The Fayetteville City Council met on Tuesday, July 21, 2026, for a regular meeting that lasted approximately five hours. The agenda included a resolution to waive appeal fees for a McDonald's development, two major rezoning requests (Dean Solomon Road and others), a new ordinance regulating non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), and several consent agenda items. The meeting saw extensive public comment, with many residents speaking on the Dean Solomon rezoning and the NDA ordinance. Key votes included a 4-4 tie on the appeal fee waiver (failed), a 5-4 vote on the Dean Solomon rezoning after the mayor broke the tie, and a 6-2 vote on the amended NDA ordinance.
Resolution to Waive Appeal Fees for McDonald's Development: Councilmember Teresa Turk introduced a resolution to waive the $667 appeal fee for residents appealing the McDonald's project on Mount Comfort Road. The fee had been increased from $333 as part of a city fee study. Staff explained that the appeal fee covers staff time and public notification. Council debated the precedent, with some arguing that the fee is a barrier to ordinary citizens. The council voted 4-4 (Stafford, Weedaker, Berna, Bunch no; Jones, Moore, Turk, Minister Jones yes), and Mayor Holland declined to vote, so the resolution failed.
Dean Solomon Rezoning (RZN 2026-15): The proposal sought to rezone 36.2 acres northwest of Dean Solomon Road and West Van Eyck Drive from RSF-4 and CPZD to RMF-12 and RSF-8. Staff recommended approval. The applicant offered a bill of assurance to cap density at 8 units per acre on the 9.6-acre parcel, increase tree preservation to 25%, and prohibit multifamily (allowing up to quadplexes). The council heard extensive public comment, mostly in opposition. A motion to split the parcels failed for lack of a second. The council then voted to accept the revised bill of assurance (7-1, Moore opposed). After a motion to suspend rules and go to third reading passed, the final vote was 4-4 (Stafford, Moore, Berna, Bunch yes; Jones, Weedaker, Turk, Minister Jones no). Mayor Holland broke the tie by voting yes, citing the risk of the current PZD zoning allowing less desirable development. The rezoning passed 5-4.
NDA Ordinance (Transparency for Non-Disclosure Agreements): Councilmember Sarah Moore introduced an ordinance to prohibit the city from entering into NDAs that restrict disclosure of public records. The council debated an amendment by Councilmember Turk, which required NDAs to include automatic termination when the project enters the public process, and approval by both the mayor and city attorney. The amendment passed unanimously. After public comment, the council voted 6-2 (Moore and Minister Jones opposed) to pass the amended ordinance. The emergency clause passed unanimously, making it effective immediately.
Streamside Protection Zone Amendment (Tanglewood Branch): An ordinance to amend the streamside protection map to allow removal of 279 linear feet of Tanglewood branch for a mixed-use development at Center and Greg. Staff recommended denial, but the planning commission had forwarded it unanimously. The applicant presented revised plans with an additional floor and parking stackers. The council left the item on first reading after debate.
Tree Preservation Vacation (Dean Solomon): An ordinance to vacate 3,320 square feet of tree preservation easement at 2434 North Dean Solomon, contingent on dedicating a new 12,915-square-foot easement and planting 46 mitigation trees. The council voted unanimously to approve after suspending rules.
Rezoning at 518 North Mission Boulevard (RZN 2026-20): An ordinance to rezone 0.20 acres from RSF-4 to RI-12 to allow a duplex or single-family home on a non-conforming lot. Staff recommended approval. The council voted unanimously to pass.
Rezoning at 2445 North Humont (RZN 2026-21): An ordinance to rezone 3.78 acres from RA and NSG to RSF-8. Staff recommended denial, citing inconsistency with long-range plans. The planning commission had forwarded it with a split vote. The council left the item on first reading after the applicant expressed willingness to discuss a bill of assurance or modified proposal.
Rezoning at 1845 West Weddington (RZN 2026-18): An ordinance to rezone 0.55 acres from RSF-4 to RIU (residential intermediate urban). The planning commission had denied it 1-6 due to drainage concerns. The council left the item on first reading after hearing public comment and testimony from the applicant, who offered to work with neighbors on drainage solutions.
All consent agenda items were approved.
Okay, good evening, everyone, and I would like to call the Tuesday, July 21st meeting of the Fayetteville, Arkansas City Council to order. Courtney, will you please call the roll? Mr. Stafford? Here. Dr. Jones? Here. Miss Moore? Here. Mr. Weedaker? Here. Mr. Berna? Here. Miss Bunch. Ms. Turk? Here. Minister Jones? President. Mayor Ron. Here. Please join me as we recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay. Ms. Mayor Holland. Thank you very much, Mayor. My apologies for this late request. We're actually kind of under a time constraint. It was an administrative decision. And there are several residents that would like to appeal this. And during the appeal process, we figured out that they were going to be charged with our new appeal fees. They were going to be charged $667. And that seemed a little excessive. And so before you is a uh resolution to waive those fees and allow Ms. Hollander to uh go forward in asking for a um a public meeting and review by the planning commission. And that is for the proposed McDonald's. It's over there on on Mount Comfort. So I'm happy to take any any questions. Okay. Um or Jonathan, can you also provide a little bit of staff insight into the process and what happened and where we are now before we and then we'll take questions from the count council? Certainly. Uh well, I don't have the dates immediately in front of me. Over the course of the last year, a McDonald's was proposed on Mount Comfort Road. It's in a zoning district that requires a conditional use permit. So the item did go before the planning commission for conditional use consideration where it was approved. So that was the first public hearing that the item had. Uh it subsequently went to the planning commission for consideration of some development variances uh where uh those were also heard as a second public hearing, and then subsequently uh the project was eligible for administrative approval, which uh staff completed and put on the planning commission's agenda for this last Monday, uh which represents the starting point where a resident can file an appeal uh if they have concerns or feel it meets one of our six standards for denial.