I would now like to call the February 17th meeting of the Fayetteville City Council to order.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Turk?

Here.

Minister Jones.

Mr.

Stafford?

Here.

Dr.

Jones?

Here.

Ms.

Moore?

Here.

Mr.

Wheedaker.

Mr.

Berna?

Here.

Ms.

Bunch?

Yes.

Here.

Mayor Ron.

Here.

Please join me in reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.

One mission.

Under God.

Okay.

And I will now go right into the consent agenda.

And before we do that, I understand we have a requested change from Mr.

Stafford.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

I'd like to uh pull item A12 off of consent.

And if we could put that near the uh beginning of the regular agenda, uh I do plan to table.

By rule, it goes to will be heard immediately after the consent agenda is read.

Okay, thank you voted on.

Okay.

Um that does not require a vote.

Is that correct, Mr.

Williams?

Yes does not.

His does not.

Okay, all right, great.

So we will move on to the remaining part of the consent agenda, beginning with A1, approval of the February 3rd, 2026 City Council meeting minutes.

A2, recognition of funds paid into a tree escrow.

A3, a new HVAC unit from elite building solutions for the YRCC.

A4, the 2026 budget reappropriation request.

A5, approval of a contract with Forvis Mazars, LLP, to execute our external audit.

A6, a water and sewer work truck replacement through Rush Truck Center.

A seven, a water and sewer work truck replacement through River City Hydraulics Incorporated.

A eight, a water sewer, a water and sewer transportation and solid waste equipment replacements through JA Riggs Tractor Company.

A9 to approve an agreement with Waste Corporation of Arkansas.

A 10 Kalara Land LLC cost share agreement.

A11, an engineering services agreement with RJN Group Incorporated.

A 12 has now been moved to an item of new business.

And A13 is an application for a federal aid grant through the better utilizing investments to leverage development program.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford.

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Okay.

And so now the rules state we will hear what previously was item A12, which is a resolution pursuant to Section 39.10 C4 of the Fayetteville City Code to authorize a payment of 100,000 to I apologize to this resident in advance.

Chris Skyrocki for a sewer damage claim arising at 516 North Fallon Avenue.

I hope I pronounced that name correctly.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Mr.

Scrockey, couldn't uh be here this evening.

Uh so uh I hope everybody's had a chance to review the uh email he did send.

Um but I would like to make a motion uh to table until our March 5th meeting.

Second.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second to table until the did you say March 5th?

Is that correct?

Yeah, I believe that's the March 5th meeting.

Yes.

Clerk Paxton, we uh the second was uh councilman Berna.

Uh Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

So that brings us to item B1 of unfinished business, rezone 2025-50 on West Michael Cole Drive.

For approximately 7.67 acres, excuse me, 2025-0050 for approximately 7.67 acres located at 5901 West Michael Cole Drive in Ward 4 from RA, residential agricultural, to RI 12, residential intermediate, 12 units per acre, and CCR, conservation, cultural, and recreation, subject to a conservation easement.

And at the February 3rd City Council meeting, this item or this ordinance was left on the third and final reading and tabled to this evening.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

I don't have any new information for the planning or the city council.

I do want to remind you all that staff and the planning commission are recommending in favor of this request.

As Mayor noted, this was left on the third reading at your last meeting and table at the applicant's request.

One was the potential to align the zoning district boundary with the flood pain floodplain boundary.

And the second was to evaluate the the allowance for detention facilities, stormwater detention in the area of the property proposed for CCR conservation, cultural, and recreation.

And mayor, I see representatives of Swope Engineering are present that may be able to provide additional information.

Okay.

If the representative from SWOP would like to come up, please.

Good evening, guys.

My name is Dirk Tibetou.

I'm sorry, part we need to hold on.

I think that means we need 10 minutes on the clock.

Is that right?

Is that correct?

Okay, great.

Okay, I'm sorry.

Go ahead, please.

My name is Dirk Chibodeau.

I'm with Swope Consulting representing the owner.

Uh when we were looking at this before, some of the topics were the detention pond within the CCR.

We were also looking at having uh any of the rezoning within the flood plan.

As we look at the map and as we talk with our consulting engineer, we are not the ones providing the drainage analysis.

The drainage analysis is showing that the detention pond facility is likely to be located where the CCR is.

So we were trying to figure out a way could we possibly remove the requirement for detention out of and maybe do water quality?

We don't have an answer on that yet.

They don't have that hasn't been determined.

Um so right now what we're looking at is if we locate the detention pond in another area, we feel that it's just gonna limit the amount of CCR.

So we do feel it's in the best interest to keep the proposed anticipated location of any pond facility within the CCR easement.

I'll start there.

Thank you.

Um Ms.

Moore, do you have questions for the applicant?

I do, and I think one might be for staff as well.

Um the first one is you said you didn't quite have an answer.

Was there a timeline on when you thought you'd know more so?

Was there anything discussed?

No, we just requested.

So there is an option uh that we would waive detail or ask not to have the pond within detention.

So we would look at a drainage analysis that would show that if we didn't detain, we could get the water into the creek and out of the area before the floodwaters hit.

So that study is what we've requested to be done, and we don't have an answer on that.

We are not the ones preparing that.

But I'm not even sure if uh once that is that's determined if that is possible, and that would be between the designing engineer and the city engineering staff.

It has been done in the past, it's not something that's atypical in a situation like this.

Uh but what we don't anticipate is that if we do have to propose detention, that it would be outside of the area that we're now allotting for the conservation easement.

Okay, thank you.

And then my follow-up question is probably more for staff, and I think he started to answer, um, said this was not atypical.

How often do we get that allowance to then just do the management of the water quality instead?

Um, you know, what uh hurdles is that create potentially for monitoring and as a solution if it's been used in the past uh for city staff.

Uh thank you for the question.

Mayor, if I may, or if you'll entertain it, uh Justin Blander, city engineer is is present.

He could probably answer that more capably than I can.

Yes, happy to.

Thanks.

Justin.

Do you need us to repeat the question?

I know or do you got it?

Okay.

Thank you though.

Yeah.

Um, yeah, that that qu that question has come up occasionally.

Um, and it basically what the drainage manual requires is that if you don't do the on-site stormwater detention, you have to do a flood study showing that um basically that's not going to make anything worse.

So you kind of do existing conditions, you need to do the development without the stormwater detention.

And if if if any of the downstream cross sections show like an increase in flood level or velocity or anything like that, then then that's not permitted.

So you basically have to prove that you're not gonna uh encroach downstream or make anything worse downstream.

Okay.

And I guess if we were to approve tonight the way this stands though, it the plan that's been looked at if they're doing detention within the CCR, though, is that correct, or is that still movable at this point?

Okay, so as far as with the city, it could be movable at that.

Absolutely.

Yeah, we only looked at preliminary plan, so nothing is set in stone at this point.

Okay.

And then my my only follow up, but I apologize.

I this I promised is the last one.

I just it goes to what council member Turk stated when she was concerned about this previous.

I think when we were looking at this new CCR, I think a lot of us were considering that this really would be untouched parts of the property.

And so just wondering through, you know, what staff are thinking around the potential that if this property did need detention and we're approving this forward, and we're gonna have to create some kind of change in that.

You know, are we already setting precedent or setting ourselves out that this is going to change what we thought CCR was going to look like?

I think I can chime in on that one.

Uh I think one of the main factors in staff's consideration in this instance is that this specific piece of property is open pasture today.

It's not untouched forest or woodland uh that we would typically not want to see disturbed as a part of uh uh drainage improvements.

Uh if it were woodland, obviously we wouldn't want it untouched, but as a pasture, typically we have plantings associated with our drainage ponds that could actually improve the vegetation in that area moving forward.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yeah, if you can stay up, Mr.

Bland for just a moment.

Sorry.

Um so when we when you figure out the calculations for existing runoff and and future runoff, you you're also calculating like uh looking at what's going to be built in the floodplain and how that's gonna uh affect additional runoff.

That that's part of the calculation.

That's correct, yes.

And and okay and then you your department still finds that the detention pond and everything is be gonna be able to adequately uh deal with uh the stormwater.

I think if I can interject there, I don't think at this point we've seen detailed plans.

We've seen preliminary drawings of it.

I don't believe a drainage report has been provided to this state, so I don't think we have the ability to evaluate.

But that will be taken into account when you figure out.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Ms.

Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um so I I guess I I was wondering how long does a drainage report typically uh uh take uh to be produced and analyzed by staff.

I I can't speak to how long it takes to produce that.

The applicant may speak to that better than I can, but once it's submitted with a project, our engineering staff in a typical project cycle has two weeks to review it, uh, and that moves forward as it with depending on the project classification, whether it's uh a site improvement plan or a large scale development, that review time uh can change potentially or or lessen or increase as it leads up to a public hearing if that's a part of it.

Uh so I mean the short answer is two weeks is the typical first review uh opportunity for our engineering staff to look at a drainage plan.

I can't speak to how long it takes to draft that.

That's purely on the applicant side.

And you you don't know how long it would be to uh until you had a drainage plan uh created.

Again, no, we requested it and we requested it when we tabled this meeting that we still don't have that answer.

They haven't produced the report to tell us what those findings would be.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, I'm gonna open it up to public comment.

Oh, I'm sorry, Miss Turk.

I I'm sorry, there was one other um issue that we talked about that maybe you could address, and that was the changing uh of where the floodplain is, and are you not are you all not entered in uh interested in doing that?

Where that line is that it overlapped where you had housing?

We left it only because what we're proposing is not putting housing within the floodplain.

That's not the intent.

So the the zoning lines were relative to the area, but not specific to the to the design because the design is still incomplete.

Okay, so theoretically, let's just talk theory here.

If we approve this and the floodplain area is still within the RI-12, you could put a detention pond in that floodplain area since you weren't gonna put housing in there, if I understood you correctly.

Yes and no.

The only reason I'm hesitant to say yes is because where with the CCR is located, it's in the lowest portion of the development.

And so that's why we feel like that's probably where if detention was required, it would encroach into that area.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, now 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.

I don't see anybody on Zoom with their hand raised.

So we are going to take it back.

What would you all like to do?

Ms.

Turk.

Well, um, I'm concerned about a couple of things.

I'm concerned about um setting a precedent with CCR, and we don't have the drainage report yet to really understand if they need a detention pond or not.

Um so if they don't need a detention pond, um that would eliminate one concern.

I think we still have the concern about the floodplain within the RI-12 to address.

Um I I would like to hold this until we have a drainage report, and it so that we have more information to make that determination.

I you know, the CCR is so new, and I really am very uncomfortable with setting a precedent that detention ponds can be um housed in that in those areas.

Is that a motion to table?

This is a motion to table.

Um, and I guess um until maybe I since we don't have an idea about when the when the drainage report would be um available to maybe May, and you think that's too long or not long enough.

I I'm kind of looking for some guidance here.

Jonathan.

I'd have to defer to the applicant on if they have a timeline.

Okay, so uh maybe the first city council meeting in May.

Um may I clear you go ahead, Miss Moore, and then I have a clarifying question for Jonathan.

Go ahead.

Uh I guess um for me, I just in asking that questions.

I had those hesitations to council member Tariq.

I just am concerned about holding up that project that much longer.

It sounds like we have avenues in place as far as precedent.

It you know, it has been pasture, um, and so it sounds like this isn't like it's woodland or you know, hillside that we're suddenly tearing into, and so I have less hesitation about it setting precedent, kind of thinking through CCR right now.

And then I heard it sounded like um the additional review process that we have in the city.

Um, we're gonna be looking at that drainage report, and so there's additional checks and balances within the city, I think that are gonna look at that and are a stop gap for us.

So I just don't know with us holding it.

I'm just not quite sure that I'm gonna cure something different outside of what staff would be working on, and we might be delaying the project.

So I guess that's just my question.

I'm not quite sure.

Um for me, I feel like we might have in place um the ability to do what we're hoping to do just through city staff.

And I don't know if they can clarify, but I felt like that's what I heard earlier.

Got it.

Okay.

So not a second is what I'm hearing.

Right, it's okay.

Uh Mr.

Stafford.

Um, yeah, uh just uh anticipating that we might go forward uh if it doesn't get tabled.

Uh I do have a question.

Uh uh Jonathan, I think you can answer it.

So you're saying that the part of the conservation uh zone uh where the detention pile will be going does not have trees at this time that this is open pasture land.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Based on the preliminary drawings that we saw for this project, detention was proposed in the lowest portion of the site, which as the applicant has uh alluded to tonight.

That's the indicated location where detention would be placed.

So to max the maximize the ability of water to flow there and try not to fight gravity.

Okay.

Um and then maybe a follow-up question for Kit.

I know we're not a quarter law, so we don't actually set precedent, but it um but would this be seen as precedent if we you know uh approve this and then change something in the future or did something differently in the future.

Land is so varied and different that it's hard to set precedent in it because every piece of property is gonna look a lot different here.

We're got some floodplain, we have potential a field, and then you have a first time.

I think uh that the CCR is gonna be used, and you so is there any precedent?

Well, part of it is uh it could be a little bit of a precedent, but both ways.

If if we make it too difficult for somebody to develop under a the conservation district, then we're not gonna see too many of them come to us.

But on the other hand, you want to do it carefully.

I understand that, but uh uh neither one is really a true precedent because the land is so different, it takes a decision probably every time by the council to decide is this the appropriate place for that kind of district.

Okay, thank you.

Ms.

Turk.

So if if the um sounds like I'm not gonna get a second, but uh maybe I can go back and have another bite at the apple.

Um so I'm wondering if if the applicant would entertain redrawing the lines of the CCR so that the um the drainage, if you did a detention pond, that it would actually not be in the CCR.

Sure.

Yeah, that's no problem.

And honestly, the pond needs to go where it's gonna go.

It's gonna go in the low spot of the site, that's always where it is.

That is in the in the uh pasture area, so it's not gonna interfere any trees.

In the end of the day, it's gonna go where it's gonna go regardless of the zoning lines.

I guess what our thought was at the end of the day, wouldn't you rather have more land in a conservation easement than not?

And so that's why we thought.

I mean you're right, we can reduce that and make that an RA area for the pond, but then you do you guys don't have conservation control over it at that point.

So we thought it was better for it to be in conservation.

That's why we continued in this path.

I think when we had the long lengthy discussion about the concept about the CCR in the uh environmental action committee meeting, and also here, we never even thought about detention ponds.

I think we just immediately assume that they would be prohibited.

Okay, and so I would like to, you know, um, go with the spirit of how we develop the the zoning type.

Okay, if that makes sense.

Sure.

I don't know how my other council members feel, but that would probably be my preference.

Yeah.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Swoke.

Thank you.

Okay, how what would you like to do?

Mr.

Mr.

Stafford.

I would just like to know a point of clarification.

What reading we're on?

There's already been the third and final last week, and then it was tabled to this time.

So we're okay.

Is that the third plus or the four?

Yeah, yeah.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh Clerk Paxton, will you please call the role?

Oh, Ms.

Turk.

I'm sorry, we have one final since we're gonna take two.

This is four, but I don't mind.

So go ahead.

Thank you for allowing me to have this um conversation.

Um, so I would like to make um an amendment um that the lines of the CCR would be redrawn so that they do not include a detention pond.

That's a motion.

Do we have a second for that amendment?

Can I ask a point of clarification first?

We already have a second, but yes, you may go ahead.

Oh, go ahead and ask now.

Yeah, um, so Kit uh basically we would just be like where the they could leave the um detention problem where they plan to put it, we would just be putting that outside of the conservation zone.

That we would just be putting the border outside of that.

We require legal descriptions for things like that, and we don't have a legal description because they don't know where the pond is going for sure.

So at this point, it'd be very difficult to to accomplish what has been requested here.

Um just uh let Jonathan talk about that.

Do you have anything to add?

I don't I agree with Ms.

Williams Commons.

We don't know the exact location, we don't have a legal description to reflect that.

Mr.

Burnet.

Thank you, Mayor.

I was just gonna say I'm I'm a little uncomfortable with with you know trying to come up with the spirit of the law when the the ordinances and zoning is described it it doesn't mention that, and that's that's an error on our part, and and we should probably go back and revisit it.

But I I don't I don't think that doing it now is appropriate, and especially with what we've just been told about not having a legal description, uh uh uh uh struggle with this.

Got it.

Okay, we have an amendment and a second.

Clerk Paxson, can you um uh Minister Jones, I believe, was the second.

Is that correct?

Okay, yes, ma'am.

Will you please call the roll Ms.

Turk?

Yes, Minister Jones, yes, Mr.

Stafford no Dr.

Jones, no Ms.

Moore, no Mr.

Burnet, no Ms.

Bunch, no, so the amendment fails.

We're back to the third and final reading.

Clark Packinson, will you please call the roll for the for the reason?

Ms.

Turk, no minister Jones, no Mr.

Stafford.

Yes, Dr.

Jones?

Yes, Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes, it's bunch, yes.

The ordinance passed.

Okay, that brings us to the next matter of unfinished business, which is um a PCD in North Cross River Road and East Zion Road, an ordinance to approve a planned zoning district, PCD 2025-005 for approximately nine acres.

And I believe that there is a request from this was left on the third, um pardon me.

At the last city council meeting, this ordinance was left on the first reading, and we have a request this time to table it until the March 5th meeting.

Is that correct, Mr.

Kurth?

That's correct, Mayor.

Mayor and make a motion to table to the March 5th meeting.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to table it to the March 5th meeting.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the role?

Ms.

Hart.

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones.

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mayor.

Yes, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am.

I just wanted to know from Jonathan, was there a specific reason why they were asking us to table it?

Thank you for the question.

There are two primary reasons.

One is the main applicant representative was not available to attend this meeting.

And the second is that given some of the questions that they heard from the council at the last meeting, they needed additional time to get those answers, uh, coordinating between the engineer for the applicant and the engineer for the Chandler Crossing subdivision.

A lot of those questions were about how the stormwater facilities will interact between the projects.

Thank you.

That brings us to our first item of new business, the renaming of the City Hall Annex Building.

Um, a resolution to rename the City Hall Annex Building to the Lionel Jordan Municipal Annex.

Dr.

Jones.

Uh good evening, Mayor and City Council.

Uh tonight we have a resolution before us to rename uh the Annex to the City Hall, the Lionel Jordan Municipal Annex.

And um do you want me to read the I think if you're if you would if you would like it's up to that standard, but you don't whatever your whatever your fellow council members would like.

I'm fine either way.

I'll go ahead and read it.

Uh whereas Lionel Jordan was a two-term councilman before he was elected mayor in 2008, and where is Mayor Lionel Jordan was the longest standing mayor in the history of Fayetteville, elected as the 51st mayor from January 1, 2009 to December 31st, 2024.

And whereas during his term, Fayetteville was voted one of the best places in the country to live several years in a row.

And whereas as mayor, he successfully secured millions in funding through a bond initiative to expand the Fayetteville Public Library, create a cultural arts corridor, build a new police station, and build a new fire station.

And whereas Mayor Jordan also created an African American advisory council, and at its recommendation, he supported a resolution to declare racism, a public health crisis in Fayetteville, which was the only city in the state to do so.

And whereas the City Hall Annex building located on Rock Street should be renamed the Lionel Jordan Municipal Annex in honor of his service to the community.

And um this is bringing brought this is being brought forth this evening by members of the uh Iota Phi Theta Fraternity Um Fraternity Incorporated.

Mayor Jordan became a member in 2024, and because of the because of the success that Fayetteville experienced under its leadership, the fraternity felt that it that it is appropriate that we rename this facility in its honor, and Mayor Ron, we have a representative Solomon Burtsfield from the from the uh fraternity present here tonight for a I guess a presentation.

Okay.

I think we'll treat Mr.

Birchfield then as the applicant kit.

Is that right?

So that he has 10 minutes.

Oh, that's fine.

Okay, Mr.

Birchfield, if you'd like to present.

Thank you, Dr.

Jones.

Thank you, Councilmember Jones and Mayor.

Um I'll be faster than 10 minutes, I believe.

I am just bringing words of support for this resolution this evening as a fellow uh as a brother in the Delta Omicron Omega chapter of Iota Phi Theta Fraternity.

Uh a few words of background.

Iodify Theta Fraternity Incorporated is a historically African American Social Services fraternity.

Founded on September 19th, 1963 at Morgan State College, now university in Baltimore, Maryland.

It's the fifth largest, predominantly African American fraternity, focusing on scholarship, leadership, citizenship, fidelity, and brotherhood.

Our organization has over 30,000 members in hundreds of chapters nationwide.

Some of the key details about the fraternity.

We were founded by 12 students, many of whom were non-traditional, older students and veterans.

Our motto is building a tradition, not resting upon one.

The values of the fraternity focus on developing and perpetuating scholarship, leadership, citizenship, fidelity, and brotherhood.

We were founded during the civil rights movement, and the fraternity emphasizes community service, social justice, and academic achievement.

Our community impact includes partnering with organizations like the Ori Smith Cancer Research Foundation, the American Red Cross, and many others.

Iodify Theta is a member of the National Pan Hellenic Council, which governs historically African American fraternities and sororities.

Mayor Jordan was initiated in 2024, and he is known for his commitment to equality, diversity, and inclusion.

He was initiated alongside Chief Eddie Garcia, the 30th police chief of Dallas Police Department, the first Latino to lead the department in its 140-year history.

Also, alongside Harry Dunn, the retired Capitol Hill Police Officer, celebrated for his heroic defense of democracy during the January 6th insurrection at the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C.

Also, alongside Dr.

Mark J.T.

Smith, a two-time Olympian and scholar renowned for uh research and speech and imaging processing.

So on behalf of the uh Delta Omicron Omega chapter of the Iwatify Theta Fraternity, uh, we are pleased to add our voice to support in this resolution.

I imagine there are many people uh within city government uh and many people and organizations throughout the broader community seeking ways to honor the decades of leadership and service from uh former mayor Jordan.

And so we are just excited to add our support to this opportunity to rename the annex in his honor.

Thank you for your attention.

Thank you, Solomon.

Do we have questions either for Mr.

Birchfield or for Dr.

Jones from members of the council?

Mr.

Berna, uh is I'm sorry, Dr.

Jones.

Do you want to is there something you want to add before we go to question?

I would like for uh brother Solomon to point out uh some of the um the reasons that we decided to go with the Annex.

Well, the annex is a special uh building for many reasons.

Um the mayor did lead the uh renovation of the building uh back in 2022, after, if you recall uh the killing of uh police officer carried here in Fayetteville.

Um currently it houses the GIS Geographic Information Systems, uh, the City Employee Gym, which I learned about this week.

Um, HR community resources, parks and rec.

Uh so yeah, this building we feel um is just uh appropriate place to be able to honor the former mayor.

Okay, uh Mr.

Burnout.

Uh uh Jones, do you know if the city has a policy about how we go about uh naming you know trails, benches, buildings?

Do we I don't I don't know the answer to that?

Do we have a policy?

Let me ask y'all let me ask you council do we have a policy?

Have we ever had a policy before?

I don't know.

I'm not sure.

If we had a policy before, I would have had a if we would have had a policy before, I would have gone through that policy.

In this prior to this, whenever we've done things like this, we've always done it in this manner.

Now I know that when it's African American, when it's been African Americans, we've gone through their group that Monique leads.

But since it's different, I'm not sure how that works.

So if someone would care to advise me, if they advise us of that, then please, by all means.

Keith, I can't see if your lights are on or not.

But thank you.

Yes, go ahead.

Yeah, I could probably answer that.

Uh, we currently do not have a policy on city building renaming.

That's something the mayor and I've uh worked on a little bit, and we've asked a couple other cities on uh in the region, just kind of how they handle that.

We do have policies on renaming streets, and we have policies on renaming parks, but we do not have one uh currently on city facilities, but we definitely you know have benefited from those other two from parks and streets.

So it's something that we worked a little bit on trying to provide some guardrails for the city council uh going forward.

Do we have other questions before we open it up to public comment?

Okay, do we have members of the public that would like to speak on this item?

Hi, please come on up and state your name, please, and then go ahead.

Good evening, council members and mayor.

Thank you for the opportunity.

I'm Clifford Nichols, and I am uh resident of the Washington County, and I am also a proud member of Iona Fife Theater for Attorney Incorporated.

I think briefly, this is a great opportunity for the city council to agree to um rename the annex.

Not only did uh brother Bryce Fields talk about some of the significance of this building, but he also resided there.

When I say reside, um Jordan had his office there as well.

So he would work out of that building and that building.

We heard from him personally that it holds um heavy significance to him, and it was a very important building.

He was also um wanting to expand the police department to where it is now.

So just his work and the opportunity to be able to say, hey, this is a building that he worked out of and that he cares so much about to expand the police department to the new location now.

I think it would be a great opportunity for the city council to agree to do so.

Thank you, and I yield.

Thank you, sir.

Do we have other members of the public that uh Mr.

Masito, do we have anyone on Zoom?

We do.

We have uh two people on Zoom.

Okay, go ahead.

First one is Lance Reed.

Mr.

Reed, whenever you're ready.

Good evening, um, council.

Um this is Lance Reed, um residing in Fayetteville.

Um, and so I encourage you to support this idea um in support of this resolution.

Um we are there are many buildings that can be named.

There are various opportunities um that can be named um his in his honor.

Um this is not just a um like the city only building they can be honored, um, but they're I looked at other um cities for example the Legardia um airport and the Ligaria Museum.

There are several mayors and different people, different buildings across the the country that have multiple the mayor has multiple names on there.

So um naming this um annex after after Mayor Jordan is not just a one-time thing or this it there are other opportunities if there is a conversation that um want to make it grand or bigger um that is also an option, but um naming this index is not just a one or a a one-time thing.

There are plenty of different times opportunities to have something named after um Mayor Jordan um as uh for those groups to do so.

But this was um what we came to do, and and and we wanted to have that support of the council.

Thank you, Lance.

Thank you.

We have a train on Taylor.

Mr.

Taylor, whenever you're ready.

All right, good evening, all thank you all.

Uh my name is Shaman Taylor.

I actually resolved in Faulkner County, uh Conway, Arkansas.

I just wanted to get on and echo um on behalf of the Brotherhood of Iota Five Ada Fraternity Incorporated on behalf of our international brand Polares, Brother Orlando Brandt, Vice Player CA McCoy, our grand council, our Southern Regional Polaris, brother uh Gibbs Hightower the Fifth, um, and our Southern Regional Vice Players, Brother Ricky Sales.

I am the state director for the state of Arkansas as well for Arkansas IOTAs, and uh we are thrilled to be able to be a part of this mission, not just for the brothers of Fayetteville, not just for the city of Fayetteville, but this has reached our national and international office.

Um we urge you know, the the council members uh to vote in favor of this and to echo Brother Lance Reed's statements.

Um absolutely there are you know many buildings and many, you know, other people that could be you know appointed their name to a building.

Um however, at this point, we are uh wanting to honor our brother uh brother Jordan and getting this building named after him for his outstanding historical track record and just what he's done for the community of Fairville and what he can do, not just for the community of Fairville, but what he can do uh for you know all of Arkansas and and hopefully beyond at this time.

So again, on behalf of our our grand office, our regional office and state office, uh we we do urge and uh and support uh this mission of renaming the the building after our brother Jordan and I yield.

Thank you, sir.

Keith, do we have anybody else on Zoom?

Okay, and I'm gonna bring it back to members of the council for any final comments or what all you would like to do.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, first of all, I want to thank DeAndre uh and the fraternity for bringing this forward.

Um I I think my personal reservations uh revolve around I I definitely uh do agree that the uh Mayor Jordan uh beyond his is is the length of his is uh running the city and serving the city uh also accomplished a great uh deal of great things, many of which were were mentioned uh this evening.

Um and I do think uh Mr.

Birchfield for bringing up the point that uh that that annex building uh does serve our our parts and rec department, uh JS Department and some other things, but just about when I think about doing something like this for Mayor Jordan, I my hope would be that it would be something uh more significant.

A like when I think about that annex building personally, is where I go to my some of my committee meetings.

It just I I would just really like us to uh definitely name something for Mayor Jordan, but something maybe uh with more stature than uh than the annex building.

That's just my personal uh opinion, but I'd love to hear uh the thoughts of my fellow council members.

Minister Jones.

I just had a question.

Thank you, Bob.

Um Keith, as you and the mayor were considering the policy.

Are you do you have any total cost for rebranding with the name of the building?

Is there a cost associated with that?

Uh I've asked staff that and we think it's around $1,500 just for some additional signage around the building.

That's a good question.

Um Mr.

Verna and then Miss Moore.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Um my comments will echo echo uh somewhat along the lines of uh councilmother Stafford, and I applaud uh DeAndre for bringing this forward because Lionel Jordan uh gave his heart and soul to this city for 20 plus years, and if there ever was an individual that deserved to have uh recognition like this, it's certainly him.

Um in saying that, I think it needs to be more specific uh more significant.

Um not that this is not, but I think that we could um table this um for a little bit.

We wanted to do a little committee and and let DeAndre chair it to try to uh uh come up with a plan to really significantly honor him.

I think that's a great idea.

I I just uh I think we're we're falling short of what we could do for the for the the person that gave so much to the city by by settling on this.

Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

I think when this um originally came in front of me, I maybe had um similar reservations to other council members.

Um but I also then tried to reflect, you know, why I kind of had that response.

Um we've kind of talked about there's not a policy.

Um I've seen council member DeAndre Jones, um, Dr.

Jones that is I apologize, um, show up and do things that are new and are different and uncommon, and I don't think this probably is any different than the style.

Um, so I think he's trying to lead us.

I try to think about what was shared with us, and this came from uh this uh fraternity and what they stand for and the months that we're in in February and Black History Month, um, where we're talking about this being discussed around this brotherhood and being elevated and brought forward.

And so I guess I have some hesitation now about pausing what came from peers um when we don't have a SATA policy.

Um, when one of our council members, Dr.

Jones is wanting to honor someone who's um created a legacy in the city of Fayetteville.

And so for me, I'm supportive of moving forward today because you know, while we may have some additional monument in the future today, we do have this building before us, and I appreciate um the acknowledgement for the service that was had and the leadership to bring forward um and honor that service that was to the city of Fayetteville.

So I'm comfortable to move forward.

I do appreciate we talked about the cost.

I think we should always take that into account.

That was another question I had, and I do appreciate too that that's very minimal at this time, and so I hope we could proceed forward and and bestow this honor tonight.

Thank you, Miss Moore.

Um Ms.

Bunch and then Miss Turk.

Yes, thank you.

Um I've been kind of you know, I've kind of thought about this a lot of different ways.

Lionel Jordan was not is not only my friend, but he's been a mentor to me.

So I to say that I think there's no one more deserving to have something named after them.

I I can't stress that enough.

He exemplifies in my mind dedication to community.

He is a servant leader and always has been.

But but I thought about I thought about the building, and I kind of I kind of would like to see something.

If we're going to name a building, I I'd kind of like to see it be something a little bit maybe a little bit different than that building.

But then I thought about that building, and I thought, well, that building has been a JC Penny's.

He wouldn't go out and ask for a building to be named after him.

He would not.

He would prefer maybe a park bench or you know, dog park or something like that, because he's just that kind of guy.

But um I'm not I'm not opposed to renaming something after him.

I just kind of right now I'm not sold on that building.

That's my take.

Ms.

Turk.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I I can't say uh better things than what Sarah just conveyed about um Lionel Jordan.

What a great guy, servant leader, all of those wonderful wonderful accolades and his um dedication and his work.

I I guess for me, I would really like to see the policy.

I don't think there's any rush on maybe uh making this decision tonight, and I think it would be wonderful if Dr.

Jones, Councilmember Dr.

Jones were on a committee that created a policy so that we had something consistent that we could move forward on uh in the future, and and certainly start naming some of these um these buildings.

So that would that would be my recommendation that we hold off here tonight, we create the policy, and we revisit this later later on.

But I I appreciate um you bringing this forward, Dr.

Jones, and highlighting um an area that we don't have a policy for that we need to draft something to uh to be consistent and accommodate that.

Thank you.

Dr.

Jones.

Uh I want to share something with the council in the city of Fayetteville.

Umor Jordan, uh, we want to recognize you by renaming the annex after you.

The fraternity, that is, we want to recognize you.

Brother D, I'm honored and humbled that our fraternity is bringing this forward.

Brother Ale.

Brother Lionel, and of course, you being the lead sponsor.

So we felt as Solomon uh mentioned, this was a collective idea.

We came together, and then I asked him because I wanted to make sure that of course that this was okay with him.

So I didn't want to um to to do this without hint without his permission.

Of course, we wanted to surprise him, but something of this magnitude, you can't really surprise quite surprise someone uh of something of this magnitude.

So I reached out to him.

I did my due dil due diligence.

I feel like that there was a responsibility on my behalf.

So he's aware of it.

He didn't go sticking forward because we all know that that's not his character, but as he mentioned in the message that he was humbled, he's very thankful and very grateful for us even considering that.

So I wanted to share that with the council.

Thank you.

I'm not seeing any.

Oh, I'm Mr.

Stafford and then and then Kit will go to you.

Mr.

Stafford.

I think my question and I think for Kit.

Uh if we were to uh put the a couple of my other council members mentioned that uh the idea of putting forward a a uh I guess a subcommittee would would be or or or you know to kind of work through uh the naming process in general and then also maybe specific to this.

Um is that something we could just uh do we have to do we have to make any sort of motion to do that?

Do we is that something that could just be done uh that the mayor can just direct, or how does that work?

Well, it can work in many different ways.

You can make it more formal or less formal, but let me talk about policies.

We do have a policy for parks and naming facilities there, but I was careful when I wrote that, just like I do most of the times to leave the final decision always with the city council.

So the city council, uh it could be recommended one way or another for something to be named, but unless the city council agrees, it's not going to be named, they make the final decision.

And that's probably what happened when Liv Horn was honored by uh naming the first uh shelter in her honor.

She had uh always been a hard worker there and well respected, and I think even left some money to it out of her will.

So the decision will always be.

I hope, as long as I'm city attorney, I'm gonna keep the decision with the elected policymakers when it comes to naming a building or even naming a park facility, even if maybe the uh recommendations wouldn't fit exactly within the plan, because I think that you all have the common sense and the judgment and the power to make the final decision for the city.

Uh so I I would recommend that you you can form a committee and try to uh create a policy if you want to, and and you know that's certainly something you can do.

It's really up to you.

Minister Jones.

I'm sorry, Dr.

I'm I'm sorry.

Who was the question?

Forgive me, I'm about to sneeze.

But Bob, you had the floor.

Did that answer your question from Kate before we I'm just wondering, you know, that said, uh, if we did want to uh have a committee, is there any sort of action we could take, or is that something the mayor can just form a committee or or well both.

I mean, somebody could have uh a motion at one point to have an ad hoc committee just to try to form this policy.

You could refer to the ordinance review committee because they could look at uh the there is an ordinance in the uh in the uh code section for naming in parks.

So that's actually part of the code.

So it could go to the ordinance review committee, or you could have an ad hoc.

Okay, thank you.

Minister Jones.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, Dr.

Jones, thank you for bringing this forward.

Um, in our meeting this past weekend with the NAACP.

Um, our theme was for such a time as this.

I am about right now doing things because we don't know what tomorrow holds.

I am um I'm grateful that you and IOTAs and the fraternity um were thoughtful in bringing this forward.

He deserves it.

Um he put in a lot of work.

He is an epitome of what service is to Fayetteville, and why would we wait to honor him?

I I think we move forward honoring him and still setting up an ad cock ad hoc committee moving forward.

But what will change if we have a committee?

What will change if we have a policy?

Will he be around to see it?

I'm I'm just saying for such a time as this is it's right right now to go ahead and honor him.

So thank you again.

Um Dr.

J.

Thank you for that.

I was thinking the same thing.

Uh and several citizens, and they've all been they've all been in favor of this, and they've mentioned the possibility of certain things, and I said that would be great, but time is not always on our side.

And God forbid this, but what if mayor, what if we didn't get the opportunity to honor him and something were to happen.

So as of right now, time is on our side.

I mean, we have a building that we have that's something that's presented right before us, and several people have also said this.

They said, well, in numerous cities, I think Lance has said this and several others.

You why can't it put some to sub?

I mean, you can some people can have maybe several buildings named after them.

But I do believe that right now uh the things that Sarah said, um uh with it being Black History Month, if we don't do this right now, this Fayetteville every year for Black History Month, Fayville was the only city in the state of Arkansas that went hard for Black History Month.

That was under the tutelage of Mayor Jordan.

So I felt that because of that, February would be perfect.

Now, some of you may not agree with that, some of you may not even agree with Black History Month.

SEP or there.

I don't care about that.

But the man who made it happen with Lionel Jordan.

And that's who we're here to talk about honoring.

And so I felt like that since it's Black History Month, and since the city's not really doing anything like we've done previously, and this is a great opportunity to do something to honor him, the man who made Fayetteville helped make Fayetteville a place that a lot of black people feel like that they are part.

Because especially in Northwest Arkansas, y'all have heard me sound like a broken record.

Being a black man, it just matters to me.

It matters to me that I live in a city and that I had a mayor that was concerned about my well-being.

That matters to me that also matters to the fraternity.

And if Minister Jones said it matters to her, and it matters to the endable ACP.

So there's no time like this.

Thank you.

Okay.

Minister Jones.

Mayor, there was a reason I asked the question because I wanted to make sure there would no be no financial burden or hardship to the city for us changing that.

It's a nominal fee.

So I'd like to motion to go ahead and vote tonight and create a committee for future for any future naming of buildings.

Okay.

Got it.

So we have a motion to Kit, you're giving me a signal.

The motion I mean the resolution before the council is just the naming.

Okay.

So probably that's what should be voted on.

That's what we do on the agenda.

Okay.

All right.

That's seconded.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second to accept the resolution as presented in C1.

Clerk Paxson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Burno?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Okay.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you, DeAndre.

And thank you to the members of the fraternity that are here.

And to those who called in and spoke.

That brings us to item C2.

An ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025-74 for approximately 0.23 acres located at 1023 South Morningside Drive.

Is that right?

Yes, South Morningside Drive and 691 East McClinton Street in Ward 1 from NC neighborhood conservation to UN Urban Neighborhood.

Jonathan.

Mayor Mr.

Williams will read the word.

I'm so sorry, Kit, I apologize.

Thank you, Mayor.

Autopilot.

Please go ahead.

And the legal description, exhibit B, both attached to the Planning Department's agenda memo from NC neighborhood conservation to UN urban neighborhood and section two at the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, hereby amends official zoning map of the city of Fayetteville to reflect the zoning change provided in section one.

Mr.

Hurts.

Thank you, Mayor.

This property is towards Southeast Fayetteville.

It's between Huntsville Road to the north and 15th Street to the south along Morningside Drive.

And more specifically, about a quarter acre of land at the southwest corner of McClinton Street and Morningside Drive.

The request, as was noted, is to rezone the property from its existing NC neighborhood conservation zoning designation to UN urban neighborhood.

Staff finds this request to be compatible from a land use standpoint.

The UN zoning district allows a wide variety of uses, but at a moderated scale, uh, where the surrounding NC zoning district only allows uh structures up to three stories, the UN zoning district seeks to mimic that while also allowing the potential for services, particularly on connecting corridors such as Morningside Drive.

Additionally, as staff reviewed the wider Morningside quarter, we identified several instances of a variety of land uses that are uh allowed in the UN zoning district, uh including apartments services, single family homes, duplexes, and the like.

Similarly, we found this request to be consistent with our long range plans, uh not just the future land use map designation or a residential neighborhood, uh, which is uh uh written to encourage uh a diversity of residential uses and again non residential uses along connecting corridors, uh, but it also complements the number of infill attributes that can be found on the property.

Uh similarly, uh, we find this request to be very consistent with the Walker Park plan.

Uh although it is uh getting uh a little up there in age, uh we do refer back to it to to make sure we're being consistent in that regard.

Uh and it does suggest that this property was intended to have uh additional uh amount of uh redevelopment on it, as you can see in the structure shown uh on the western half of the property, uh its backyard.

In terms of other issues, staff considered as part of the request.

Uh, we do recognize that this will reduce the tree preservation uh requirement for the property uh from 20% with NC to 15% under UN.

Uh if you visited the property between agenda session and tonight, you may have noticed that there was some construction work doing on the property.

Uh specifically, the the current owner is removing an unpermitted addition from several years ago in order to bring the building at compliance before moving forward with uh potential uh future development plans.

Uh another item we considered uh in evaluating this request is that the city's uh sewer model suggests that there is a wet water wet weather downstream capacity issue.

Uh but when we consider this with our utility department, they found the property to be of such a size that it did not represent a significant concern.

Uh finally, we've not received any public comment on this item.

Uh staff is recommending approval, and it's in front of the city council by unanimous vote from the planning commission in favor of approving it tonight.

I could take any questions that the council has, and Mayor West Bates is uh available for any questions.

Okay, great.

Does anybody have any questions for Mr.

Kurth or for Mr.

Bates?

Mr.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so I noticed, and please correct me if I'm wrong, Jonathan, that under NC it's uh 40 uh foot width for um a structure, right?

And under urban neighborhood, it's 12 foot.

For a lot, not the structure.

Oh, sorry, for the lot, thank you.

That's correct.

Yeah.

Um, so given that, how many um how many structures, how many dwellings could be placed on there uh if it's changed from NC to urban neighborhood?

Uh that's a good question.

I don't have a survey of the property to measure out the exact dimensions in that regard, uh, but of note the 12-foot dimension or even the 16-foot one that the council sees in some of our other zoning districts are largely intended to contemplate townhouses where you build multiple attached units and are able to split them off on the lots and sell them fees simple.

Uh, in reality, it is next to impossible to create a 12-foot lot and build a single family house on it because of building code standards uh that dictate how far apart detached units have to be from each other.

So that has an inherent guardrail on lots for detached structures being split out like that.

So I don't have a very specific answer to you, uh, but but that I think hopefully that helps uh guide your determination or vote.

Okay, thank you.

I I guess I should have done a little more homework to see how large that lot was or that's that area.

Thank you.

Okay.

I'm not seeing any more questions, so I'm gonna open it up for public comment.

Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on this rezone?

I don't see anybody on Zoom.

Keith, do you?

I do not.

Okay.

All right, I'll bring it back to the council, starting with Ms.

Moore.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'd like to suspend the roles and go to the third reading.

Second.

Okay.

We have a motion and a second from Dr.

Jones to suspend the rules and go to the next next reading.

And Clerk Paxton, as soon as you get back, if you could call the roll.

Sometimes we're we move quickly and sneak up on you, and you never can you never can tell.

No, sorry.

Ms.

Turk.

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore.

Yes.

Mr.

Barna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

And your orders to rezone the property described and rezoning petition RZN 2025-74 for approximately 0.323 acres, located at one 1023 South Morningside Drive and 691 East McClinton Street in Ward 1, from NC Neighborhood Conservation to UN Urban Neighborhood.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just want to quickly say that I think this rezoning is going to be great for this neighborhood.

Being able to offer uh services in this area.

Uh we much need them, especially if we want to make uh a more walkable uh in local kind of city.

So uh very excited about this and support it fully.

Great.

Thank you.

All right.

We are seeing nothing else.

I'm gonna go ahead and ask uh Clark Paxson to please call the roll for the final vote.

Ms.

Turk?

No.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Barnett?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Okay, that brings us to C3, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025-71 for approximately 1.8 acres located at 416 South Willow Avenue in Ward 1, from NC neighborhood conservation to UN Urban Neighborhood and RIU, residential intermediate urban.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Section 1.

At the City Council of the City of Fayville, Arkansas here by changes to zone classification of the property shown on the map, exhibit A and a legal description, exhibit B.

Both attached to the planning department's agenda memo from NC, neighborhood conservation to UN Urban Neighborhood, and RIU residential intermediate urban.

Section two that the City Council, the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas here by men's official zoning map of the city of Fayetteville reflects a zoning change provided in Section One.

Jonathan.

Thank you, Mayor.

This request is also in Southeast Fayeville, albeit closer to City Hall than the previous one.

It is currently developed with one single family dwelling on the northern portion of the property.

And in total, the the site is uh fairly irregular in shape, as you can see in the aerial image here, uh, with about 280 feet of street frontage along Willow Avenue before tapering down to about a 50 foot uh width, almost like an hourglass, and then expanding uh outward again uh to include almost uh an acre in area that backs up to several of the or the rear of several of the adjacent properties.

Uh the request is to rezone the property, uh the the majority portion of it totaling about 1.6 acres to RIU residential intermediate urban, with the balance of that uh totaling about 0.2 acres uh at the corner of fourth and willow to UN urban neighborhood.

Uh staff finds this request to be compatible.

Um the Walker Park area uh and this or this portion of the Walker Park area has a wide variety of both residential and non-residential uses, uh, which can be complemented by the RIU and UN zoning districts.

Uh we also feel that having a lower intensity or lower potential development within the interior of the property is appropriate, uh especially given it's the level of access to it and and how it abuts uh the rear of several adjacent properties.

Uh we also feel that it is consistent with the future land use map for designation for the property as residential neighborhood area.

RIU complements that by allowing uh several different housing types and the UN zone district at the corner of the property uh complements it as well with the uh corner uh adjacent to the church and and other properties at an intersection within the neighborhood.

Uh we feel that it also complements the Walker Park neighborhood plan uh uh to a greater extent.

Uh while that plan was uh rather aspirational in the sense that it it uh uh hope to see a street come through this area and and create a tighter street grid.

Uh the reality of street construction is very expensive and acquiring adjacent properties, uh and so we feel that the potential to develop this property with additional housing uh largely meets the that goals plan uh in this this portion of the the the neighborhood.

Uh as far as other issues go, um this will reduce the tree preservation requirement uh from 20% under NC to 15% under both UN and RIU, uh similar to the last item.

Uh there is a known wet weather downstream uh sewer capacity issue within the city's sewer model.

Uh but again, uh given the size of the property, uh we feel that uh this can be addressed uh on a larger level or that the level of development that's possible on the site will not uh exacerbate that to a great extent.

Uh we did receive some public comment uh alongside the original request for this property, which was to rezone the whole 1.8 acres of the property to UN urban neighborhood.

Uh there were concerns about the the the uh inconsistency of that request with the Walker Park plan and also the potential for the additional intensity and density, uh particular on the interior portion of the property.

Uh at least one member of the public uh did feel uh more at ease with the proposal that's in front of council, uh which is what staff proposed as an alternative to that original request to rezone the full site to UN urban neighborhood.

Uh the planning commission concurred with staff's proposal of an alternative uh and amended the request after receiving a verbal agreement with it from the applicant and forwarded it to city council by a vote of five to zero.

And with that, uh I can take any questions that council has uh, although Mayor West Bates does have a prepared presentation uh that uh the mayor of the council may want to wait before asking.

Great.

Okay, Mr.

Bates, if you'd like to go ahead and present, and then we can ask questions either to you or to Mr.

Kirth.

Good evening.

Thanks, Jonathan.

Uh I just have a few slides.

So the some of these slides I put together for planning commission when we originally talked about UN for the entire site, but you know, this slide is meant to show that you know the urban neighborhood zone is kind of scattered to the north and to the south of the existing site, and then there's downtown general zoning to the north and adjacent to the south.

Um, so we were kind of with staff's recommendation around where to draw the line to to put urban neighborhood and RIU.

We were a little bit conflicted about where to draw the line, um, but I can get into that a little bit.

Next slide, please.

Um one of the issues that we looked into was that my co-applicant owns the property um highlighted in red there, and so that's that's all zone DG.

And you know, the where you kind of draw the line between DG and UN or DG and RIU, it becomes a little bit arbitrary at a certain point when you own the adjacent property.

And so even going from you know, on those parcels to the south, doing like a simple property line adjustment in the future, if say the property to the north state RIU or you know, NC, you get into it just becomes kind of um a mess of when you have different use units allowed between those, where UN is kind of a lesser version of downtown general, um, lower lower height, a lot of the same units, and it made sense having that adjacent there.

Next slide, please.

Um, I've already kind of talked about this that we within the Walker Park neighborhood, we're seeing um the urban neighborhood zone kind of pop up more.

Next slide.

So this gets a little bit nuanced and why we don't exactly like RIU, but because of the lot width requirements of RIU of 18 feet, and because how minimum parking standards have changed for townhouses, what we're finding is that the kind of optimized layout on the like frontage, say along Willow in this example, if you have RIU turns out to be uh you know, 22 foot wide uh townhouse with two bedrooms, two parking spaces within a garage, and three stories high.

And that that would be allowed with RIU.

And the examples we're seeing of that, like in the top right around town, it's just not the type of product that like within the neighborhood we think fits, but it's easy to build because of the required parking and you know, the two bedrooms with two parking spaces.

Um, because you can't really build a one-bedroom, you can't really build a one-bedroom, one single car garage townhouse without having additional parking somewhere else on site.

Um, so you're the most efficient ends up being like two-bedroom, two-car garage, like the top right.

Something on the bottom right becomes a lot harder to build, which feels a little bit more comfortable, but it's hard to build that because all of the parking required has to be put somewhere else on the site.

Um, those could go to you know, three stories, but then they're less engaging at the street level because now you don't really have a front porch, you have a um you know garage in the back with some kind of entry in the front.

So that hopefully everybody followed that.

Uh next slide, please.

Um I think that staff's recommendation of using that kind of corner parcel and and having that as urban neighborhood.

That was it's an easy recommendation because you know, there was no legal description provided for any other option.

Um, it's easy to just take that.

Um, we didn't provide any legal other legal descriptions to to staff, and we didn't have any discussion about that really until the week before planning commission.

And so we provided two options that we're considering, and we we want to discuss more with staff as we get the legal descriptions.

We still don't have the legal descriptions for these yet.

Um, option one is kind of including the the existing house and all all basically all the frontage along willow, but limiting how far back it goes into the lot, and that would be like option one, and that that's to show the urban neighborhood portion of it.

So urban neighborhood kind of at the corner, and then the remainder in the southeast would be RIU as staff recommended.

And then next slide, please.

And option two is less preferable, but it's just adding that little bit of that panhandle south of what staff recommended to for the urban neighborhood portion.

Our main concerns here is that if we did want to activate that corner and do some kind of neighborhood commercial, um you you do have non-residential uses across the street.

Um it's a little bit limiting potential and can open a can of worms if you don't quite have enough enough room there.

Um we think adding those two parcels to the north, it's still a pretty small site, so intensity is naturally limited.

Um, and we do agree, like keeping the back as as residential makes sense, um, even if you know it's not our favorite zone.

Um that's all I have.

Um we would like to ask to have this left on the first reading tonight, just so we can get those legal descriptions and have more discussion with staff and kind of we would like to get you know staff's opinion and um you know have more just more discussion before the next council meeting.

Great.

Thank you.

So your request is to have it left on the first reading.

That's correct.

Okay, great.

Do we have questions for Mr.

Bates or for Mr.

Kirth?

Okay.

Then seems like we will leave it there and move on.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

Yes, thank you.

Do we have any members of the public that would like thank you?

They would like to comment on this rezoning.

Okay.

So now we will leave it on the on the first reading.

Thank you for catching that, Sarah.

Um, item C4, an ordinance to rezone the property described in RZN 2025-67 for approximately 2.42 acres, located at 660 South Crossover Road in Ward 1 from RSF 4, residential single family, four units per acre, and C2 Thoroughfare commercial, rezoning to UT Urban Thoroughfare.

Kit.

Thank you, Mayor.

Be it ordained by the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, Section One, at the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, here by changes its own classification of the property shown on the map, exhibit A and the legal description, exhibit B, those attached to the planning department's agenda memo from RSF4, residential single family four units per acre, and C2, Thoroughfare Commercial to UT Urban Thoroughfare.

Section two, that's the city council of the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, here by men's official zoning map of the city of Fayetteville to reflect a zoning change provided in section one.

Mr.

Kirth.

Thank you, Mayor.

This request is also in Southeast Fayetteville, albeit much further from City Hall than either the last two items.

More specifically, it is includes about two and a half acres uh north of the intersection of crossover and Huntsville Roads.

If you're familiar with the gas station at the northeast corner of those two state highways, this is one lot to the north of it, and it's currently developed with a single family home accessing directly on the crossover road.

Uh the request is to take it from its current split zone status, uh, which it is partially zoned C2 thoroughfare commercial and partially zoned RSF4 residential single family four units breaker and rezone the entirety of the property to UT Urban Thoroughfare.

Uh staff does recommend in favor of the requests of the UT Urban Thoroughfare Zoning District allows both single or both residential and non-residential uses, which can be found in a variety of different forms in this area.

And we feel that development of the property under the UT zoning district would complement that in either way.

When it comes to additional issues that staff considered, uh this would change the tree preservation on the property today, which is split, just like the property zoning designation, uh, which is 25%, 15% for RSF4 and C2, taking it to 15% for to UT.

Additionally, and perhaps uh as significantly as any other consideration that is worth acknowledging that the city's current zoning designation reflects this property's uh previous life uh along crossover road when it was a two-lane uh highway.

Uh crossover has become very uh much a much more substantial transportation corridor in recent years, and we feel that that merits uh rezoning the property to allow much higher uh density and flexibility and uses.

Uh we received no public comment on the item.

Uh staff and the planning commission are recommending in favor of it.

Uh I can take any questions that the council has.

And Mayor, I believe uh members of the Davis family are here if the council has any questions.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Uh, do we have any questions for Mr.

Kirth or for uh members of the applicant's family?

Okay.

Then Miss uh sorry, uh almost said Mr.

Ms.

Turk.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, you know, Jonathan, I'm kind of struck by this um that to the north, there's RSF4.

And I know we usually try and have some kind of um you know intermediate zoning type, uh, you know, so that there is a a staggered uh density.

And I don't know if that uh property owner, I surely they were notified uh of this uh proposed rezoning.

I mean, we're going from a very low uh density RCF4 to urban thoroughfare, which is about as high as we can get or close to the highest amount.

So I I have some concerns about that.

Um just wondered if that was part of your discussion with um your other colleagues.

It was.

Uh certainly the planning group looked at that, and it is uh unusual as you go north from Huntsville Road along Crossover, it very quickly declines from commercial, very intense commercial densities to very large lot residential properties.

Uh, we felt that between the larger lots uh that you find on crossover, which creates its own natural buffer, and the inherent uh 15-foot setbacks, it's a higher setback in UT when you're next to single family property uh that puts staff out of use.

Additionally, as an interesting note, staff did receive a request to rezone the property to the north uh in our last round of submittals.

So assuming the city council or the planning commission forwards that to you all, the city council will be seeing that in the future.

So I I think that is a uh very much an indicator that that property owner does not have concerns with this request because it's it's uh similar one to what you see tonight.

Um so just to follow up, but could you um kind of enlighten us about what that request would be?

Would it be also UT?

I believe so.

Give me a moment just to remind me, sir, it's been a week since I looked at it.

Apologies for not having that up my fingertips.

While you're looking through that, are there other I mean you have a question?

It's probably for Jonathan as well, so it might not do any.

We might ought to just I I realize there's not the that a lot of sense in holding up.

Yes, Jonathan, go ahead.

I do have an answer.

There that request is to rezone to C2.

Staff has not evaluated at this point, and it has not gone before the commission yet, or it has also not been publicly notified yet either.

So there's always the possibility that people will amend their requests in the lead up to the and the lead up to public notification.

Once notification is made, we require the request to stay the same until the public hearing.

So you said C2?

Yes.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh Jonathan, um our 2040 plan, it is this uh like the intersection there crossover and Huntsville Road.

Is that considered like a a uh a node like a a tier one or tier two node?

It is.

So that's an area where we would want to see um kind of more mixed use and and and kind of like uh building that little city node there so that uh we have services and that's correct.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Miss Moore.

Um so UT always just gives me a little pause just because of all the use units that are in it.

Um I appreciate that it's form-based, but especially use unit 17 and 18, and I think this sits right beside gas station, I believe, in that area, possibly, if I'm recalling correctly.

Um, is there any possibility that the applicant would be open or we wouldn't cause any issue if we were uh to strike out use units 17 and 18?

Mr.

Williams can speak more to this, but there is not a way for the council to amend or condition a zoning request.

The applicant would have to offer a bill of assurance to that effect voluntarily.

The bill, any bill of assurance is supposed to be offered by the applicant rather than requested by the city council.

Okay.

Okay, so just for my colleagues, I think that's something I'd like to visit in the future is looking at the use unit 17 and 18 and the UT and potentially moving that to a CUP process.

Just for clarity for those that may not have it pulled up, can you speak to what 17 and 18 are?

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, use unit 17 is transportation, trades and services.

And correct me if I'm wrong, Jonathan, because it's been a minute.

I looked at this over the last couple of years.

Is that a car wash of 17?

Uh that is correct, yes.

Sorry.

And then uh then use unit 18 as gasoline service stations and drive-in drive-through restaurants.

Um, yeah, that's another one.

I think we've had a lot of discussion about, you know, what is our saturation point on those.

So just wanting to potentially bring forward to look at us having an additional uh regulatory body to really kind of look at and evaluate the compatibility for just one more of those types of uses.

All right.

Thank you.

Um, do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on this item?

Okay.

Come on ahead.

Please state your name.

Council members, mayor.

My name is Philip Davis.

I'm the applicant.

Okay.

So we we actually originally, like he was talking about with the neighboring property, we submitted to go C2, but the planning commission recommended it if they said that UT fit their growth plans for the future.

So they recommended that we change that to urban thoroughfare, and that's what we did.

So that's what we're at.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Okay.

Do we have any members of the public that would like to speak on this item?

Okay.

Seems we have a couple that have called in, Keith.

We do not.

Oh, okay.

We do not.

Okay.

So I will bring it uh back to the council, starting with Mr.

Stafford and then Mr.

Burton.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I think when we look at our future growth map and the 2040 plan, the that this area is is a uh a tear center and and should be developed as such.

And so I think that this request is appropriate.

I do understand the concerns of of council member more.

Um, and maybe that's something we need to address.

Uh uh looking forward uh about those specific uses.

Uh I I do agree with that.

I'd like to kind of get those types of uses separated out from most of our zoning and have them be more conditional.

But um that said, uh, I do think this is an appropriate request.

I think it matches our our future land use plans.

It'll I I believe if it developed as urban thoroughfare that'll help us uh create uh the territory center that we hope it becomes or that I hope it becomes, and so I will be in support.

Thank you.

Mr.

Bernard.

I was just gonna make a motion to suspend the rules, go third funner second.

Okay, great.

We have a motion and a second to suspend the rules.

Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Turk?

Yes, Minister Jones, yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes, Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore, yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

And you're in to rezone the property described and rezoning petition, RZN 2025-67 for approximately 2.42 acres, located at 660 South Crossover Road in Ward 1.

From RSF4 residential single family, four units per acre, and C2 Thoroughfare commercial to UT Urban Thoroughfare.

Okay, great.

Without any further comments, uh Clerk Paxton, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Okay, that brings us to so that passes.

So there you go.

Sorry, I realized I should probably make that clear.

Thank you for being here.

And that brings us to item C5, an ordinance to rezone the property described in rezoning petition RZN 2025-7.3 for approximately 0.3 acres located at 1149 Southwest Avenue and Ward 1 from RMF 24 residential multifamily 24 units per acre to RIU, residential intermediate urban.

Thank you, Mayor.

Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Fairville, Arkansas Section 1.

At the City Council, the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas, hereby changes zone classification of the property shown on the map, exhibit A, and a legal description.

Exhibit B, those attached to the planning department's agenda memo from RMF 24 residential multifamily 24 units per acre to RIU residential intermediate urban.

And section two, that's the city council, the city of Fayetteville, Arkansas, here by amends the official zoning map of the city of Fayetteville to reflect the zoning change provided in section one.

Mr.

Kurth.

Thank you, Mayor.

This request shifts from Southeast Fayetteville to due south of where we're sitting today.

Uh is on the west side of West Avenue between 11th Street to the north and 13th Street to the south.

It includes just under a third of an acre.

So if you had the opportunity to visit between agenda session and tonight, you saw that the property was maybe in a bit of a disturbed state where that uh building was recently taken down.

The request as noted is to rezone the property from RMF 24 residential multifamily 24 units per acre to RIU residential intermediate urban.

Staff is in favor of the request.

The RU zoning district allows single two, three, and four family dwellings, uh, which can be found uh in a variety of instances in this area, uh in addition to other uh uh residential housing types and non-residential uses as you approach school avenue to the east uh from a long-range plan standpoint.

Uh we found this request to be similarly uh appropriate.

The residential neighborhood area, uh depending on the context, is intended to promote a diversity of housing types with a wide variety of infill attributes on this site, uh including access to both transit services.

Uh we feel that the allowance for additional housing opportunities is fully appropriate here.

Uh then in terms of other issues we look up, uh this would re uh reduce the amount of tree preservation required uh on the property from 20 to 15 percent uh as was asked about or noted at the agenda session by councilmember Turk.

This property is uh abutted to the west side uh by undeveloped alley right away.

Uh while this is not usable today, uh it could potentially afford the opportunity to subdivide the property uh if that alley was developed all the way back north through 11th Street or 13th Street to the south.

Uh as with some other uh items you saw in midtown Fayetteville.

Uh this property does have a known modeled uh wet weather search capacity issue downstream, but also similar to the other items given the size of the property.

Uh, we don't have any uh particular concerns about the development and that it may aggravate that that issue.

We've received no public comment to date.

Uh staff is recommending in favor, and the planning commission forwarded the city council by unanimous vote, uh, recommending uh you all approve it as well.

Uh Mayor West Bates is the applicant for this item as well, and he does not have a prepared presentation, but either of us can stand for questions.

Okay, great.

Do we have questions from the council on this item?

Okay.

Do we have questions for members of the public?

Okay, I'm gonna bring it back to the council.

Um Mr.

Stafford.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, is that right?

Oh, okay.

Um, when I said do we have questions for members of the public, and Miss Moore would like me to clarify, we also accept comments for members of the public.

Okay.

All right.

So hearing no public comment, uh Mr.

Stafford, please go ahead.

Thank you.

And this is in ward one.

And I was a little surprised I hadn't heard anything from the public, so I was uh proactive and reached out to uh a neighbor I know a couple doors to the south.

Um, and she was familiar with the rezoning request uh and in favor of it.

Um so I just wanted to share that.

Um you think it is an appropriate request, and and with that, uh I will make a motion that we suspend the rules and move to the third and final reading.

Second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

Clark Packson, will you please call the roll?

Ms.

Turk?

Yes.

Minister Jones?

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford, yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna.

Yes.

Ms.

Butch.

Yes.

In order to rezone the property, described in rezoning petition RZN 2025-73 for approximately 0.3 acres, located at 1149 Southwest Avenue in Ward 1 from RMF 24 residential multifamily 24 units per acre to RIU residential intermediate urban.

Okay, Clerk Paxon, will you please call the roll for the final vote?

Ms.

Turner?

Yes.

Minister Jones.

Yes.

Mr.

Stafford?

Yes.

Dr.

Jones?

Yes.

Ms.

Moore?

Yes.

Mr.

Berna?

Yes.

Ms.

Bunch.

Yes.

Great.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

Before we adjourn, do we have any announcements from the chief of staff or the city clerk?

Kara?

Go ahead.

Just as a reminder, um, the city is currently accepting applications for board committee and commission vacancies.

Applications must be submitted by 5 p.m.

on Friday, February 20th.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Mercedes.

Yeah, I have a couple.

The City of Fayetteville Environmental Action Committee is taking nominations for the 2026 Mayor's Environmental Stewardship Award through March 1st.

And then the City of Fayetteville is also seeking nominations for its 2026 Historic Preservation Awards.

And those uh are due April 3rd.

And then a reminder to all council, we are moving our March 3rd City Council meeting to March 5th due to the March 3rd elections.

That's all I have.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

And now we're adjourned.