which is ward one, south of town.

Um as a child, I played along that ridge from Evelyn Hills all the way to township behind the stores.

Um there's several remediations, if you'll see, for that shale hill.

That entire ridge historically has been open for residential development, and no one has uh wanted to spend the money or have their houses slide down the hill.

Um I think the rezoning might be a little bit quick uh cart before the horse due to the fact that I haven't seen enough geotechnical information to prove to me that the weight of a multi-level school is gonna stand up on the shale and the clay.

Um I feel that it should be uh the taxpayers' duty to follow that for the city with the city to possibly help.

Um I also think that you're not taking into account the ground cover that is there.

Trees take up many, many thousands of gallons of water.

If you remove the trees, you put sod back, you put pavement, you cover the ground with uh the school.

Um, by my reckoning by what they're saying, I've got about 8.6 acres that are gonna go from tree canopy to full on sod rough and pavement.

I think the folks down the hill toward college, which is where the runoff is really going to be intense at the bottom of that hill.

There's there's a very deep creek there for a reason.

Um that water's been coming off that hill as long as I've been around this town.

And there's waterfalls coming down the shale hill.

I think you should maybe take a walk on the college side uh after a rain and go see just what it's doing.

Um I'm against the rezoning.

Uh I I hope you are too.

Um, I think I'm I'm not against the new school.

I think there's a better site for it.

Um, and I definitely think before you spend the money to go up that hill, you better look at what it's going to take to get there.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Arita Hill Mosley, 2953 East Pebblestone Ward 3.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council, for your time tonight.

I'm a proud FHS alumna.

I have a second grader at Happy Hollow, sixth grader at McNair, eighth grader at Woodland.

I serve as PTO president at Happy Hollow, the PTO Vice President at McNear, and the PTO Vice President Woodland.

As you all know, I'm in full support of this property.

It's been over four years coming, and our students at Happy Hollow are very excited about it.

Again, like I said a couple weeks ago, Happy Hollow is over 40% poverty.

Our kids deserve to get to go to a school in close proximity to where they live.

This also provides this feeder pattern method also provides a school that can fix the demographic inequity that currently exists in the district.

It will decrease the current gap in regards to eligible and free and reduced lunch from 40% down to 12%.

Again, these students in the feeder pattern deserve equal opportunities and access to comparable facilities that are in close proximity of where they live, just like the other two-thirds of our city.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

If the rezone doesn't re happen and there's a different location that has to be found, one third of this city's junior high students are denied equal opportunities to comparable facilities and a school in close proximity to where they live.

Those that have the means will transfer their students either to the new woodland and maybe stay back at McNear, which is closer to where they live, and this would create a larger gap between the haves and have nots.

The city can work together with Fayetteville Public Schools and close this socioeconomic gap, provide equitable environments for all the city's junior high students.

Thank you for your time.

And I'm here tonight to request that the council vote no on this rezoning, or at the least table this matter to allow sufficient time for the council and the public to review the new information that's been submitted by the school district and the public tonight.

This includes the traffic study that I understand was submitted yesterday.

Uh at previous city council meetings, and I could not find them in the documents linked to this rezoning matter.

There are other things that were presented during city council meetings that also were not linked to this rezoning matter.

So I'd like to ask again that additional time be allowed for both the public and the council to review those documents.

To best of my knowledge, the staff hasn't prepared and or done an independent analysis of those documents.

I know I'd be curious to see those things.

I'd like to just take a minute to remind the council, although I'm sure you remember, but of some things that I did see in the record.

There are three letters of opposition to this rezoning from the city's own committees and boards.

The Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council voted unanimously in opposition to this rezoning.

The Environmental Action Committee voted to oppose this rezoning.

And the Urban Forestry Advisory Board voted to oppose this rezoning.

On a matter that's important to me, stormwater, the planning staff report from Jesse Masters dated October 27, 2025, under the sewer heading says there are known wet weather sewer capacity issues in the city's 2021 sewer master plan that appear in the system downstream from this property.

This proposed stormwater retention, the seeds requirements will not capture or treat the stormwater from this site.

Thank you.

Good evening, Keaton Smith, 8080's Fourth Street and Ward 1.

I've lived in Fayville since 2003, joined the school board in 2018.

I am grateful to live in an engaged community.

A community that cares about its future, a community that cares about all living things.

I'm grateful to live in a community that wants to ensure its children are safe, healthy, regularly immersed in nature, and well educated.

I'm grateful to live in a community that values ecosystem services, contiguous wild places, and each of the plants and animals that live here.

Based on the best available information, I believe the project will improve challenging stormwater situation for neighbors.

Building RAMI at this site is preferable to any other, as building here will make more efficient use of land, preserve contiguous forests on the outskirts of town, and help our community realize its long-term vision for a walkable and vibrant redeveloped college avenue.

We know that private development follows new school construction, so it's worthwhile to compare the private development that is likely to follow if RAME is built at the proposed site and compare it to an alternative site, which would not be centrally located.

School-oriented-oriented development in your new urban corridor zoning will make more efficient use of infrastructure while producing orders of magnitude more property and sales tax per acre when compared to a single family home development that would follow an alternative location on the outskirts of town.

Building in a more infrastructure efficient pattern helps to reduce infrastructure maintenance costs over time.

This site is a major win if your goal is to reduce infrastructure maintenance costs and keep taxes as low as possible while funding services.

So where do we build this school?

Do we build up or out?

Do we accelerate construction of the urban corridor and college, or do we accelerate single family construction on the southeast edge of town?

This is the true impact of tonight's decision.

My hope for a yes vote represents a desire to see the city's 2040 plan.

Thank you, Keaton.

That's time.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yes, come on up.

Hello, I'm Nika Waitsman.

Good to see you all again.

Thank you for your time.

I will try to be brief.

I just wanted to share my unique perspective as a person who has been a part of creating this dream and watching it take shape for the last 10 years.

We have been looking at student data, watching the socioeconomic gap and achievement and opportunity remain unchanged since I first came on the board in 2015.

We have tried some things, but the inequity remains.

We have known for all that time that there is one major shift that could truly move the needle for our less advantaged kids.

We have also known that we live in the type of community that cares deeply about all kids and does believe in the value of public schools and the effort to establish equitable and diverse opportunities for each and every one of our students.

We care about outcomes.

Students who attend school with kids from all different socioeconomic backgrounds reap a number of transformative benefits.

We know that interaction with peers from different backgrounds helps students understand and respect differences.

All students are likely or less likely to feel isolated and marginalized.

Students are less likely to rely on stereotypes and more likely to form cross-cultural friendships.

Navigating diverse social econom environments builds collaboration and interpersonal skills.

Importantly, these advantages apply across demographic groups, not just for students from historically underserved communities.

Students from more advantaged backgrounds also show gains in social awareness and leadership skills.

We have looked thoroughly all around the center of Fayetteville, and we have not been able to find land that would serve these purposes as well as this one does.

The school board cannot responsibly sell this land at a discount to a group that would then need to get this property rezoned.

This rezoning process has been very intentional and thorough, and I'm thrilled to be in a place where we are bringing forward a solution that will impact our children on both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum and create equity and access.

Our plan will also strengthen friendships as students matriculate through schools together.

Well, your job is to consider the best city planning zone for this property.

Our job is to create the best opportunity to succeed for future generations of REMI junior high students.

We are on the same team.

We all want the best for our community.

Please approve this rezone tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Once again.

Together with my husband, we are actually co-owners of 1998 North College, better known as Formosa Chinese Restaurant.

We will not be continuing to operate it as a Chinese restaurant.

But I just want to bring up that we are directly downhill from the proposed Ramey Junior High site.

And so perhaps more than almost anyone here, we will absolutely depend on trusting the work of the civil engineers of the reports in terms of what they plan to do in mitigating stormwater runoff, all of those things because it will it will literally be our backyard, so to speak.

And so I've I've sat through many of these meetings as well.

I've been here to speak, I've listened to the presentations, and myself personally and my family feel that we have heard a very, very strong case put forth by the school board.

And you know, I I want to explain that we obviously have skin in the game, which is why I felt it necessary to run uh down the hill to come tell you all of this.

Um I wanted to strongly urge you to vote yes for this rezoning.

Um I do think that there's been so much thought and planning and information and reports that have presented, been presented tonight as well as many times in the past, and I do think that there is enough information to make a knowledgeable decision tonight.

So I urge you to vote yes in favor of rezoning.

And um, in addition, I'm gonna bring up an important point of view that I think has been stated here most recently by the my predecessor up here at the podium.

But this junior high is obviously going to affect the landscape of Fayeville, but it's also going to affect the culture.

And unfortunately, there's not enough representation here of the kids that this is absolutely going to affect that are the future leaders.

So when I see this campus and I see something as inspiring as what they have presented, I see children that are going to continue to be extremely proud of where they live and continue to advocate for all the things that all of us here hold dear and why we love living in Fayetteville.

I think that this junior high will achieve that.

So once again, thank you for your time.

And please do vote yes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Keith, do we have anyone on Zoom that would like to speak?

Uh we have one person, Anna James.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Hi, I'm Anna James, and I live in Ward 3.

Um, I just appreciate all of the time effort that each and every one of you has put into this issue.

I know it's been a lot.

It's been a lot of long, long city council meetings for you guys, but it is really appreciated.

And I do think that there are way too many vague variables surrounding safety and traffic concerns.

Um, especially if you were to approve a rezone tonight, it would just come across, I think, as a bit of a rush decision.

Um, and I urge you all to make a vote based on provided information and not uh basically a dream move what could be.

And yeah, I would just like to request the uh dismissal or at the very least.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Okay.

All right, I'm gonna bring it back to the city council for your comments if you have them.

Okay, Dr.

Jones.

Uh I have a question for I believe Keith.

Uh Keith, how long has the staff worked on this?

I know there have been a few references this evening about uh staff devoting time and energy.

But if you could, if it's possible, could you um tell us could you measure how much time staff has devoted to this project?

Dr.

Jones, that'd be pretty hard to estimate, but I do know the first time that I was kind of brought into this conversation at length was at our joint uh school board and city council meeting, which was back in April, I believe.

So I know that we had a a conversation uh as both boards to talk about this location, and then we've had staff from public works, engineering, development services, urban forestry, uh, stormwater sustainability.

So we've had quite a few departments that have worked on this, but it'd be kind of hard to put an hour to it, but that's just kind of a the length of time.

It's been, I know since uh initially it's the when I was starting to get involved, which was in April, and then the all the various departments, so I would say it'd be a significant amount of time and duration.

Right.

And with that with that uh time and duration, a lot of the questions and concerns that this that the city had toward the school board, they've been answered, huh?

Yeah, that's been a that's kind of a tough question to answer because a lot of the questions that we've been asked are generally asked in uh kind of the development phase and not our you know the zoning uh rezoning phase of it.

So it's been kind of mixed.

Um Jonathan Curth may be able to add a little bit more to that, but um I would say this one's just been hard to track because of the diversity of the types of questions that we've had.

Okay that are not common to a rezoning.

Okay, but it's been a lot, so correct.

Right.

Okay.

So Jonathan, as it relates to the I guess the infrastructure of this entire project as it relates to development, a lot of the concerns that the city had initially sounds like to me that the that they've been answered, huh?

On the for the rezoning purposes, absolutely.

Uh for the development review purposes that's still underway and to dovetail into uh Mr.

Mesita's comment, uh development services staff originally met with the school district in 2024.

So their husband and even lengthier amount of time they've been doing their due diligence with us as well.

So it sounds like to me a lot of the major things that were of concerns um have been addressed.

Uh I would think the things that what are some of the bigger things that I'm not a developer.

So what are some of the what are some of the the major parts that you guys had to work through?

I think keeping the conversation where we are tonight as far as the rezoning goes.

Which staff does find this request to be in line with some of the other comments that you've heard from the public and that the council's asked about are also pertinent to rezonings.

So you've heard a lot of talk about trees as well.

Infrastructure adequacy is a considered a legal uh uh consideration during rezoning requests, and so that's incorporated in the staff's review.

We look at surrounding street networks, we look at surrounding water and sewer access, and in our estimation, uh we don't see any of those being overriding concerns that make this rezoning inappropriate.

So okay, so that brings me to my final point that all of the legal concerns have been sounds like they've been met.

I mean, based on you being the expert and with your communication and and and working with the school district, it sounds like for the most part, a lot of the those concerns have been met, and that y'all have approved this.

You've been there's been a lot of uh uh staff time, a lot of uh I mean I just feel like that.

Well, I know rather that the city that the school district has done their due diligence.

So uh do you feel that there's anything else that really needs to be done?

Not at this juncture, no.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, and and these aren't my comments yet.

I uh have a couple of clarifying questions based on uh public comment, and it it goes to uh one of the early commenters brought up um a couple of tragedies we had this year, one on Garland, uh one at Holt Middle School.

Um, and so I I'm sure that those went through the same process of you know trying to make things safe, but obviously at some point there was a failure point.

Um, and I know that sometimes accidents just happen.

Um but to that point I also have uh Kit's letter in front of me.

Um project impacts on pedestrian traffic safety, the city council negative enact of regulations to protect pedestrian traffic safety, which will be enforced during the large scale development review process.

I'm sure that happened in those other uh projects as well.

But so uh it in specific to the college avenue crossing.

And Bob, I just want to make sure you know, and we can add time back that the since clarifying questions was before public comment according to the rules, this is one of your two five-minute sections.

So I wanted to let you know that way if it if it influences how you use your comment time.

So okay, that's fair.

But we'll give you a few more seconds at the end because the final thing.

One more comment after this.

Uh, but but to that point that the college avenue crossing that that is a very large street.

How do we ensure is it up to the the school?

Is it up to the city?

Is it up to the both working together, ensure that that crossing is is going to be safe where we don't lose a kid uh uh making that crossing?

Will it be will there be crossing guards at college during school hours or you know, bollards that come down or up or like what is the process during LSD that they like because it you something we do have to consider is safety and and and how do we ensure that that is as safe as absolutely possible when I in a in a large street like that?

Cheryl, I don't have insight into how the school will be managing the the flow on their property, where they'll have cross guards and how many are for how long or details of that nature.

I think one important distinction that bears noting uh that came up in I can't remember if it's public comment or council comment is it is the city's intent to put a signal up Poplar in college, and that includes crossing.

So this is not the school district's crossing that's being proposed.

The city recognizes that we need a street crossing at Poplar because there are no other pedestrian opportunities to cross College Avenue between Sycamore to the south and township to the north.

And as a part of that, we are evaluating what that crossing will look like to ensure that it's the safest possible, whether that includes automatic uh uh signaling for for when pedestrian or automatic call for when pedestrians cross.

Uh if you're familiar with that terminology, basically, if you go up to a signal, sometimes you have to push a button to get a signal to to come on for you.

Sometimes it automatically is part of the cycle of the light.

Those level of details I don't believe we have at this point either.

Uh but having the school be the fourth leg of this intersection is certainly a factor in that consideration, but it does bear noting that the city has prioritized putting a crossing here because there are no other there are very few pedestrian opportunities along College Avenue today, as is.

And and I guess this might be for the school board.

Does the school have crossing guards crossing for a crossover in mission?

I don't believe we have one there, but we do have one uh right by Washington where it crosses college and camera for another road there by paper.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mr.

Burner.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um obviously this has been talked about for three meetings now.

Um but we've asked a bunch of questions, which you know uh the door was opened by the school district to ask the question or to give us the information, and we have uh firmly ran through it.

So they probably wish they hadn't opened the door quite as wide, but but they have given us a lot of information, and we've asked a lot of questions that don't normally apply to rezoning.

And I appreciate um uh the fact that the city attorney uh sent out a memo this afternoon and it laid out um factors that we can use for consideration.

So I looked at that and I looked at this rezoning.

Um I'm not looking at the geological surveys, I'm not looking at uh you know any of the other information other than what we can by our city attorney's direction uh consider for uh compatibility and and uh uh conclusion on the uh rezoning.

Uh first item is compatibility with nearby residents, businesses, and institutions.

I think this is a perfect uh match for that compatibility.

Uh number two is public opposition that is logical and reasonable.

Absolutely is there's there's opposition, but there's a tremendous amount of support as well.

So we're kind of in a 50-50 there.

Um traffic problems and safety that will not be improved during development.

I think it's been clearly stated that the city will work with the school to make sure that the traffic problems and safety for our kill our children are met because I think we all understand that our kids are the most important asset that we have as a community.

Uh safety and fire protection.

Again, our kids are our most precious commodity.

We're gonna make sure it's safe.

Uh and it's gonna pass fire inspection.

Uh good civic design and efficiency.

I think it does.

Um, absolutely.

The design of that building is incredible, and um the efficiencies, I think they've they've worked tremendously to make sure that it would fit within the footprint of that property and and and access uh and uh and improve that property.

Uh adequacy of public facilities and plans and ability to improve inadequate inadequate facilities.

Again, that's a yes.

Uh noise that would adversely affect nearby neighborhoods.

There's been nothing that shows us that this development would adversely affect uh the neighborhood in the way of of noise.

Decrease in value and enjoying land and buildings.

I don't think that there's any question that this would improve uh the the property values in that area.

Uh appropriate and best use of use of land.

Uh I think in this case, that is absolutely appropriate and best use of land.

And number 10 is the 2040 long range plan objectives, and I think this meets those objectives.

So there's I'm gonna make someone mad no matter what decision I make.

But at the end of the day, I've said I will always back the school until the point they don't give me a reason or they give me a reason not to.

In this case, they have met the criteria by which the city attorney has told us that we can take in consideration when we do a rezoning.

So for that reason, I will be supporting this.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Berner, for uh clarifying that.

And Kit, I I appreciate your um willingness to share this with us, but I want to touch on a couple of issues.

Um Mr.

Berna, number six, it says adequate and public facilities, street sewage, water, and plans and ability to improve inadequate facilities.

And Jonathan, I want to pose, I mean, pose this question to you without the geotechnical information.

Without the geotechnical information, this leaves us question whether or not there's soil bearing capacity and stability, there's flood risk and hydraulic impact, there's foundation design feasibility, there's slope stability and erosion potential, there's regulatory compliance.

So are you saying that everything that we received so far has answered all those questions as it aligns with the geotechnical results that we don't have yet?

I don't I don't believe I have said that.

I also don't think the geotechnical work factors into the adequacy of public facilities, geotechnical work, the foundation work associated with the building is not generally a consideration and whether there's adequate sewer uh or water provision or streets to be able to get to or from a property.

So everything that we have heard from the school district's professional suggests that the soil on this property can or will be adequate for the the building's design.

I and staff do not generally evaluate the adequacy of soils or if uh foundations can be adequately designed as a part of a rezoning request that it's very much in the the realm of development review.

And so you're saying that we don't need a geotechnical report to number nine as quoted from our attorney to state whether or not this is an appropriate use of this land.

In my opinion, no.

Okay, thank you.

We are on the third reading, so I'm gonna ask uh Clerk Paxton to please call the roll for the vote.

Sorry, I think we are just low.

I'm okay.

I just I've been looking at every single light.

There hasn't been a single one on except the three people that spoke.

So I'm I'm gonna call on Ms.

Turk, I'm gonna call on Ms.

Moore, and then we're gonna go to the vote.

Okay, Mr.

Or I mean just put uh we use the lights so that I know to call on you because I don't if you don't have them on.

So I'm not trying to skip anybody.

Yes, uh, Ms.

Turk.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um, and I want to thank all the Fayable residents for coming out for uh three three meetings.

I mean, it's it's great to live in a city where you see democracy in action, you see civil debate and discussion uh and a lot of facts um bantered around.

So I I am not gonna support this tonight.

Uh if I would prefer that we table it, uh, but I'm gonna go through my comments first um, but and then make a motion at the end to table this because I do feel that we need all of the information available before we make a final decision.

But here are my concerns.

I'm very concerned about the accelerated downhill and downstream flooding of businesses, and uh, and especially our work we've spent a lot of money and are gonna spend even more on our new urban corridor.

I don't want that to be compromised by the massive amount of runoff that's gonna be generated by this.

You saw the information that Dr.

Paradise uh provided, and this is like a best case scenario.

This is only with uh a quarter inch of rain or a half inch of rain in 30 minutes, but it is a huge amount of a volume of water, and we are having, as we have all experienced climate change where we have these huge bursts of water, and our current drainage manual does not adequately account for these kinds of major environmental um bursts that that have been happening.

Um we're also having we're gonna have a serious reduction of our carbon sequestration with actually the removal of at least nine acres of trees on that property.

It may be more because they're gonna have to come in and with all these different dump trucks, they're gonna have to build lots and lots of streets that you've heard about.

And so it may be more than nine acres, it may be up to 15 acres, or maybe even more than that that are going to be removed.

Those trees absorb, like one of our public commenters said, they absorb a huge amount of water right now, a massive amount of water, and these detention uh basins that we're gonna have are not gonna be able to accept all of that.

So this also goes against our climate action plan.

We need to improve our tree canopy, not reduce it.

So this will be huge in the reduction of that.

The third thing that I'm concerned about that was talked about a little bit tonight was the huge amounts of earth and sediment that will be moved out and moved in to build on a steep hillside.

Right now, what we heard tonight was 863 truckloads.

Okay, if you live around that area, you're gonna be hearing that's gonna be a noise issue.

You're gonna hear those trucks going in and out of there.

We're gonna have issues with our streets, they're gonna have to be maintained, upgraded, all sorts of things to deal with that volume of removal that's going to occur.

So I just don't think that that's really been talked about enough until tonight.

Um, I would also say why are we getting all caught up in vehicle miles traveled?

If we really want to reduce vehicle miles traveled, we need our students to be on school buses.

This estimate has us at 55%.

The other 45% of children are are most likely going to be dropped off.

That is a very dangerous area.

And you know, I can't think of really of a worse place in town in terms of safety to place the school.

Yes, it's centrally located, but all the other parameters are significant and are concerning me about safety, and that is by far the biggest reason that I'm not going to support this.

The current proposal to develop this hillside does not present a walkable or safe path for Fayables children's.

Sidewalks will be installed, they'll be expanded, and there'll be a uh some very few very expensive traffic signals and some other signage that will be added to reduce the likelihood of accidents, but they're still going to occur.

I am the unenviable person, or uh, and I've had the unimiable experience of less living less than a hundred feet away from two fatal accidents in the last year.

Uh last five years, excuse me, not last year, but the but this year, two months ago, we had a small child that was killed a hundred feet away from my house.

In the previous accident, I had to watch while the failable police department measured and took away the body of the young man in my front yard.

So that is traumatized our entire neighborhood, and it certainly less left uh an indelible impression upon me.

So I will never vote for something that I feel is unsafe.

I will not have that on my conscience if there's ever a child injured or killed in this location.

Thanks.

Um this way.

Pardon me.

Oh, yes, thank you.

We're just gonna go this way.

So, Miss Bunch.

Oh, I'm I know I just figured since that's okay.

And you haven't yet spoken.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I'll try and sum all this up here.

I really took to heart uh the memo that we got from the city attorney, and I thought long and hard about each one of the issues that he put in there, and this is something we had also discussed at our last agenda session about you know the council, you know.

Sometimes we go down a rabbit hole.

One person will say one thing, and then that makes me think something, and I'll ask something, and then someone else asks something, and pretty soon we're off in the ditch.

We're not dealing with what priest is laughing over here, but it happens we're in the ditch, we're in the ditch.

It happens a lot, and uh, but I I really appreciate the the memo and the uh discussion at our agenda session about what we need to focus on, and so I kept going back to that.

This is a rezoning issue.

A lot of the things we are talking about are things that will be you know that that could be problems, it could be potential issues, are issues that will be determined and dealt with at the development stage.

That's not part of the rezoning consideration though.

That we need to look at very specific things, and I'm considering the compatibility for the neighborhood.

Is it gonna be houses?

No, it's gonna be a school, but a school is something that should be part of our community and not off on the fringe as if it's some sort of prison or something.

I mean, it should be incorporated into our community, and they and schools used to be incorporated into our community.

I live right behind root school.

Lots of people walk their kids to school.

I used to live near Washington school.

That's a place where there's a lot of you know, parents and and kids walking and that sort of thing.

So it's right in the middle of town.

So I do think this is compatible.

The the storm water runoff.

I have to trust when we talk to engineers and we talk to what our requirements are that it will detain the water.

If it doesn't, they're gonna go back and redo it until it does.

I mean, just to say it's not gonna, it's gonna be runoff and it's just runoff, run off, run off, and it's gonna ruin everything.

I don't think that's I don't think that's really going to happen.

And safety, I think we're already putting a stoplight in on poplar.

I think we can adequately address safety and and do the best we can with that as well.

Um many many times it has been brought up here, and this is something that we cannot consider that it is a there's a viable offer out there.

Well, I'm a real estate agent, and I know when you have a viable when you have an offer, you have to have two willing parties.

That's a willing seller and a willing buyer.

We don't have a willing seller, it's not for sale.

So whether you have an offer or whether you have the money or not doesn't make any difference if it's not for sale.

And if you have an offer, an offer has to be in writing.

It can't just be, well, we'd make an offer if it doesn't go through.

Well, you might not make an offer.

I don't know what you would do.

So that's not something that we can consider, and that's been brought up over and over and over again.

And I received, I think 15 postcards sent to my home address, and about 10 of those, 11 of those addressed the viable offer, which I can't, it's not something I can consider because it's not really part of the deal.

So I am in favor after long thought on this, I am going to be supporting this issue tonight.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, Mr.

Wiedaker.

Thank you, Mayor.

You know, it's it's impressive the number of emails we've gotten where people cited the plans, concurrence with the 2040 plan, or opposition to the 20.

I didn't know that many people had even read the 2040 plan.

So, if nothing else, this project has caused people to read more documents that this organization has produced than they ever would have been exposed to.

So, kudos to you for for that.

Uh my comments are brief and barely appropriate, and that is if someone complains to me about the school board and a school board member in the room, you can rest assured I'll be defending those people.

They're qualified, they're competent, they do a remarkable job for this community.

I'll even defend the superintendent as highly competent and remarkably qualified, and they do an outstanding job.

If you speak about a council member that votes in support of this project, and you don't like that, I will be defending them.

If you speak about a council member that opposes this project, you will absolutely hear from me that they deserve your respect and competence.

And if you complain about me, I'll offer to meet you like I always do, mayor, in the phone booth of your choice.

And there's only one in Prairie Grove, I'll drop a pin for it for you, and I get the door when we get there.

Everyone involved on both sides of this issue in this remarkable community deserves to be heard and has been heard.

And I don't relinquish one ounce of the authority that's temporarily entrusted to me to vote yes or no on this issue.

Regardless of what anyone says, if I have no opportunity to vote yes or no, why is this even coming to me to vote?

I defend our planning commission who made a ruling based on compatibility.

The school is terribly compatible.

We want schools in the middle of neighborhood.

In fact, schools are in the middle of every neighborhood in this town.

There's nothing incompatible about that.

But I'm going to disappoint you and defend the planning commission from however many years ago that approved RSF 4.

We've had so many people say that that's completely inappropriate.

It just would be an abomination to the Lord.

Well, wait a second, that's the same planning commission authority that created that zone that you're asking us to change now under that same recommendation from a planning commission.

Some city council, 15 years ago, I don't know how many years ago, approved that zoning as appropriate.

So we don't get to play both sides of the street.

There are people that have emailed me, I have to confess, and said, you know, there wouldn't be 90 homes there.

The original, the only plat that was last presented to the planning commission was for 34 or 35 homes.

That's all the developer could afford to put in a single cul-de-sac dead-end street with a lot on either side of it.

So yes, any development is going to be, I will use the term hideously expensive in this site, and there's just no way around that.

I didn't cause that.

The school district didn't cause that.

The current previous owner didn't cause that.

So my last admonishment is God forbid you say something about the city staff, and we will have words.

And their tolerance of us and our questions and their patience with us, despite us on occasion disappointing them.

So the only thing you're going to hear from me is that regardless of this decision, I trust eight people in a ninth if necessary, far more than I trust my one brain.

The collective wisdom of this body far exceeds any one of us.

And whatever this outcome, I will endorse it wholeheartedly as if that was the side I voted with.

And I will ask you as a community to do the same thing.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Wheedaker.

That's much appreciated.

Thank you.

Ms.

Moore.

I didn't know I was going to have to follow that.

Thank you, Mayor.

No, I I really want to thank, I mean, I feel like since I've been on council, this probably is one of the harder decisions.

I think that I depending on what information I've looked at, I've kind of gone back and forth one way or the other, softly a no, softly a yes.

Um, and tonight still came in very conflicted, um, as you've heard from my colleagues.

I mean, for a lot of different reasons.

Um, I also um appreciate the guidance that's been given to us by staff, by the professionals that have been a part of the administration's team at the school and the school board.

Um, and um I also, when I look at our considerations that we have to take very seriously for you as taxpayers in our community and what we sign up for when we're elected, um, while we are looking at this, and it has been talked about as a land use decision, um, us looking at the safety and the well-being and the full compatibility is something that we um are challenged to really consider.

And I also want to broaden our thoughts about um that isn't a black and white cut and dry conversation.

Um, parts of compatibility have to do with thinking about in uh the large scale development, these deeper questions, you know, the connectivity, the fact that the way that the plans have been shown to us, there appear to be a lot of variances that are gonna be asked outside of our code, um, or you know, potentially we look we're looking at giving at greater deference to the district than we would a private or other developer that could create challenges.

Um, when I think about the compatibility on its space value, yes, I want a school embedded within each of our neighborhoods.

Absolutely.

I'm a mom with two kids available public schools, and we've gone to Washington uh for nine or ten years at this point.

Um, and it's a wonderful neighborhood school.

And so, yes, um, as my colleague talked about proximity at one of our other um uh meetings, it checks the box for that.

But when I start to think about the considerations too that we go down the road about um having to tackle um what some of the impacts might be for this to be quote unquote compatible in this area, um that's where I start um to have some deeper um concerns.

You know, this is a six or seven uh block area where this will be located with this continual loop that I think became becomes almost a mile.

Um, that is not a common practice that's a part of our development code.

And while um I know it will be addressed during large-scale development, I am concerned about the potential that um we might hit our head on some of that moving forward.

I know I've talked to the district, and I want to say a special thanks to um Keaton Smith and to Dr.

Mulfer for sitting down with me.

And I talked about connectivity.

Um, compatibility for me in our city really is creating um that connectivity.

Um, and so um, and it's safe connectivity, right?

It's it's accessible and it's safe.

And I know my uh colleagues have talked about you know, concerns about um this is a corridor that um has a lot of accidents um in this area of college, and with the improvements we're putting in place and you know, adopting towards vision zero, we still have to recognize that even with um looking at a traffic study that was provided to us and previous conversations around traffic studies, um, they give us directionally and try to help us to make the best decisions, but there's no accountability later if there are things that they don't foresee, um, if they don't um hit it on the bullseye.

There's really no way for us to um hold anyone liable or accountable.

We really just have to huddle together, and a lot of times for me that that probably is the city and the the district looking at additional taxpayer monies, right?

Because we want to keep our kids and our families safe.

Um, and so I know that this area where I live is really challenging to navigate.

I also I've talked to so many of you who I respect and I've seen you be opposite to how I think you would support this land use, and so that's been a conundrum as well.

And also people that I know would move uh normally in our city using a pedestrian bike pathways, have expressed concern to me about sending their kids on their own to this campus, um, given some of the concerns that are showing today.

And so I'm not gonna tell you how I'm gonna vote because I at this time, just because I tell you this is weighed really heavily on me to think about the longer term implications, knowing that we're gonna look at this in large scale development, but this is not a best site.

Um it obviously has incredible challenges, and there are a lot of unknowns that during large scale development.

I want to make sure that we thoroughly look out of connectivity access and a safety there if we're gonna uh move forward together.

Thank you, Ms.

Moore.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I I arrived a little early this morning this afternoon and uh was in the bake break room, and uh when I sat down, the chair slipped out from underneath me and I I landed on my wrist pretty hard.

And uh true story.

Uh and uh I got up and I was like, well, it hurts, but it's darn it, it's not broken.

I'm gonna have to stay here and make this tough decision.

Um and it is, it is probably one of the toughest rezonings we we've dealt with.

Uh public input throughout, and this is not how I make my vote, but I do take it under consideration.

Uh public input throughout uh emails and comments is pretty much 6040 uh in favor.

Uh this is a land use decision, nothing else.

Uh uh to me, RSF4 is horrible.

I hate it.

I ran on hating it.

I still hate it, I always hate it.

Uh I don't believe in single family zoning.

Sorry, don't um but this is a land use decision, and what's it and we have to keep it at that.

You know, uh a lot of people have been bringing forward, you know, other buyers, engineering, uh, other locations, use of school money, uh lots of other issues.

These are school board issues, these are not city council issues.

I cannot take the they are not under my purview, and it is unethical to take those under my purview.

Um I do have concerns with with traffic and safety, especially along Ash, I think.

Um I'm told that this is what's addressed during large scale develop the large scale development process.

Um I believe it will be.

I I believe I kind of have to trust that process.

Um I believe the water issues are gonna be addressed.

I think uh it might have been council member uh bunch that that talked about that those those will be addressed, and I have faith they will be.

We have very good uh stormwater and runoff uh ordinances and rules.

Um on the way here, I asked my wife, you know, it's like you know what it what do I do here?

Uh uh like council member more.

I it this has just been I've been a soft yes, I've been a soft no, I've been everywhere uh even up till now.

And uh she told me to vote my conscience and uh I'm still looking for it.

I don't know where it's at, but I I figure by the time it gets around to me, maybe I'll I'll hopefully find it.

Um and uh I I guess I'll leave it there.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Stafford.

Ms.

Turk.

Um I would like to make a motion that we table this uh until we have um the geotechnical report and we have sufficient time to review that.

Um I don't know about you all, but I really felt rushed about the traffic study um coming in yesterday.

Okay, so we have a motion to table until when until the geotechnical report is in.

Yes, yes, maybe.

I don't remember when I know that we were told when that would be in three weeks.

Okay, thank you.

So we have a motion to table for three weeks andor until the uh geotechnical report is in.

We have a second.

Oh, I'll second that motion.

I have issues.

We have a motion and second, we have a motion and a second on the floor, so we're gonna go to the vote on the motion to table.

Clerk Maxon.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wiedaker.

No.

Mr.

Berna?

No.

Ms.

Bunch, no.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

No.

Mayor, I think we have a four-to-four vote, so do you care to vote?

I do, and I um, with a great amount of respect to everyone who has come to these meetings, who has sent postcards, who has sent emails, who has presented.

Um, I think it is important that we vote and hear this uh matter this evening.

So I would I'm going to decline to vote so that the motion to table fails and we can move on to the vote this evening.

So that is correct.

A motion failed.

Okay.

I believe um Ms.

Moore.

So I keep trying to figure out who to go to next.

Yes.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just I missed one of my notes, and I I we just have spent time in nominating committee, and I want to thank all the applicants.

And uh those that's a long uh process that we do.

Um, you know, one of the things that I want to apologize was that tonight I also got new information.

Um I knew that we had been told by uh these are advisory groups and committees where our community members are uh so um willing to gather their time and expertise um to come and advise us.

Um we take those boards and those committees really seriously, and so I don't want to gloss over to um that there was mentioned that three of those had expressed concerns.

Um, the youth council, I think the AAC and the urban forestry.

Um, and I don't see in our packet where we have that information too.

And so I I've missed in my previous comments that that had been sitting with me.

Um, in particular, the youth council is a new counsel that we have.

Um I found found them to be incredibly thoughtful, and so I hate that we um skipped over and didn't know that they had some some comment um in regard to the subject, and and obviously their um school age and and are definitely impacted by the decisions on theater patterns and and new schools, and so um I think again we get new information all the time.

I try to warn folks that we do, um and so for me that's incredibly conflicting when I think about um we tell people who come and spend their time with us that we value their expertise and that we value their counsel um and we want to look to them for guidance, and so um for me that's just another added layer of difficulty tonight, too.

I don't have before me um what the information was in particular from our youth council, except for what was verbally told to me, and I don't know if there is additional information on that, but I don't want to gloss over because again, we spend all the time through interviews, we seat people, they spend a lot of diligence outside of meetings and in meetings um to counsel us, and so I want to thank everyone who's ever applied.

I also want to put a plug in um to apply if you haven't and you live in the city of Fayetteville.

We need your expertise on those committees and boards.

Mayor Ron, may I may have respond to something?

Sure.

Okay, so that specific document that you're referencing for the Fayetteville Youth Advisory Council, it's actually located in attachment six on the item.

It's within the planning commission staff report.

Mayor, as a point of clarification, also the environmental action committee letter, they're both in there and have been in there since this was submitted to council.

Got it.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Kirth.

And Clerk Pexon.

Um, Mr.

Burnout.

And I just want to clarify those were advisory committees, but the staff and the planning commission both recommended approval on these, correct?

That's correct.

Okay.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker?

No.

Mr.

Burnout?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Ms.

Tart?

No.

Minister Jones.

No.

No.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

So the rezoning passed on a vote of five to three.

Okay.

The rezoning passed.

Um, I would like to make one comment for everyone in the room.

Um, just echoing Mr.

Wiedaker's um comments earlier, if I may.

Um, one of the things that I have come to respect and appreciate about literally every single council person up here is how responsive they are to residents, how they respond to emails, how they you talk to residents when you see them out in the community.

And I just would like everyone to please remember that just sometimes things happen and we make decisions as this body that you may not agree with, and that doesn't mean that we haven't listened.

So there is a difference between not listening and not always agreeing with.

And so I just on behalf of I know how much this decision has weighed on the eight members of this council, and I know how they have listened.

Um, and so I hope that no one feels like they were not listened to.

I certainly understand that there's a difference of opinion and that there's disagreement, but uh I don't want anyone to feel ignored because that's I know not what what anybody up here um that's not the intent.

Thank you.

We're gonna take a recess until 8 20.

We're gonna take a 10-minute break, and then we will be back.

Okay, it is 8 20.

So we are gonna call this meeting back to order.

We all we now have a quorum.

We're having a meeting.

We are now uh on the second item of old business.

I'm sorry, the third item in your if you're following along in the packet, it's listed as the third item, and it is D3 short-term rental ordinance.

Um an ordinance to repeal ordinances 6427, 6625, 6710, 682, 688, and 6936, and to enact this replacement ordinance to legalize the operation of short-term rentals pursuant to reasonable regulations.

So this ordinance is on the third and final reading.

It was passed at the last meeting, but was properly reconsidered and then tabled to this meeting, which means that the ordinance has returned to the meeting it to the point immediately before the final vote.

So all previous public comments and statements by staff and statements from cancel uh council members, it's like they just occurred and the ordinance is ready to be voted on again.

So, Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Moore.

No.

Mr.

Wheataker?

Yes, Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Budge?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

No.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

So the ordinance passed, but we still need a vote on the emergency clause.

Okay.

So I need to make that motion or does it and that needs to have a motion?

I'll make a motion to pass the emergency clause.

Second.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second to pass the emergency clause.

Um, Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Miss Moore.

No.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

No.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

So the emergency clause passed.

Okay.

So that brings us to new business.

The first.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Um, can I ask the um the city attorney to read at least the emergency clause so we know what pass?

Yes.

Okay.

The emergency clause says the following that the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby determines that this ordinance should become effective without delay because allowing the city's short-term rental regulations to expire through its sunset clause without enacting replacement short-term rental authorization and regulation code provisions will likely lead to unregulated and illegal operation of short-term rentals not subject to the city's life safety standards and insurance requirements.

Enacting the new short-term rental code will legalize and regulate the existing permitted and inspected short-term rentals necessary for the public peace as well as for the health and safety of Fayetteville restaurants.

Therefore, the city council hereby declares an emergency exists, such as this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage and approval.

Thank you.

Thank you, Kit.

Um, moving on to new business.

Item C1 is also this also uh this reading of the resolution also serves as a public hearing, and it is for the Butterfield Trail Village Public Facilities Board Revenue Bonds.

It's a resolution ratifying the resolution of the Fayetteville Public Facilities Board, which approved issuance of public facilities board revenue bonds for the Butterfield Trail Village Project and prescribing other matters pertaining thereto.

And so I think procedurally, Kit, is this any different the way we move through public comment um given that it is also the public hearing for the board?

I don't I don't think it has to be as long as there is a public comment allowed for a public hearing, then make sure satisfy that requirement.

So you can start with the council if you want to.

Okay.

Got it.

Um do we have a the applicant from the public facilities board that would like to speak?

Yes, please come up.

Hi there.

Uh Aaron Berg, I'm the chairman of the public facilities board.

Um this is uh a resolution that we passed to do one of the core functions that we're able to do, um which is to help support uh senior housing.

The way one of the ways that we do that as the public facilities board um is we're able to act as a conduit issuer, um, creating a revenue bond that is funded by the city um or it's funded by lenders.

The city is the one who's borrowing, but our only obligation is to pass those funds along to Butterfield Trail Village, and then Butterfield Trail Village is obliged to pay the loan back, and if they don't pay the loan back, um the city is not on the hook for that.

So we think that this is great.

Um this is aligned with um some lending we've done in the past, um, and this is refinancing a portion of the loan and also helping Butterfield Trail to uh achieve one of their their near-term goals.

Thank you.

I think we have a couple of questions from council if you don't mind.

We'll start, Miss Turk.

Thank you.

First of all, I need to say that um I'm a member of the carriage club, but I don't think it will affect me.

So that's um I don't live at Butterfield Trail.

It just means that um I'm in line to get in there eventually one of these days, but I don't think it will affect my vote.

Secondly, um, I'm not that familiar.

I appreciated you being here at agenda session uh last week and talking a little bit about the public facilities board.

So, for example, did you all re um I saw a um I saw uh a TV presentation recently about how some facilities, some long-term care facilities, some facilities similar to Butterfield Trail, um, have actually gone bankrupt and the residents have been kicked out.

So this made me kind of be a little bit concerned about this.

And so does the board, do you actually review the financial solvency and health of uh Butterfield Trail or any applicant before they come when they come before you?

So we are not the lender.

Um we did in this case um have uh a presentation discussion with the leadership of Butterfield Trail and with the underwriters who have done extensive review of what the financials are.

Um so I can't vouch for their financials, but I I know that as part of the lending process, the person who's making that loan is assessing that.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, I'm gonna open it up for public comment if we have any members of the public that would like to speak on this matter.

And I think we have representatives of Butterfield Trail here also.

Yes, we also have representatives from Butterfield Trail if um if they have if they would like to comment.

Yes, my name is Charles Watson Levin East Davidson.

I'm vice chair of the public facilities board, and I want to say your approval of this request.

It's much needed.

I feel like their solvency is impeccable, actually.

They still have a waiting list, 393 applications, representing 152 single persons and 241 couples.

They're not going down.

That's not a problem.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Gracie, are you able to tell if we have anybody on Zoom that's called in?

Okay, we can adjust.

Okay, um, I will bring it back to the council, Mr.

Burnout.

Uh, is it just appropriate to go?

Uh probably mayor, you ought to just ensure the public uh hearing is over.

Okay, okay.

So that concludes the public hearing portion of this item.

I'll now bring it back to the council, and because it is a resolution, it will require a motion to move forward.

I'll make a motion to approve the resolution as presented.

Second.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxton, we please call the roll.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Thank you all for your work on this project, and yeah, best of best of luck with your plans moving forward.

Um that brings us to item C2, an ordinance to approve the vacation of a 4,850 square foot portion of a tree preservation easement located north of 3600 North Gregg Avenue, contingent on the dedication of a replacement tree preservation easement, totaling 5,534 square feet and other conditions.

And I believe, Miss Um Tom, well, I'm sorry, um Kit, go ahead.

I've I skipped over your part.

Thank you, Mayor.

Whereas a developer would like to vacate approximately 4,850 square feet of the existing tree preservation easement located on city-owned property at the northeast corner of North Greg Avenue and West Ban Ash Drive to allow a proposed development to tie in to an existing sewer line.

And whereas the developer has offered to dedicate an additional 5,534 square feet of tree preservation easement and satisfy other conditions recommended by the urban forester.

Now therefore it be ordained by the city council, the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas Section 1.

That the City Council, the City of Fable and Arkansas hereby determines that the developer adjacent to the city-owned property, parcel number 765 to 8354-000, that is covered by a dedicated tree preservation easement, has proven to the city council satisfaction that the vacation of a portion of this tree preservation easement as shown in exhibit B to the staff a memo attached to this ordinance is in the best interest of the city of Fayetteville and therefore grants the request to vacate the existing tree preservation easement as to those 4,850 square feet.

Section two.

That the vacation and abolishment of the 4,850 square feet of tree preservation easement shall not be effective until the following conditions are satisfied.

Number one, dedication for approximately 5,534 square feet of tree preservation easement on that parcel as shown in exhibit B to the staff memo attached to this ordinance, which will occur with the easement plant submitted for the proposed development.

Number two, removal of all invasive species prior to the dedication of the new pre-preservation easement.

Number three, planting of 22 mitigation trees with a three-year maintenance or bonding agreements within the proposed tree preservation easement.

Great, thank you.

And we have Ms.

Thomason, the RC's urban forester, to tell us more about this.

Good evening.

Thank you.

Yes, my name is Willie Thomason.

I'm one of the urban foresters and development services.

And we have here a request to vacate approximately 4,800 square feet of a 15.4-acre tree preservation easement.

This tree preservation easement was dedicated in 2008.

The subject property here is at the northeast corner of the intersection of North Gregg Avenue and West Van Ash Drive, approximately 0.3 miles north of the Fulbright Expressway.

And staff is recommending approval of this request for vacation.

These are recommended conditions of approval, include dedication of a new uh 5,534 square foot tree preservation easement on the same site, as well as removal of invasive species within those new tree preservation easements and planting of an appropriate number of mitigation trees, which we quantified based on that proposed vacation.

So, and then just as a reminder, um, this is the first tree preservation easement vacation that's been brought forward since changes to that portion of code were approved in July of this year.

So this has a little bit of a complicated background.

Um I'll try and explain it as clearly as possible.

Um in 2008, the city acquired property on the parcel that you can see in the lighter green on the east side of this map shown here.

Um the city acquired this property from the original developer, and at the same time, a tree preservation easement was dedicated.

That's the outline that you can see, the polygon in light green.

Um and several utility easements were shown on the plat on which this tree preservation easement was dedicated, including a 30 foot-wide exception for a sewer easement, which you can see in your packet as exhibit D.

However, this uh easement, the utility easement ultimately was not dedicated.

So you can see here in the call out the proposed 4,850 square foot area that would need to be vacated in this request.

So between 2008 and 2010, um, improvements on site included construction of a retaining wall along the east side of the property and installation of a sewer line running across the tree preservation easement from east to west, and that is the sewer line in question.

However, um, perhaps due to the recession in the early 2000s, work was not finalized.

Um here you can see aerial imagery from 2010, and this is post site improvements, um, and you could see in this call out box on the left in black, um, a faint uh little area that contains the sewer line after it was installed.

Um so today there is a development um pending administrative approval.

It came through as a large site improvement plan and has been forwarded through tech plat.

Um this development needs to vacate this portion of the tree preservation easement in in order to tie into this sewer line.

Alternatively, they could directionally bore a new line underneath the existing tree preservation easement and utilities and engineering staff have said that both options would be viable.

Uh, but they have expressed support for utilization of the existing sewer line, um, given that the long-term maintenance would be more efficient than maintenance of a new directionally board line.

Um just to speak a little bit to the quality of the site, you can see in this imagery from 2010 that there are not uh there are not trees directly to the east of the area that is currently pending development.

Um that area was mowed up until about 2008, uh, and now in 2025, obviously there is canopy, but it does consist primarily of first succession species and smaller uh immature trees as well as some invasive species.

Um to talk about the new and existing easements on site.

Um, here's an overview showing the existing tree preservation easement, um, the area proposed to be vacated, as well as two proposed new tree preservation easements.

So, with the large site improvement plan that's currently pending administrative approval, uh part of their requirements for tree preservation include dedicating a tree preservation easement.

Um so they have already expressed their intent to dedicate this area outlined in this slide.

And as a condition of this proposed vacation, they're proposing to dedicate another easement directly west of the one that they would dedicate with the large site improvement plan.

Um, this easement would be 5,534 square feet approximately.

And also contains smaller first successional species.

Who they reviewed this packet at our previous meeting and they voted in favor of the proposed conditions of approval.

And again, staff is recommending conditional approval of this request, and we also have the applicant here, Paxton Singleton, to speak to this if you guys have any questions for them.

Thank you.

Great, thank you so much.

Um, Minister Jones.

Thank you.

I just had a question for Willow, and it's only because I don't know is when you have the dedication of a replacement, is it on the property or does the city get to decide where those replacements go?

So it would have to be an easement on a property owned by that applicant within city limits, and I think ideally it would be as close in proximity as possible to what is being vacated for you know maintaining ecological integrity in that region.

Ms.

Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Oila, for being here.

Um, just two questions.

Um, you sort of mentioned that um in the existing tree easement right now that there are many invasive species or some evasive species in there.

Uh, is this part of the dedication?

Would those uh invasive species be removed from the existing dedication or only in the new proposed dedication?

What has been proposed is removal of the invasive species only in the proposed dedications, in part because the existing tree preservation easement is on city property.

So although they do need to tie into that sewer line, that would not technically be this developer's easement to maintain.

Thank you for clarifying that.

That's that's my only question.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you so much, Willa.

I'm not seeing any.

Um I'm just gonna take it to public comment.

Oh, yes, sir.

If you are you the applicant?

I am yes.

Just real quick, I wanted to add from that question.

Yeah.

Is that part of this with the easement with the the sewer line already being there?

We need to get in there to maintain that and to to do some repairs to it.

And so we do plan on going in there in removing those invasive species within that 30 foot area that we're asking to abandon so that we can't repair that sewer line and make it active.

Okay, thank you.

I'm gonna open it up to public comment.

Do we have any members of the public that would like to speak on this item?

Okay.

Council which would I would move to suspend the rules and go to the third reading.

Okay.

Um we have a motion and a second to suspend the rules and go to the um third and final reading.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Clerk Paxton, please call the role.

Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

In order to approve the vacation of 4850 square feet, a square foot portion of a tree preservation easement located north of 3600 North Greg Avenue, contingent upon the dedication of a replacement tree preservation easement totaling 5,534 square feet and other conditions.

Okay, Clerk Pexon, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Wiedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turr?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Great.

Okay.

That brings us to item C3.

Thank you, Willa.

And thank you also as well to the applicant on that one.

C3, an ordinance to approve vacation 25-17 for property located west of South Duncan Avenue and West Treadwell's Treadwell Street and Ward 2 to vacate 0.02 acres of sewer easement.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Whereas the City Council has the authority under ACA 1454-104 to vacate public grounds or portions thereof which are not required for corporate purposes.

And whereas the city council has determined that the following described portion of sewer easement is not required for corporate purposes.

Now therefore be it ordained by the city council, the city of Favel, Arkansas Section One.

At the City Council, the City of Fayeval, Arkansas hereby vacates a portion of sewer easement as described in exhibit B attached to the planning department's memo.

Section two, copy of this ordinance duly certified by the city clerk, along with the map attached as exhibit A to the planning department's memo shall be filed in the office of the Washington County Circuit Clerk.

And section three is vacation approval subject to following conditions.

Number one, any damage due to relocation of existing facilities will be at the property owner developer's expense.

And number two, any easements required to serve the associated development shall be dedicated with the easement plat.

Thank you, Kit.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

This location is likely to be familiar to the council as the same general area as a right-of-way request associated with the same project that came before this body about two weeks ago.

It's located in central Fayetteville, southwest of downtown and immediately northeast of the Fayetteville High School football field, which you can see on the aerial image here.

This easement vacation request is associated with the Juniper Student Housing Project, which received uh Planning Commission approval in May of 2025 and is working through some of their uh uh title indeed due diligence, uh which is where the uh right-of-way uh issue that was considered and approved last week and where this easement issue uh were identified.

What this is specifically is a request to vacate uh just a little bit less than 1,000 square feet of uh water and sewer easement that runs diagonally uh under a building and uh through the northern most portions of this property.

Uh it does not currently have any water or sewer main in the property.

Uh it actually runs around the building as I think most of the the the council would prefer to see any of our water and sewer infrastructure, and so the easement is not currently serving any purpose other than as a uh cloud on the deed.

We've not identified any issues with the request uh and all the uh associated or the single franchise utility associated with this, our water and sewer department has consented to it.

Uh we are recommending just the two conditions of approval that Mr.

Williams read, our standard one, in addition to that uh any new easements associated with the project be dedicated uh with uh the easement plat that will come forward uh following uh grading permit and building permit issuance for this proposal.

Uh with that, I'm happy to take questions.

And Mayor, I believe Brom Driver is available online uh as the applicant for this.

Okay, great.

Um, does anyone on the council have questions for Mr.

Driver or Mr.

Kirth?

Okay.

Uh do we have any public comment in the audience?

Okay, I'm gonna bring it back to the council.

Mr.

Burner.

Mayor make a motion to spend the rules go third and final reading.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxton we please call the roll.

Is Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Verna.

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

And your orders approved VAC 25-17 for properly located west of South Nunken Avenue and West Treadwell Street in Ward 2 to vacate 0.02 acres of a sewer easement.

Okay.

Clerk Paxton, we please call the roll for the final vote.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wiedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Okay.

And that passes.

Thank you.

That uh brings us to item C4, an ordinance to approve vacation 25-25 for property located at 1370 and 1378 South Van Buren Avenue in Ward 1 to vacate 0.25 acres of right-of-way.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Whereas the city council has to go in or HDA 144.

Oh.

Mr.

Williams, will you please turn your mic on?

I think we heard most of it, but that helps.

Thank you.

Yes.

Okay, I'll keep going from there as if I actually have my mic on.

Whereas the city council has determined that the following described portion of right-of-way is not required for corporate purposes.

Now therefore be it ordained by the city council, the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Section 1.

That's a city council, the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, hereby vacates the portion of right-of-ay as subscribed exhibit B and attached to the planning department's memo.

Section two that a copy of this ordinance duly certified by the city clerk along with a map attached to exhibit A to the planning department's memo shall be filed in the office of the Washington County Circuit Clerk.

Section three is vacation approval is subject to the following conditions.

Number one, any damage, two or relocation of existing facilities will be at the property owner developer's expense.

And number two, a 20-foot wide drainage easement shall be dedicated for the entire length of the vacated right-of-way abutting lot one to maintain an existing storm pipe.

The owner of lot uh 12 shall be required to execute the document by which the easement is dedicated for any portion of the new easement that may extend into lot twelve.

Mr.

Kirth.

Thank you, Mayor.

This request takes us towards South Fayeville.

It's about 1,500 feet northwest of the intersection of uh South School and West 15th Street, which are yeah, West 15th Street, which is just off screen to the right.

Uh the property in question specifically is a piece of unbuilt, undeveloped right-of-uh that links uh at least on paper, Van Buren Avenue to the southwest and Ellis Avenue to the northeast, which run uh diagonally parallel to the college branch stream, which you can see the floodway and floodplain associated uh with that body of water on on the screen in front of you.

The request is to vacate about 10,700 square feet of public rightway.

Again, this has never been built uh the according to any records.

This was platted with the original subdivision uh some time ago with no indication that it was ever uh built or that any plans were ever submitted to see it built.

Uh there are a few items that staff considered in evaluating this request uh in terms of public interest and whether vacating this right-of-way would serve any public interest.

Uh staff does not have a significant concern with vacating that right-of-way for the same reason that it's not been developed for the last uh 75 or so years.

Uh, we don't imagine it being more feasible to develop today given the floodplain and floodway.

Uh initially there was a question of what would happen with the remaining right-of-way.

Uh, as of today, there's not been a request to vacate it, so it will remain on our maps.

Um, the planning commission did inquire what it would take to expand that request when they were hearing this proposal, and effectively that would require a whole different round of public notification and a whole different drafting of of legal descriptions given it would is expanding the scope beyond what is uh before uh the planning commission at that time in the council now.

Uh finally, and to touch on a pair of conditions that the staff recommended uh before the planning commission, uh the one of those related to drainage and the other one to access.

The there is uh there are two inlets along Van Buren, which is the white line you can see running diagonally on the lower left-hand side of the screen.

Uh, that those are the the light yellow line uh that runs uh under the street and ultimately daylights or has an open pipe before running over land through that right-of-way down to the college branch.

Uh, because of the existence of that public stormwater uh uh uh infrastructure, uh our transportation department, when they evaluated this request, uh proposed or requested a 30-foot drainage easement be dedicated uh across this uh to ensure it's ongoing maintenance into the future.

Uh relatedly, uh staff, planning staff in evaluating this request did have a concern uh foregoing any form of connection uh through this portion of the neighborhood uh into the future.

Uh, if you uh have ever had the opportunity to drive this area or are familiar with the street grid, you know that this is effectively a mega block today, if you will.

There's no connection between Ellis and uh excuse me, Ellis and Van Buren, except going south to 15th Street or further north up to uh around 11th Street.

Uh as a result, planning staff proposed a uh an access easement be maintained as well in order to facilitate future pedestrian connectivity if and when the opportunity presented itself to uh create a trail connection, a sidewalk connection, and some sort of bridge through that area.

Uh accordingly, that is what staff moved forward to the planning commission with.

Uh when this item was heard at the commission, uh they ultimately uh evaluated those two specific conditions uh and removed the condition for a public access easement, finding that the viability of making a pedestrian connect to a connection what did not exist uh and that maintaining that that uh that access easement would would hinder the potential development of this property after it's vacated.

And secondly, they propose reducing the size of the drainage easement from 30 foot to 20 foot.

Uh, I did discuss this with our transportation department, and uh 20 foot is the minimum uh that they do need to maintain uh to to do drainage uh facilities maintenance, so they can work with 20 foot.

30 foot is a preference on their part.

And so that was what staff moved forward with.

Um, when the planning commission heard this, again, they ultimately removed the condition for a public access easement and decrease the size of that drainage easement from 30 feet to 20 foot.

So the ordinance written today that Mr.

Williams just read to you does not include that public access easement, and it's for a 20-foot drainage easement.

So if council would like to consider an alternative, that it would require amending the ordinance.

Uh ultimately, after making those amendments, the planning commission forwarded the proposal to city council recommending approval.

And mayor, I can take questions.

Uh also uh I believe Leon Lee is available as the applicant for this item who he may want to speak to uh also his concerns or preferences about those easements.

Okay.

Um, if we if it's okay, we'll go ahead and hear from the applicant and take questions for both Jonathan and the applicant.

I just see Johnson the repeat something he just said.

Okay, yes, Minister Jones.

You you were saying that um if we had questions and wanting to make changes where I noticed the planning commission removed the public access easement.

And so my question to you is what's the cause and effect of not being included in the recommendation?

The the the access easement specifically, that would that's a great question.

I don't often get into this.

When we vacate public right-of-way, typically it is split down the middle and goes to the two adjoining property owners, making it private property.

And so at that point, there would not be an opportunity for public access through this site unless a future property owner were to dedicate that easement uh to us, uh, similar to how we sometimes have to go acquire these easements when we do trail projects and other sidewalk projects.

Does that answer the question?

Yes.

Thank you.

Got it.

Um Mr.

Stafford, do you have a question for Mr.

Karth or do you want to wait until after the app?

I can wait until they advocate comes.

Okay.

If you'd like to go ahead, or if you'd like to come ahead and go on, come on up.

Uh good evening.

Um I'm Leon Lee.

I'm the landowner.

Um generally, or I do agree with the planning commission findings.

Um have any anything else to add?

Okay.

No, that's great.

Thank you.

Um Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Okay.

Um, so Jonathan, and I'm just trying to get this right.

So the Planning Commission wanted to just retain a 20-foot drainage easement.

But right now, is it's written as with the staff recommendation of the 30-foot easement?

I'm sorry if I did not explain that well.

The ordinance, as written, if the council takes action right now, would approve the 20-foot drainage easement and no access easement.

Okay.

So that's so if you're looking at the screen in front of you, those two bullets you see below the planning commission recommendation, that is what that is how the ordinance was drafted.

Our codes require that uh the legal department draft ordinances based on what the planning commission forwards.

Would the with that access easement and the drainage easement be the same easement or or is this an additional easement that they were it was staff's intent that they could overlap uh that would allow the opportunity in the future to apparently if if you were to bury the stormwater line, you could put a sidewalk on top of it or something something, some variation of that.

It was not meant to be cumulative or in addition to okay.

And and staff does not recommend the access, or they just didn't include it.

We we recommend an access easement.

Okay, in addition to the 30-foot drainage easement that the transportation department requested.

What's before you is no access easement and a 20-foot drainage easement?

And that's what planning commission approved.

Okay, I think I got it.

And a question for the applicant would the does one or the other impede what you uh are aiming for?

I would say um we don't have any plans right now to develop this property, but possibly in the future, and I think we would kind of take care of that at that time.

Like you know, work with planning to um if they requested certain easements, we could work that in.

Okay.

Like it it could fit in if okay.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Ms.

Moore.

Jonathan, I didn't quite track, sorry, I was trying to listen to pay attention.

Um, on the the reasoning why the planning commission removed the public access easement.

Could you help me understand that again?

What was the reasoning that gave?

That primarily hinged on their assertion that there's that it was not viable to make a connection through their oh okay.

Okay, thank you, Jonathan.

Um, I I'd like to make an amendment to add the access easement there with a 20-foot drainage easement.

Just clarification, it either is fine.

Are you wanting to amend to staff's recommendation of 30 foot in the public access or keeping it at 20 and adding?

I'm trying not to confuse it, but um it sounds like that's the bare minimum that staff says 20 foot can be agreeable.

So I'm going to stick with the plannings 20 foot drainage easement and ask to add the public access easement back to that as an amendment.

And the public access easement would then also be 20 feet to match the drainage?

Correct.

Just to again to overlap it.

So we're not doing a cumulative, it's just the same 20 feet.

Second.

Okay, uh, Minister Jones, do you know that's just gonna say okay?

Um Jonathan, is that amendment proper in terms like that is that does that make sense as an amendment that we can then take forward based on I believe so if I may repeat it back to Council Member Moore to make sure I understand the intent is to uh add a effectively it would read instead of saying a 20-foot wide drainage easement shall be dedicated and so on to be a 20-foot wide access and drainage easement would be dedicated.

Okay, and that would be overlapping.

So we have a motion and a second.

Um Clerk Paxson, will you please call the role uh for the amendment?

Is more yes, Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes, Mr.

Barnett?

Yes, his bench?

Yes, Turk?

Yes, and Mr.

Jones?

Yes, Mr.

Stafford, yes, Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Okay, so we have now amended it.

Um and we are gonna open a suspend the rules.

But we need to go to public comment.

Oh, okay.

Yeah.

Uh so does anybody in the public have comments about this item?

Okay.

Um that will suspend the rules and go third by reading.

Second.

Okay.

I have a motion and a second.

Um Clerk Paxson, we please call the role to suspend the rules and take it to the final reading.

Is more?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Burnett?

Yes.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Tart?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

In order to approve VAC 25-25 for property located at 1370 and 1378 South Van Buren Avenue in Ward 1 to vacate a quarter of an acre of right-of-way.

And I should note for the council, uh, my office has been charge that when something gets changed at the planning commission, we we draft what the Chinese planning commission has recommended rather than what staff might do.

So the the last entity to see this, that's what we draft.

Thank you, Kit.

Uh Mr.

Wheedaker.

Thank you, Mayor.

And Jonathan, just one quick question before we vote.

And it is I'm trying to grasp the planning commission's logic, and I'm assuming that there's a creek or enough water that they thought a bridge would be necessary and that the city would never spend money on a on a bridge to put a sidewalk through.

Did do you have any insight into what they were thinking?

Yes, I I think you're acting.

I think that's an accurate uh characterization of it.

Again, it came back to there is the college branch stream that's through there.

It does have FEMA floodway and floodplain associated with it and also our suicide protection zones, and in all likelihood, if the trail or sidewalk would be built across it, our standards would require it to be spanned rather than uh culverted.

Our preference is not to channelize uh streams whenever possible.

Perfect.

Thank you.

I I understand their thoughts now.

Thank you.

Mr.

Lee, did you want to add to that question?

Well, I guess um my thoughts are if if it's too expensive to build a bridge across there, then why do we need the access easement?

Jonathan, are you able to address that?

I I think if I'm understanding his question, is staff staff's assertion is that we believe it may be feasible to make that connection.

Our planning commission does not feel it may be feasible to make that connection is the distinction there.

Okay.

Okay, um Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turd?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Okay.

Uh C5, an ordinance to approve vacation 25-29 for property located at 618 North Ruppel Road in Ward 4 to vacate 0.07 acres of utility easement.

Kit.

Mayor, where has the city council?

Thank you.

Uh whereas the city council has authority under ACA 1454-104 to vacate public grounds or portions thereof which are not required for corporate purposes.

And whereas the city council has determined its flying described portion of utility easement is not required for corporate purposes.

Now therefore it be ordained by the city council, the city of Fayel, Arkansas, Section 1.

That the City Council, the City of Favel, Arkansas hereby vacates the portion of utility easement as ascribed in exhibit B attached to the planning department's memo.

Section two, a copy of this ordinance to be certified by the city clerk, along with the map attached as exhibit A to the planning department's memo shall be filed in the office of the Washington County Circuit Clerk.

And section three is vacation approval subject to the following conditions.

Number one, any damage to or relocation of existing facilities will be at the property owner developer's expense.

Number two, any and all conflicting water and sewer lines must be relocated and accepted by the city of Fayetteville.

Great.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh this property is in West Favel.

Uh you'll notice I don't have an aerial image because uh we noticed this afternoon that it was not showing the actual correct piece of property there.

So I apologize for not having that, but generally, if you had a chance to look at it in the packet, uh those maps do show uh where it is located, which is between Persimmon to the south and wedding to the north on the east side of Ruple Road, a little ways north of the Boys and Girls Club and southeast of our fire station, uh, I believe it's fire station number seven.

Uh the request is to vacate an easement uh totaling about three thousand square feet uh in reviewing uh development proposals at that time.

It was uh determined or identified uh that the location of the as built uh sewer main in that area was not actually within the easement and uh that it needs to be rededicated at this time.

Uh so this is a part of cleaning up removing this easement and then rededicating an easement over the line itself to make sure that the city can adequately maintain it going into the future.

Accordingly, we have no issues.

Our water and sewer department would like to see this corrected as well.

Uh, we are recommending approval with the uh conditions that Mr.

Williams read our standard one and that any conflicting water is through lines are relocated and accepted as a part of this uh determining that we're identifying where this conflict is occurring.

Now, with that, I'm happy to take any questions and mayor.

I believe uh Nick Boning is online to take questions if the council has anything for the applicant.

Okay, great, thank you.

Mr.

Berna.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought okay.

Um, does council have any questions for the applicant or for Mr.

Kirth?

Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment?

Okay, Mr.

Burner.

Make a motion to spend the rules gold third model reading second.

Competing seconds to my right.

Uh Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheataker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna.

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Statard?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

In order to approve VAC 25-29 for property located at 618 North River Road in Ward 4 to vacate 0.7 07 acres of utility easement.

Okay.

Ms.

Bunch?

Oh.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Okay.

That brings us to C6.

No, that was C6.

That brings us to C6.

Yes.

I'm so sorry.

I'm too many notes.

An ordinance to approve C6 is vacation 25-30 North Goldie Road to vacate prop uh for property located at 3383 North Gully Road in Washington County to vacate.10 acres of water easement.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Whereas the City Council has the authority under ACA 1454104 to vacate public grounds or portions thereof, which are not required for corporate purposes.

And Raster City Council has determined the following described portion of water easement is not required for corporate purposes.

Now therefore it be ordained by the city council, the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Section One.

At the City Council, the City of Fayetteville Architecture by determines the portion of water easement as described in exhibit B attached to the Planning Department's memo.

And section two, a copy of this ordinance due to certified by the city clerk along with the map attached to exhibit A to the Planning Department's memo shall be filed in the office of Washington County Circuit Clerk.

Mr.

Kirth.

Thank you, Mayor.

This property is unusual in terms of easement vacation considerations.

It is located in unincorporated Washington County east of the city of Fayetteville.

I used to say that was our planning area, but under recent state legislation, we no longer have a planning area.

So the council may be wondering why they're considering this vacation request.

Is because as an easement, the city has an interest in it and in evaluating our interest in it with the legal department who was ultimately determined that the appropriate route to vacate it is to go before the city council.

With that background in mind, uh this is located on the west side of Goalie Road.

If you're familiar with our two water towers out in East Fayetteville, this is uh not too far north of that, uh, in line with the water line coming out of that piece of property.

Uh the request is a specifically vacate about 4400 square feet of the water and sewer easement that you see on your screen here.

Uh and that is primarily uh intended to uh locate uh relocate a line so that avoid any uh interference with the uh aseptic system that is located on the adjacent piece of property.

Uh water and sewer uh department effectively submitted this request, so they have uh consented to it in that sense.

Uh we don't have any issues uh with it, and we are recommending that this be approved with no conditions um given again we don't have any oversight uh in the normal sense uh in Washington County, and I'm happy to take any questions that the council have, and I am representing it as staff.

Thank you.

Great, Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I just didn't know in that particular area they're running into septic lines there.

Are there is there multiple septic in that area?

I just I guess I'm not sure how that's um city of Fayetteville utility, like the water uh sewer versus like being septic, and I know we've got septic even in the main part of the city at different spots, so I just didn't know if it was at one system or are there multiple out in that general area?

It's a good question.

Almost the almost the entirety of unincorporated Washington County within our water and sewer service area is on septic.

We do not generally uh provide sewer services to unincorporated areas.

Um there are multiple reasons for that.

Uh one is the cost associated with it, the challenges of getting sewer into ever lower density areas.

Um as a result, yeah, the vast majority of properties, almost all of them are on septic systems in one way, shape, or form, uh, depending on the size of the development.

They may have more lateral lines.

If you're familiar with the septic system, there's usually a tank of sorts into which it empties, and then there's these lateral lines that extend out from it that allow the uh effluent to to seep out of it as a part of the septic system process.

Uh so we do periodically run into issues less often now that we don't have development oversight where septic systems are not historically always surveyed terribly accurately and are found across property lines and in some instances.

I'm not sure exactly what the background of this one is and how it relates to this easement dedication in the past, but the effort here is to correct.

Okay, I'm sorry in explaining that now.

You've made me have another question, so then hopefully this will be the last one.

Because the septic systems, they always give me some pause, and so you're right, we don't have those planning areas, so it makes me think about um the additional areas kind of around that we typically had some oversight.

Is it possible that our other lines might have conflict areas with septic in the future and other areas around us that we're gonna like struggle to have oversight of?

So if somebody was going to rework their septic, is it possible that they might have interaction with our city of Fayville lines?

I can't say definitively no.

Most septics septic system installers are required to do some manner of due diligence, uh, just as if anyone who's interacting with underground infrastructure would have to.

Uh, they need to do uh contact one call to identify where easements or lines are specifically.

I I won't pretend that's a perfect system.

I mean, there are there are conflicts that periodically occur in the city of the case.

Appreciate that.

Okay.

Um not seeing any other questions.

Do we have members of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Okay.

I would move to submit the rules and go to the third and final reading.

So we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bench?

Yes.

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

In order to approve AAC 25-30, a property located at 3383, North Kelly Road in Washington County, to vacate about a tenth of an acre of water easement.

Okay, Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Wheedaker?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Ms.

Turt.

Yes.

Mr.

Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Okay, that brings us to item C7, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025-49 for approximately 0.2 acres, located at 258 West Miller Street in Ward 2 from RSF 4 residential single family for units per acre to UN urban neighborhood.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Favorville, Arkansas, Section 1.

At the City Council, the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas hereby changes the zone classification of the property shown on the map, exhibit A.

And the legal description, exhibit B.

Both attached to the planning department's agenda memo, from RSF4 residential single family four units per acre to UN urban neighborhood.

And section two, that the city council, the city of Fayville, Arkansas, hereby amends the official zoning map of the City of Fayetteville to collect the zoning change provided in Section One.

Jonathan.

Thank you, Mayor.

This request takes us to North Central Fayville.

It's along Greg Avenue, just south of Greg Avenue's intersection with Poplar Street at the northeast corner of Greg and Miller.

The property is currently developed with a single family home, and it is a corner lot that does have access to both Greg and Miller.

The request before council is to rezone the property from its existing RSF4 residential single family four units per acre to UN urban neighborhood.

Staff does find this request to be compatible from a land use standpoint.

Not only is Greg Avenue a major connecting corridor in the city that affords it appropriate opportunities to have more diverse housing options and the potential for non-residential uses.

It has uh retail uses.

But as uh once you get on the other side of the railroad tracks to the west, uh on the east side of Greg is uh you can find a multitude of different housing types, um mostly attached residential along Greg Avenue itself.

From a land use plan standpoint, uh staff finds the request to rezone the property to urban neighborhood to be similarly consistent and compatible.

Uh the residential neighborhood designation is intended to promote uh not just a wide variety of uh diversity of residential uses, but in particular places, specifically corners and on major transportation corridors, uh, also the potential for non-residential uses.

We feel that uh many of the attributes that uh make infill appropriate are found here, uh including uh some of the basic ones like access to water, sewer, and fire uh response, uh, but also the proximity, very close proximity to the razor back trail to the west uh and access to transit as well.

Uh other items uh that staff considered with this.

Uh this would uh reduce our cure preservation uh requirements uh significantly on the property.

RSF4 has our highest standard at 25%, and urban neighborhood is a more urban district, has one of our lower standards at 10%.