Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-02404 ApplicationAPPLICATION FOR REZONING TO THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION: FIRE D ISTR ICT NO. b P. C. 19 P. C. DENIED 19 aw BD. of DIR.APPROVED: 19 BD. of D IR.DEN IED 19 ORDINANCE NO. ZONING CASE NO. Z Filing Datee 19 Application is hereby made to the Little Rock Board of Directors of Little Rock, Arkansas, through the Planning Commission pursuant to Arkansas law on"City Planning, Ac.t 186 of 1957, Acts of Arkansas and Section 23 of the Little Rock Zoning Ordinance No. 5420 as amended,- petitioning mended,petitioning for a rezoning of the following described area: A part of Tract "B" Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock, Arkansas containing 14. 164 Acres, more or less, as more fully described on the attached. Title to this property is vested in: William H. Thom son It is desired that the boundaries shown on the District Map be amended and that this area be reclassified from the present "A _Single Family District to �� _•' artment in accordance with the attached de eio ment lan Distri t. JV►IENDED $y APPi.IGaJT To '6 2es10i� c� a� OGT. 28 197ri Present Use of Property: vacant unim roved • �► I Desired Use of Property: for development in accordance/the attached development plan. M*iWYWYrX-3 ( there are no) deed restrictions pertaining to the intended use of this property. The filing fee, required by Ordinance No. 9455 will be paid at the City Collector's Office on the filing and acceptance of this application by the Zoning Office. It is understood that notice of the public hearing hereon before the Little Rock Planning Commission will be published at least 15 days prior to said hearing in a daily newspaper as required by Act 186 of the 1957 Acts of Arkansas and Section 23 of said Ordinance, and that notice of preliminary hearing before the Commission (PC -18) must be circulated by the applicant to all other parties in interest, including owners of land within 200 feet of the boundary of the area under consideration as required by the rules of the.Commission, and that the cost of these notices shall be borne by the applicant. DATE: 10-5-70 Form ZA 2-17-69 (600) OWNER Will�� H. Thomason or By (� - AGENT C. V. Barnes, Agent ADDRESS: 733 Pyramid Building, Little Rock, Ark. PHONE: 372-2021 Tract No. 6 - /-"2401- Western end of Leatrice Drive and Alvin Street From: "A" -One- amily District To . "B" -Residence District Mr. C. V. Barnes, representing William H. Thompson, the applicant, was present. There were approximately 50 protestants in attendance. Mr. Venhaus prefaced the Staff recommendations with a statement that it would be well for everyone to understand what the issue here is in terms of the proposed zoning and development of the property. He said the applicant proposes to take this piece of property before the Board of Adjustment using the device in the Zoning Ordinance which allows that Board on the recommendation of the Planning Commission on a development plan to vary or to grant a specific sort of use and development of a piece of property. It would be his intention to submit a development plan to the Planning Commission for its consideration. A recommenda- tion would then be made to the Board of Adjustment who would consider a develop- ment plan which would be based on a single-family zoning classification of the -5- Planning Commission Minutes - November 5, 1970 property but which would allow structures other than single family dwellings. The format of the development proposed is for townhouses with common walls and cluster parking area. So far as the Ordinance is concerned this device has been available since 1937, but this is the first time to our knowledge that it has ever been used in this capacity. There is more to the issue here than the zoning on the property. It is a development concept to .be applied to the property that is more significant than the zoning application we are going to deal with. The concept submitted here and the issues that we are going to deal with are broader than this particular piece of property. We have an entirely new kind of concept, a new application of the zoning ordinance, and it is somewhat complex. The problems at hand do not lend themselves to short paragraph explana- tion of the issue, and certainly they do not lend themselves to a "yes" or "no" kind of response to the Staff. It is important to us, and to you, and the developer and people who are interested in this application that they understand the reasoning behind the position the Staff has taken and we want to share this with you. The recommendation is somewhat long and we have covered more issued than what is at hand here. The Staff recommendation is as follows: "Staff reviews of the zoning and develop- ment proposed for the subject site have persuaded us that the applicants original request for "D" -Apartment zoning is totally inappropriate. The potential densities available with "D" zoning and the absence of development controls to assure protection of adjacent residential areas make "D" zoning inadvisable and the Staff could not support the original application as filed. On the other hand, the development concept proposed, which includes cluster development, common parking areas, generous open space, optimum use of the topography, and substantial setbacks from existing structures, has much to commend it, and is deserving of Staff support if densities are maintained at a reasonable level, and maximum protection is afforded to existing development in the area. The site in question has the following characteristics. It is fourteen acres in area and irregular in shape. It has five existing streets developed into its boundaries. There is a 50 foot wide water line easement traversing the site from the northwest corner to the mid -point of the south line. There are substantial deposits of rock which need to be excavated for utilities; and there is an over- all difference in elevation of 60 feet from the low to high point. We do not suggest that these factors make it impossible to develop the site for single-family use. We are of the opinion, however, that the site characteristics are such that a free design, cluster approach would best take advantage of the character of the site, and provide the optimum in open space, accommodation to the grades and utilization of prime building sites. The Staff is of the opinion that the City of Little Rock must contain a variety of available housing to accommodate the life style,space needs, and income levels of its residents. We do not believe that all families wishing to live in apart- ments should be relegated to large high density apartment complexes along major streets. We believe that people who prefer to live in apartments should have housing available in areas which provide the amenities of low density, open space, proximity to schools and low traffic volumes. In short, the prime urban land resources available for development, affording the greatest amenities and desirable characteristics, should sustain not only single-family dwellings,:but townhouses, condominiums, garden apartments, and row houses. Planning Commission Minutes November 5. 1970 r. The rising cost of land, labor and building materials, coupled with increasing consumer demand for efficiency and amenities, dictate a more efficient use of land and a broad variety of housing types. The alternative is to provide single- family development for only the small percentage of the housing market that can afford it, and relegate the remainder to high density complexes and mobile home parks. We do not suggest by these remarks that apartment complexes should be allowed at any location, regardless of density or arrangement. We are expressing the belief that the critical and relevant consideration for evaluating the appropriateness of residential land use should be density, circulation, open space, traffic volumes, amenities, potential impact on surrounding areas, and optimum use of the special characteristics of a site. No development should be pre-empted or refused consideration solely because it does not follow a traditional single-family format. The broad category of apartments applied to all residential units which are not detached single-family, tells us nothing about the appropriateness of such uses for a given area, or the quality of the housing environment proposed. If the rights of existing and future single-family property owners are protected with procedural safeguards, if reasonable consideration is given to such factors as utilities, traffic circulation and volumes, open space, setbacks, protection of adjacent development, and if densities are maintained in keeping with surround- ing zoning and development, the Staff believes that favorable consideration should be given to residential development that departs from the orthodox side - yard format of single-family development. The applicant has reduced the original zoning request from "D"=Apartment to "B" - Single -family. In the Staff's judgment the 8.7 units per acre allowed by "B zoning is not an unreasonable density and would not have an adverse effect on utility loads, traffic volumes, open space or land coverage. After street dedica- tions the site will accommodate approximately 112 units, a reasonable development for the subject site which can provide an optimum relationship between floor area, open space, parking and recreation areas." Mr. C. V. Barnes, on behalf of Mr. Thompson, the owner of the property, stated that in his opinion the Staff's recommendation states the position that Mr. Thompson took in trying to present this development plan for this property. Mr. Wassell stated that regardless of the decision of the Commission today, he would like the record to show that it not be considered as the establisment of a pattern or the establishment of a precedent toward this concept, that for future presentations it should be the basis for studying sites under this concept because each site is different. Mr. Hogan commented if he voted against this petition, he would be willing tomorrow to votefor the concept on a piece of property that is right for it, as in his opinion this concept is right for an appropriate location. Mr. Edward Lester, attorney, appeared on behalf of the protestants to this petition, filed a petition signed by 381 persons, which read in part. "it is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in -7- Planning Commission Minutes November 5,1970 reliance on the existing "A" -Single-family zoning and the maintenance of such zoning on a consistent basis." bir.Claude Brasseale, realtor and planner, was present in opposition stating that the Little Rock Zoning Ordinance was written prior to the idea of planned unit concept and therefore does not embody that concept in the provisions, and that the petition under consideration is to the utilization of "B" Single=family density in terms of a planned unit development. Mr. Don Stacks, an adjacent property owner, was present stating that he lived on a street which would feed directly into this project, and situated right beside it. In essence he said this is an apartment complex being developed in an "A" Single-family area, and asked the Commission not to rezone this property. Mrs. E. B. Ward, Jr., 8114 Lowell Lane, was present stating that they built in Sheraton Park Subdivision because it was a quiet neighborhood, and was represented to them to be a single-family area. Mr. Lester repeated that he respectfully requested that the petition be denied because of the character of this neighborhood which is set on all three sides and no need for any change in the existing zoning which would automatically change the character of the neighborhood that is already set. Mr. Barnes read a letter of approval of the peitition from Bishop Albert L. Fletcher. In answer to Mr. Lester, Mr. Barnes said you cannot develop a final development plan until you know what the zoning classification of the property is. Mrs. Carrie Maines, 1302 Biscayne Drive, was also present in opposition. Mrs. Gloria Jones, 8110 Lowell Lane, was present in opposition saying that when they moved into this area they were trying to get away from the conditions of noise, intense traffic, and they were told that this would be a quiet single- family residential area. Mr. Venhaus said the rights of the property owners would be preserved assuming the developer pursues the matter of a hearing before the Board of Adjustment by the usual advertisement of the public hearing and notification to all interested property owners in the area. "The idea that this type of development cannot be located anywhere approximate to single-family dewllings is not a valid idea and I would take issue with it. The matter of traffic circulation through a resi- dential area is a very significant one when you are talking about great differences in density. However, if you are talking about a reasonable density level - a density level that is compatible with single-family areas, then I don't think it makes a great deal of difference whether a car comes from an apartment, from a townhouse, or from a cluster, or a single-family dwelling. By the time it got to Biscayne, I doublt very much if you would know whether it was from an apart- ment dwelling or a single-family dwelling. lie have not argued that it could not possibly be developed for single-family dwellings, but I do take serious issue that the property is not appropriate for free design. approach. The grades on the property, the prime building sites would lend themselves beautifully to a cluster type of concept. The grades greatly favor this kind of location because Planning Commission Minutes November 5,1970 the elevations could be used to good advantage in placing development below the visibility of single-family dwellings in the area. I do not think the site is incompatible for planned unit development. I think it is the very kind of property that we ought to be considering for this kind of free design approach. Noise is a function of density o function of the number of people, and it seems to me that again we are talking about whether or not the residential densities are compatible. Certainly the kind of thing we have talked about would not generate more noise than any other kind of residential housing." Mrs. Elaine Walls, 8111 Alvin bane, was present and stated that her property is adjacent to this property and they bought seven months ago with the assurance that it would be "A" -Single-family. Mr. Lyon commented that the applicant would still have the right under the law to come back another time and request a freer form of development than the rigid one -family per lot development that we most often know no matter how the Commission voted. It would be a fully advertised hearing as this one has been. However, the applicant could not re -submit the same petition for at least a year, if the petition were denied. Mr. Putnam made a motion that we accept the Staff's recommendation and rezone the property to "B" -Single-family classification. This motion dies for lack of a second. Mr. Lyon made a motion that the issue be voted on as stated, that the rezoning request for "B" -Single-family be approved. The motion was seconded, but failed for lack of sufficient affirmatives votes. The Chairman announced that the applica- tion had failed for lack of the necessary affirmative votes. LI I ILL HULK HA -1I rti - If Nil 45 /p ARK L/ I A01 Ian' 10 GAS � 124 I - V yl0 R T ` 9 � R BiLIJNGSLEi o jCATE /3 5 p Y "j�r�'+. IEVgNS CANTRFLL HEIGHTS COMM SUB H „ y�' 9 a #.• �3 7 - HORN BpF. w•3. . xas A aa. G E r 3 0Ig z 14 s JERiVIGA1 a 14 a {v I i e30 _ 3Sb. �. 5 f1•. ~� r �.F 1 NEWTON OL " AOOI T I "� x ROCU 7AC• TR7_1 ^ / ' D ' I ` •r`•Cll iY TRACT Cd53,-r LT - �[- SIDNEY THOM r T � � 4-;��/d T •'� C '�'Y ,may �• y- •� �+ �y�.ry • V WILLIE M- $RC7V9fHs' c 1 ��- EYueIRE rya rl x w t�� II i C NSYOPAL3ERT L. FLETCHE'Ft A'3 -s-_ ' 111 - •+ � s 11iWA - - AE i. BF'EE SHERATON PARK LOWELt LN. � 3 r COVE -^offmin SIT FORMAN LAKE D EE &&AAV 1 _ I NA 7 r r ez a - Et)` CHATHAM CT CHATHAM DR. /315 \ :i8 .,/•4 �$ °� 7' !_ pl CA � 157. 133 e66 I - 116 P41 F �� 60 F 77 9 10 E rt.. � _ _ ' 14�r - i•L- - HARMDN DR. c a A& r I r f0 ; f Iice. ' z 4 16 • !ad I S--TO -� aT-h y Q f ~ FOIST CIGF71S'TtAt! GNIIRCN 166 VE 76Z' � .r.•,x f �� � �� =, SQA {7 �. t-� r tri.A70-1$ kJLL /i/ _ .9Sr- /s z /dz Ile 7% 4 t f� EVERGREEN 1 ' SAiIKjSTItlR� 1:'f, TI4ACT 'A i !, zn0 yoI los �ro 41 � � 340 f Y,ap LANE PAMELA {lryryylE � ,ryk3 .�'/ 307 3oB 321 /LS /37 ISO X19 Z® `• IZ5 d 5- 650 � - � 0 "4.311 � 316. J /o fG a � /36 a %05 300 301 34 LOREYTA C1R. zE 3M 3/s a 5} L£AWDDO REVD- /lo I cp SQ CHURCH z66 I 4s 276 /W / 4 378 2.7/ Z,74 /3s STAFF RECOMMENDATION 2-2404 Staff reviews of the zoning and development proposed for the subject site have persuaded us that the applicants original request for "D" apartment zoning is totally inappropriate. The potential densities available with "D" zoning and the absence of development controls to assure protection of adjacent residential areas make "D" zoning inadvisable and the staff could not support the original application as filed. On the other hand, the development concept proposed, which includes cluster development, common parking areas, generous open space, optimum use of the topography, and substantial setbacks from existing structures, has much to commend it, and is deserving of staff support if densities are maintained at a reasonable level, and maximum protection is afforded to existing development in the area. The site in question has the following characteristics --it is fourteen acres in area and irregular in shape; it has five existing streets developed into its boundaries; there is a 50' wide water line easement traversing the site from the northwest corner to the mid -point of the south line; there are substantial deposits of rock which need excavated for utilities; and there is an over-all difference in elevation of 601 from the low to high point. We do not suggest that these factors make it impossible to develop the site for single family use We are of the opinion, however, that the site characteristics are such that a free design, cluster approach would best take advantage of the character of the site, and provide the optimum in open space, accommodation to the grades and utilization of prime building sites. The staff is of the opinion that the City of Little Rock must contain a variety of available housing to accommodate the life style, space needs, and income levels of its residents. We do not believe that all families wishing to live in apartments should be relegated to large high density apartment complexes along major streets. We believe that people who prefer to live in apartments should have housing available in areas which provide the amenities of low density, open space, proximity to schools and low traffic volumes. In short, the prime urban land resources available for development, affording the greatest amenities and desirable characteristics, should sustain not only single family dwellings, but townhouses, condominiums, garden apartments, and row houses. The rising cost of land, labor and building materials, coupled with increasing consumer demand for efficiency and amenities, dictate a more efficient use of land and a broad variety of housing types. The alternative is to provide single family development for only the small percentage of the housing market that can afford it, and relegate the remainder to high density complexes and mobile home parks. We do not suggest by these remarks that apartment complexes should be allowed at any location, regardless of density or arrangement. We are express- ing a belief that the critical and relevant consideration for evaluating the appropriateness of residential land use should be density, circulation, open space, traffic volumes, amenities, potential impact on surrounding areas, and STAFF RECOMMENDATION Z-2404 Page Two optimum use of the special characteristics of a site. No development should be pre-empted or refused consideration solely because it does not follow a tradition- al single family format. The broad category of apartments applied to all resi- dential units which are not detached single family, tells us nothing about the appropriateness of such uses for a given area, or the quality of the housing en- vironment proposed. If the rights of existing and future single family property owners are protected with procedural safeguards, if reasonable consideration is given to such factors as utilities, traffic circulation and volumes, open space, set -backs, protection of adjacent development, and if densities are maintained in keeping with surrounding zoning and development, the staff believes that favorable consid- eration should be given to residential development that departs from the orthodox side -yard format of single family development. The applicant has reduced the original zoning request from "D" apart- ment to "B" single family. In the staff's judgement the 8.7 units per acre allowed by "B" zoning is not an unreasonable density and would not have an adverse effect on utility loads, traffic volumes, open space or land coverage. After street dedications the site will accommodate approximately 112 units, a reasonable develop- ment for the subject site which can provide an optimum relationship between floor area, open space, parking and recreation areas. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D YtkOPMENT THIRD FLOOR CITY HALL FR 4-431 Planning Division LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAAN Permits & Inspections Division Traffic Division 72201 0. V. �S 733 Pj • Dear Res Case No. Z Address: Public Works Real Estate This is to Advise you that in connection with your application for a change in zoning from District to_= District, the following action was taken by the Planning Commission -at its meeting on A 1 Q � a ti � (a) -q� Denied. (b) Approved as applied for. (c) Approved - provided: (d) Rezoned to (e) Deferred (f) — n ordinance effecting this rezoningto-tfte Board of Directors for its consideration at its meeting Yours very truly, DEPARMENT OF ODMU N ITY DEVELOPMENT Don R. Venhaus, Director 7-7-70 250 October 27, 1970 Little Rock Planning Commission City Hall Little Rock, Arkansas Re: Zone Case No. Z2404 Gentlemen: On October 5, 1967 I made application for rezoning of a 14 acre tract being a part of Tract "B" Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock, Ark. This application was for a re-classification of the zoning on the property from "A" Single Family to "D" Apartments. Following several conferences with the staff of the Department of Commu- nity Development, I wish to request that my application be amended and that the property be re-classified from the present "A" Single Family District to "B" Single Family District. In accordance with my discussions with Mr. Taylor and Mr. Venhause, notices are being mailed today by Certified Mail to the property owners owning land within 200 feet of the property being considered for rezoning. CVB:md Respectfully Submit -t Willi a Thompson 3': C. V. Barnes, Agent C. V. BARNES REAL ESTATE COUNSELOR APPRAISALS OG3 7 3 3 P Y R A M I D L I F E B U I L D I N G r L I T T L E ROC K,A R K A N S A S CROMWELL NEYLAND TRUEMPER MILLETT & GATCHELL ARCH ITECT-ENGIN EER 416 CENTER STREET — PHONE 374-8251 TRANSMISSION OF DRAWINGS LITTLE ROCK, ARK. DATE JOB No. 0-614 OB TITLE i4+- € G- A p,6,ye.i t i b y L e �a i5,A V— . W, P,. Ti -kc> I PSON TO M2. jAe-- v- 7-4�L-or2:- - ADDRESS 4" OMPA UN T i `{ !DEAF LCT--' M f-- 1-4 % IT`r �4AU- Ao-,fL ATTENTION: DEAR SIR: We are sending you the following: BY ❑ Messenger ❑ Express ❑ Parcel Post ❑ Airmail or Express ❑ First Class ❑ Special Delivery ❑ Bus 21 Preliminary Drawings ifications Addenda [� Letter ❑ Sample NAME Architectural Drawings ❑ Engineering Drawings ❑ Mechanical Drawings ❑ Electrical Drawings M Shoo Drawinas ifications Addenda [� Letter ❑ Sample NAME DRAWING NO. DATED Copies REMARKS 1 c'Y rz J �- T r* 4 N 1 D F v1 a:-{ COPIES: BY- w I CROMWELL, NEYLAND, TRUEMPER, MILLETT & GATCHELL ARCHITECT -ENGINEER �1 416 CENTER STREET - PHONE 374-8251 LITTLE ROCK, ARK. TRANSMISSION OF DRAWINGS JOB No. ' JOB TITLE __ _ TO ADDRESS __- -- ATTENTION:- _- DEAR SIR: We are sending you the following: BY ❑ Messenger ❑ Express ❑ Parcel Post ❑ Airmail or Express ❑ First Class Special Delivery ❑ Bus DAT E— © Preliminary Drawings ❑ Architectural Drawings ❑ Engineering Drawings ❑ Mechanical Drawings ❑ Electrical Drawings ❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Specifications ❑ Addenda ❑ Letter ❑ Sample BY WILLIAM H. THOMPSON 404 COMMERCIAL NATIONAL BANK BUILDING LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 November 10, 1970 Mr. Don R. Venhaus Director of Community City of Little Rock, Dear Sir: Development Arkansas Thank you for recommending approval of my application for the re -zoning of the Sheraton Park property. It was our idea that a more practical and realistic approach to the shortage of homes in the medium price brackets must be found eventually in the Little Rock area, and that the "cluster" type of housing presented an acceptable solution. It is obvious that the public is still not sufficiently informed, and that it will be some time before anyone will be able to get such a project approved. Therefore, I have no interest in pursuing it. You may be interested in the enclosed clipping from the Indianapolis, Indiana News for October 25. Yours very truly,`'? Wi Siam H;-4hompson WHT/jh Enclosure cc: Cotton Barnes cc: Ed Cromwell I &o_Cka.Vj-G k e4� SUNDAY, OCTOBIER 25, 1970 x_wtwster Hames Offered East Construction progress at Chatham Walk Town Homes is checked b" (left to right) William R. Fox, vice-president and general manager, Fred Fdlender, Richard Turner, construction supervisor, and Sidney Goldstein, vice -president -production, all of Falender Homes Corporation /Indiona. Indianapolis' f i r s t "own- eluding lot. Unlike rental, a I d.ing -own" cluster home c )n 'o garlelopayments are tax-deducti- your m portion f the monthly mort- munity has been introduced by Falender Homes Corpora ble. Indiana. Re,4°';`ti;`L', . Q A * h I k Located on a 16 -acre site at ; 2di tes at M50,000 East 21st Street and Franklin re-crea61Jiftenter, currently un - Road, C h a t h a m Walk Town der AWnstruction.- which Falen- Homes offer families an alter- der notes Will be one of the n a t i v e to either apartment most fully -equipped facilities of renting or single-family owner- its kind in the city. ship, with the advantages of both, according to Fred Falen- der, president of the firm. WHILE cluster homes (sev- eral houses grouped together on smaller than average lots) are not new in Indianapolis, the Chatham project is the first in which the homes may be purchased rather than rented. Along the lines of condomin- iums . popular in Florida and California resort areas, Chath- am are clustered in groups of six in a tudor-styled unit, sur- rounded by well -tended lawns, trees and paved sidewalks. Ex- terior maintenance and grounds -keeping are provided for a nominal monthly fee. ],,ACII op the homes is fully carpeted, S o 11 11 (1 -conditioned, and air-conditioned. Two, three and four -bedrooms are offered, some With family rooms, all With built-in elt,ctrje kitchens. A Carport or garage is adja- cent to each home. Prices begin at $23,950, in - !S P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in�Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. Q r � CITY OF -LITTLE ROCK NO. 1086 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FILING FEES ,19 Rock, Ark. Little $ Application $75) Zoning PP tion Fee Application Fee $ $25} Board of Adjustmentreliminary Subdivision Fee $ Plus 50� per lot/acre $l0 p acre Final Subdivisian Fee Plus 50� per lot/ $ $t10 P per loti Replat Fee ($5 plus $1 p Street Name Signs Fee ('$20 per intersection T OTP1 $ The above fees shall be or, aid to the z Y al C t, Floor, B ass of property involved: _ — .w P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in -Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- ing on a consistent basis. v n rPr� 7 7 iLR' P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. j� t1 /C ��L 17/i'7 a t��✓ Aa 1y J r V f/a. , 7 7 G -2 -770 �7i>� P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main - tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 1i c 7 cl- Jsrtr.'G =-I r Q irJ-t—rt,cv�.r. ter`! ' 7 �f�J % J� / / �/ Cce-c-, iC. 0 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character.of'the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main - tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 3a, 01, ►_,,_ f 96 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in�Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main - t e of such zoning on a consistent basis. 7ql ,7 P E T I T i 0 N To: The Little Rock Planning CoanissiOn The undersigned are property owners .ia `Sheraton park Addition to th* City of Little Rout and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 ace tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Peak Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Siegle family use Classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting th* Petition to change the established zoning pattern in the arorav it is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and wild materially affect tho investment of persons who in good faith hie" built or purchased their has*s in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main - to anee such zzoning on a consistent basis. CA a -is 6L LC LL47 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of'the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 7 w-'Aga, m 7 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 0 7 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in -Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 101 0 M P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. k E f P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in -,:Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in --Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. r } ♦ +i ��` 150 l _ r• w r iSNOW i P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. Ss P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. • _AMA A, 'VIA- 964- f .�.��. 2 EM a? P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in,Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning a consistent basis. Ifi -' l -e P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zon'ng on a consistent basis. i13 Qq P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. F 10 / 3-Z = r -- �7 f P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. �, F A9 r P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in,Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main - stent basis. r PET IT I OST T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in,Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character.of"the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on•the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. ?A, L. zi, • f 0 C :7Zr t ✓"• V ::11► P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in, -Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of"the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 4 �� 'a 3!J M P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in -Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. i C I r r 1 BE P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character,of'the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. ie P E T I T I O N TO: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. Y/DO r / �r P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character.of'the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. ,,G 777 ,,G yt P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. P E T I T 1 0 N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. i P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character.of"the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good.faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such ing on a consistent basis. Ig r - - - � trP • J ►r f � v � �, � e �� Alat M 10 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character.of"the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tens a of such z on a consistent basis. Y(-) 17 kILI ,_I c 20 / r t5 P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in,;Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. I M P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract -lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character of the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. 4, j JAA a/ 4A4 r P E T I T I O N T0: The Little Rock Planning Commission The undersigned are property owners in Sheraton Park Addition to the City of Little Rock and in other areas lying adjacent to the 14.3 acre tract lying on the western edge of Sheraton Park Addition which is subject to a petition for rezoning from "A" Single Family use classification. The undersigned maintain their homes in areas adjacent to said 14.3 acre tract and hereby protest the proposed change in the character.of"the neighborhood which would result from granting the petition to change the established zoning pattern in the area. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed rezoning should be denied as the rezoning of this tract is not in keeping with adjacent land use and would materially affect the investment of persons who in good faith have built or purchased their homes in reliance on'the existing "A" Single Family zoning and the main- tenance of such zoning on a consistent basis. F I, -'le 2-, //Z,1� e-ee-r, >Le 4�z� 01, _-=1_ 53 Ac C, -3 W VACANT ear �6G.1 94 CAR 5 i 42� 4 J 23 UNI r 4 D f 44 4�► 41 A3 T i . 77 I .Q iio' L .� 23 78 94 � l . 1 �� F. DATA i 143 A ZE5_ _ _ I . _ Cl, S uN17- 22404 � �IESfEFN EDGE- sHEQe�oN P,dRIC Nom, 5; 19-7-0 �,VQ• (-Vond ° 113 1/q • 1 5� �. �o a 1U'9• � IGG { {�651 47 f/ rr >? 96•'x" ''� �`'- •�� _ A 4A 4b 33.G G rte. `n -725 •i AG VIN LA v b y W f5-11- �7 I + •�` ia.d' h Cc? f, „ 0 1 ti : A � � �� $ � Jre.d' +► 5¢ a �� t1t'#'F -CS' i3' c ii} � 1dJ•3' �/So �M cx le' o c' • 40' .� Off 83.s- s. cr _ h0•5r+�€P X272 *i ": -77 Zk A/9 � ii rz . ..��lr �� ♦ti �4 4 4 _' � 3 59.4' $�• x. "�' � ` �'r iia �" 70 r =' C3• % r, J C� 4 s i. R zQ ` 3s p4 '�?rr• Cf/A71-1,41v 0 .� .. A �4 lli F5' fr1•S' � rv6a` CnCa' 7i" . 100' d5' 1%• BI' s' r 'i7' z' a' ter_ yo 63 y�5 ti b m SN:Fr" 70 6 7 d '� &G rte' tq c a©S 7! 1 sus' a� 3 2 i ccj" 100' 85' SS' •` rc! CC, L3' i Gcb` corn' 73r 471 110 lJ4 1d4' r��+ t/ZT) ria .'.' / V74 71 �� 'G�,B• : 7,Si 60, az 14 -74 127 is A SO4. ' T CL: -5- ` Ez 0 1� p F R7 6 % IC�3 off' 7ev i` n 'jr?•'Z 1�S �1pTS.+� �� %¢/.fit � � e� � E [i 50�`t'F wy 2aa.s j xy 65 1�Z•� " Tga C = 81 �o �•,�. o '�'$ e /S9' � 1 h, /48.9, � r S�� a"� � � J� � '� 76 1 �" O � V o �6'r c? ¢,'�•�i � P�'• r `-: ��c` . f' EGA �j s�,-:..��t.= y 13L.y• A� qty fJr% ! 1' fa R��! to 1. •I ��. (� �_ L. �. sn � 122 0 • � � �: �, P�.�' ��_ � ���, --;;� +'1i• _ ��: r 170. .a 117.2 ' 1h '11q - n v •• ,,, .9' rev. 1; r o r 14S•B' �' `A 0 107.' � �� j o 7 o Lu rza' _ .T 69 r. �� G w 15 f zS3 kf�9 2 91 82 v 81 �� ,rr -44a Oa d®Q, 153 +n N t Sa.2'2's3' ,?.7•I: /' •a ra r¢r,.3' 1 / i w 50. `52:7' 6 l' � V �' �: �+ Abz N C s '.s rto' �B•f !2f t � � Ito o = 85.4 - �`7 '� '�°' 83 `' I ° � 1 rK �, l25S' 1�c33 ti+ ;r 133f• w` it 7fi' Vol 9T.rv'.- „ •:� ? to' rE0' ��. m� �' b170. lora` AU ti IQ t3' t sc 1301' 170.3' ti JQ 0 c� 1t- F'217 4M1 +� ► �� .r IZ�'. lad, Q \ o � � ao � � � rn -^ +` ' 110, 213 - - -rn o 0 THIS COMPLETED 2UESTICNNAIRE�MUST ACCOMPANY THE REZONING APPLICATION (FILL IN or CROSS OUT words or lines notappropriate) 1. I am the Lvwne4x(legally designated agent) of the property involved in this application. 2. (a) The rezoning of this property has been requested before 64=k (no) (b) The rezoning of this property was requested previously (date) changing it from District to District 3. For what purpose is property presently used: ant ndevelo ed 4. The intended use of this property is For development pro Q1 as a low density multi -family 5. I (do) (do not) propose use of the property as it is (exclusive of minor repair) if rezoned. (If you do, have yop discussed this with the Building Inspection Division of this Department ( yes ) ( no) 6. If rezoned: (a) I have an immediate builder - - (no) (b) Plan to develop in the future - (yes) - (No (c) Plan to sell after rezoning - (yes) 7. The proposed rezoning: (a) Is compatible with the established land -use pattern of adjacent properties in the immediate area 0VfMXN00QK yes (b) Would create an isolated zoned lot or tract incompatible with adjacent zoned property ( (no) 8. The basic land -use pattern of the immediate area has changed recently - (yle`A (no) 9. The proposed zoning: (a) (W (will not), in my opinion, adversely affect living conditions in the neighborhood (b) %�Mx(will not), in my opinion, adversely effect the value of adjacent properties (c) -W (will not), in my opinion, deter the improvement or development of adjacent property (d) MMM (will not), in my opinion, adversely affect the character of the immediate area 10. (a) The general Character of the immediate area is "built up" (b) The general character of the immediate area is vacant land 50-50 11. In my opinion, the rezoning of this property (will) (=UkxnrKt) result in ant (inciease) :kftR&IpAW,} in traffic incident to the intended use of the property. 12. I have parking spaces sufficient to comply with requirements of the City Ordinance under mypresent zoning classification ( :s) C� inexcess of city requirement Eased on attached development MELn 13. If property is rezoned: (a) Sufficient parking is now available (yes) (no) not presently developed (b) The required additional parking will be provided (yes) *HUY 14. There 6 (is not) any restriction on this property imposed --by a Bill'of Assurance. (Should there be one, I realize I shall be liable to the pr:oerty owners having a common interest in this matter.)-- Willi' H. Thompson Byr C. V. Barnes, Agent Date: 10=5=70 8-26-69 PC 150 Signature of owner, or legally authorized Agent 733 Pyramid Building, Littlb Rock, Ark Address - 372-2021 00 00 C5 z RECEIPT FOR GFE#'.�!ED MAIL -30(l (plus postaze) SENT TO POSTMARK _John Buford & Betty G. Compton OR DATE STREET AND NO. 1920 Biscayne Drive Q P.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE Little Rock Ark.z. r ,1 OP ZONAL SERVICES FOR ADDITIONAL FEES RETURN T• S-ws to whom and date delivered ......_ ... 15Q RECEIPT With delivery to addressee only ............ 650 r �70 T. Shaws W whom aad date delivered RETURN With deliver to addressee only RECEIPT y Y ..........., 150 ..:...'-.... 65d' . a L' • Shows to whom, date and where delivered .• 35e SERVICES With delivery to addressee only ...... 450 DELIVER TO ADDRESSEE ONLY ...................•...•........ ............... Sot SPECtAI DELIVERY (2 pounds —or less) .......................................... 45t/ I i i I i i, I f i t POD Form 3800 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— (See other side) � July 1969 NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL . aro : 1969 0-3ee-312 c RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL -304= (plus postage) ` O SENT TO LO Lois G. Dabbs OR DATE STREET AND NO, #9 East Shore Drive Q P.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE 0) OPTIONAL SERVICES ADDITIONAL FEES RETURN T• S-ws to whom and date delivered ......_ ... 15Q RECEIPT With delivery to addressee only ............ 650 r 2. Shows to wham, date and where delivered SERVICES - � z SENT TO POSTMARK Lois G. Dabbs OR DATE STREET AND NO, #9 East Shore Drive P.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE Little Rock Ark•��7j.C� 'Ai OPTIONAL SERVICES ADDITIONAL FEES RETURN T• S-ws to whom and date delivered ......_ ... 15Q RECEIPT With delivery to addressee only ............ 650 r 2. Shows to wham, date and where delivered SERVICES ., 354 With delivery;O addressee only ............ 85¢ D$LIVER TO ADDRESSEE ONLY ....................... .......... .....__...... ...... Sod SPECIAL 4ELIVERY f2 pounds Or less] .......................................... 450 3 l I I POD Form 3800 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— ` ' July 1969 (See other side) NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL • GPO : 1969 0-356-312 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL -3044 (plus postage) SENT TO-�� rftSTMARK i 000 Joseph A. & Donna Jannell Zur, S6� TE t STREET AND NO. - L0 8201 Lowell Lane e P.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE CLittle Rock, Ark. ,t_1 OPTIONAL SEpV10ES FDR At1DITI0NA1 FEES}y P`76(hows to Viilfm liedda;edelivered ,. IECE PT With delivery to addressee only „ . 6 SERVICES Z• Shows to whom, date and where delivered . 350 • With 40ivery to addressee only._,, 85d Q DELIVER TO ADDRESSEE ONLY ........ SO@ z 5P€CIAL DELIVERY {2 pounds or lees) -It....... 450 1 — — POD Form 3800 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— (See other side) July 1969 NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL GPo : 1969 0-356-312 1 y RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL -384, (plus postage) N SENT TO POSTMARK H. 1. & Lil n Foreman OR DATE i CD STREET AND NO. _ -- - f #1 Foreman Drive OP.O., STATE AND ZIP CODE f Little Rock, Ark. CY) OPTIUMN1. SERVICES FOR ADDITIONAL FEES ' ` :•� RETURN I- Shows to wham said date delivered _.......:.,, 15p RECEIPT With delivery to addressee only ..... 554 j SERVICES 2• Shows to whom, dale and wher0 daflrered 35t • With delivery to addressee only .........•.. 8f{. O DELIVER 70 ADDR€SSE€ ONLY.."00000 ............................ (11►«<7111 SPECIAL bUIVERY ! ` {7 p0U11d5 pf 1e55] ` "— POO Form 3800 NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED— July 1969 (Seo other side) NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL • GPO: 1949 0-356-312 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION TO ALL PARTIES IN INTEREST, including owners of land lying within 200 feet of the boundary of property located adjacent on the west to Sheraton Park Addition, containing 14. 164 acres more or less and described as a part of Tract "B" SHERATON PARK ADDITION to the City of Little Rock, owned by William H. Thompson. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for a rezoning of the above described property requesting a change of zone classification from "A" Single Family District to "B" SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICT by amendment of the Little Rock Code of Ordinances (Chapter 43), has been filed with the Little Rock Planning Commission, City Hall. A public hearing on said petition by this Commission will be held in the Board of Directors' Chamber, City Hall on November 5, 1970 at 3:00 P.M. ALL PARTIES IN INTEREST MAY BE HEARD at said time and place or may notify the Commission by letter of their view on this matter. ATTENTION: PROPERTY OWNERS The rules of the Little Rock Planning Commission require that the applicant for rezoning serve notice to all parties in interest. THIS APPLICATION WAS ORIGINALLY FILED FOR REZONING TO "D" APARTMENT - THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN AMENDED ---------------------------------- FOR REZONING TO "B" S---INGLE FAMILY. C. V. BARNES, AGENT FOR WILLIAM H. THOMPSON, OWNER 733 PYRAMID BLDG. LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 ARKANSAS ABSTRACT & GUARANTY COMPANY ABSTRACTS ESCROWS TITLE INSURANCE Edward D. Briscoe, Jr. President C. V. Barnes Pyramid Life Building Little Rock, Arkansas Dear Mr. Barnes: 212 CENTER STREET P- 0'80K Ips? LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72203 October 5, 1970 Code 501 376-3345 Enclosed is the ownership listing of the property Mr. Snider wanted rechecked. As of this date there are no changes. Yours truly, Edward D. Briscoe, Jr. President EDB/ejr Encl. cc: Mr. H. L. Snider 4.11 Pearl Street Little Rock, Arkansas TITLES INSURED BY J(iSS&F4pP1 IVAffe,r Vii& Ara' Mee &NXNY I:ISTIING OF LANDS LYING WITHIN ' fi n, E 01 - Tract of S�_.t]_RATON PARK ADDITION to the Citv of Little Rock, Pulaski County. Arkansas, LESS and EXCEPT ,ares olatted as Lots in SHERATON PARK ADDITION (per recorded Plats). DESCRIPT'ONI OWNER (1) Pt. sw SE-_, Section 26 -21\T -13W., (described -_:,ete & bounds) ; (2) Pt. Ez S; , Section 26-2N-13`,P.T., (describe: mete & bounds) ; (3) . Pt. NEI I-1nj1, Section 35 -2N -13W., (described :rete & bounds) ; (4) Pt. NEI NU 1, Section 35-2N-1319., (described mete & bounds); (5) Pt. ',%F --!g - .}, Section 35 -2N -13W., (described mete & bounds); (6) Lots 1-2-3-4, Block 9, ROSE CTMY ADDITION to Little Rocks (7) Pt. NES NtrJ Section 35 -2N -131W., (described mete & bounds); Albert L. Fl:,tcher, as Bishop of Little Rock, Arkansas. (D-1970-59 689/525) The City of Little Rock, Arkansas. (D-39927-38 256/176) Millard Branstetter & wf Phyl ' is Ann; (D-73354-57 625/517) H. I. Foreman & wf Li lyn; (M-4 3 7-59 " �3/449 ) H. I. Foreman & wf Lilyn; (m-22026-61 633/363) Lois G.Dabbs• (D-7%91-66 96/569) Edward V. !4cNab & wf Mary G., (D-2279-59 '090/477) (8) Tots 75-77-79-80-$2-83-84-85-86; William H. Thompson; SHERA-20N PARK ADDITION to Little Rock; (D-26130-68 1027/169) (9) Lot 76, SHERATON PARK ADDITION to LR., Richard A. Cupples & wf Betty Jane; (D-22784-67 101 ;577) (10) Lot 78, SHERATON ?ARK ADDITION to LR., Samuai Dav- id Niekal & wf S' OILT"i i c 'v (D -131G=-67 936/2'79) s+ (11`) Pt. Lat 16,-QHE.RATON PARK AD DN. to ? i.' Melbourne E. Woodson: wf d - • 997/453) Ownership Listing (continued) Page #2; DESCRIPTION; West 41 of Lot 16 and all of (12) Lot 17, SHERATON PARK AD3�1. to LR., and "ot 6, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (13) Lot 18, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (14) Lot 19, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (15) Lot 20R, LEATRICE REPLAT:.of Lots 20 through 28, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (16) Lot 21R, LEATRICE REPLAT; (17) Lot 22R, LEATRICE REPLAT; (18) Lot 23R, LEATRICE REPLAT: (19) Lot 31, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (20) Lot 32,,SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (21) Lot 33, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (22) Lot 34, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (23) Lot 355; except strip on East side, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (24) Lot 36 and Part of Lots 35 and 37, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., OWNER : A. S. Rosen & wf Leatrice B., P. E. Murrnerlyn & wf Melba.; .(Plat & 3/r 73372-65 909/5040 Thomas J. Charles.& wf Jean H., (D-82584-65 939/401) Donald W. Stecks & wf Maxine D., (D-22425-67 1015/475) Clarence M. Lutz & wf Charlotte N., (D-13909-67 988/611) Eugene G. McElroy, Jr., & wf Janice A,,'' (D-12555-67 984/479) b'rank H. Hawkins & wf Nan H,, (D-16587-67 997/201) William H. Nevins, Sr., & wf Wanda H.J. (D-31857-68 1045/213) Vance W. Booker & wf Zera Kate; (D-83131-65 940/57) Roger M. Dew & wf Dorothy H., (D-81661-65 935/351) W. Dale Morris & wf M. Judy; (D-52108-70 1107/557) z Joseph August Zurborg & wf CD Donna Jannell; (D-8164-66 970/645) Teddy W. McDowell & wf Gloria June; 1/\D-16482-67 996/635) Raymond A. Mills & wf Dorothy Mae; (D-34044-68 1052/49) Ownership Listing (continued) Page #3; DESCRIPTION: OWNER: (25) Lot 37, except 1.51 off West side, Edgar B. Ward, Jr., & wf SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., Patsy Rowland - (D -13367-67 9;7/179) (26) Lot 38, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., Gloria M. Jones; (D-20913-67 1010/635) (27) Lot 39 & pt. Lot 40, SHERATON PARK Frank Moore Sipes & wf ADDN. to LR., Patricia Joyce; (D-14211-67 989/595) (28) Lot 40, except 1 foot, SHERATON PARK C. C. Ealy .& wf Ruby C., ADDN. to LR., (D-43079-69 1080/3) (29) Lot 41, SHERATON PARK ADDN, to LR., (30) Lot 42, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (31) Lot 43, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (32) Lot 44, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (33) Lot 45..r SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., (34) Lot 46, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., Don R. Barclay & wf Alpha L., (D-83651-65 941/425) Archie Y,McMillan & wf Olive Lord; (D-13820-67 1004/315) Arthur W. Wells & wf Gladys E., (D-50039-70 1101/241) Eugene E. Ray & wf Mary Cuba; (D-25781-68 1026/107) Aubrey McCasland & wf Catherine C., (D-27250-68 10301551) Buford John Compton & wf Betty G., (D-80690-65 932/327) (35) Lot 109, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., B. H. Schulte & wf Eunice; (D-59031-64 865/341) (36) Lot 110, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., The Bracy Corporation; (Plat & B/A 6938-59 705/147) (37) Lot 111, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., The Bracy Corporation; (Plat & B/A 6938-59 705/147) (38)` Lot 112, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., The Bracy Corporation; (Plat & B/A 6938-59 705/147) (39) Lot 113, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., Leo L. Galvin, Jr., & wf Dana W,, (D-29212-68 1036/649) Ownership Listing (continued) Page ft DESCRIPTION: (40) Lot 114, SHERATON PARK ADDN. to LR., OWNER:. Hazel G. Williams' (D-314266-62 789/1+65) - - - F -I -N -I -S - - - Dated: July 28, 1970. 7 PREPARED BY ARKANSAS ABSTRACT AND GUARANTY COMPANY BY: �� � ASST. SECY. � 1� • /Y� Yr r� -�� � S" y rr � �t w - 1 � F r� a l� { y •:Il • f• a !• •'.� 1' 'mow • l� ,•`rt ' /Jr/ �f� � J i_/ . j/*'s /+ ynt• ca� rFr Ej y j •{ii ~3,, •" a 1. Rr . .° ,.�. _... - • -- •t-� `:� /dry{. i=a;�. a' s� 3 •713` A� Al -4d � ' _.. u � � 4 r at�j ��' T 7,91- ,� ��'{� *ri.�•I�* ��'7 e•• t r f��_ "� � � � 7.G • ��' \'�k t3 j��f�` '� . r'syr �r.� �t �? Z Z tA sl �tiG �l CAU 71-1,4 M • �°` 108' l00.3' . �� v /sl!" rrs• � 1% �/o' lam' :�s•; .'r• 1y 70 �� � �170�', � BS' 65' $D' Gs• GJ' 97• Ion' Gr..`= J/i r /7�4t' . /A.7.• - r �rrt---r.—a.�.. �7r' 7 ��71�.� � _ r ^ =r iii 90. T.. • ..� `� }.�__ `� 7! +�,IY.._,�. DIOCESE OF LITTLE ROCK 2415 NORTH TYLER STREET P. O. BOX 7298, FOREST PARK STATION LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72207 November 4, 1970 Planning Commission City of Little Rock City Hall Gentlemen: Telephone Area Code S01 664-0340 0.: J Reference is made to the application for rezoning by William H. Thompson for lands located at the West end of Leatrice Drive and Alvin Lane in Sheraton Park subdivision. I am the owner of lands immediately to the North of the subject property; and my representatives have made a review of the applicant's proposed development plan. We think the development is in good taste and that the proposed density will adequately protect surrounding property, including our own. I have no objection to the application. Albert L. Fletcher Bishop of Little Rock ;-15' J .- zN J 0 N m N a p c � W •d �., Y t] o .fli W w v ❑ tj pa v any V W Ld a C UW. *0 W z M vb W 'a la a int a W- � Y' � >gLU E v U) i O y Z •_> U) 3 '� d z -1tj .� Q7 U O � cLn 3 W W J I z �o PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S), REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID, Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered ❑ to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered Article described below. REGISTERED NO. SIGNAT EORNAMEOF ADDRESSEE (Rdusf u!ways Trs�ad" irt} CERTIFIED N0. 909525 2 SIGNATURE OFADDRESSEE'SAGENT, IF Y INSURED NO. ��► DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (,dy if raj�cilst } 1 8 e5S-10-71548-11 547-198 GPO _ PLEASE FURNiS=RVICE(S) INDICATED'SY -QHE�D B PRIM,FEE(5) PIrRS•n;_ `V e i'ver ONLY Show to when, kr address ❑ to addressee where deii—o RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED O• CERTIFIED NO. 909524 INSURED NO. DATE DLuvLrtcu SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADrJntsJtt %—I -t SIGNATUREOM ORESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY SHOW WHERE DELIVERED c55--16-71548-11 347-198 GPo PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. Show to whom, date and address=Deliver ONLY where delivered to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below.. REGIS]LRED NO. CERTIFIED NO. 909515 INSURED NO. SIGNATURE OR NAlAE F ADDRESSE�( l 4444 ft ra t SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY DATE DELIVERED SHOW VoiERE DELIVERED (any if 058-18--71948-11 347-198 GPO 4- v� C W oO�4 n LL o- d v W v �+ (f] � I U. _ 1Y fl V :Y Qi x 0 y"M •r-1 ."moi W n a Cd 0 Ld mCd I✓�� �7 ori O a ea4� `'a�w a W -1 G 7 u CO� ,44 �u y�-r, _. 4 a FU.0 O IL o a fd ® cazs3 1I-BbSTL�Ji—SS S.St • V ��0� 004 PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S), REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID, Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered ❑ to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered Article described below. REGISTERED NO. SIGNAT EORNAMEOF ADDRESSEE (Rdusf u!ways Trs�ad" irt} CERTIFIED N0. 909525 2 SIGNATURE OFADDRESSEE'SAGENT, IF Y INSURED NO. ��► DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (,dy if raj�cilst } 1 8 e5S-10-71548-11 547-198 GPO _ PLEASE FURNiS=RVICE(S) INDICATED'SY -QHE�D B PRIM,FEE(5) PIrRS•n;_ `V e i'ver ONLY Show to when, kr address ❑ to addressee where deii—o RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED O• CERTIFIED NO. 909524 INSURED NO. DATE DLuvLrtcu SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADrJntsJtt %—I -t SIGNATUREOM ORESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY SHOW WHERE DELIVERED c55--16-71548-11 347-198 GPo PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. Show to whom, date and address=Deliver ONLY where delivered to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below.. REGIS]LRED NO. CERTIFIED NO. 909515 INSURED NO. SIGNATURE OR NAlAE F ADDRESSE�( l 4444 ft ra t SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY DATE DELIVERED SHOW VoiERE DELIVERED (any if 058-18--71948-11 347-198 GPO 4- 8 �-Na r ® C) y V J CU 1 .a p >v _ m Z 1L1 Y Q w Y C Ail a y w v y w w La _ 1- ( W Yf o LLI _ p LL. -0 iiI ¢ z W O a y O v� b ^� La v— {� y W c� v V1 Ur� W Gb ° : .� 3 7 C11 L` Or Z r' •U c O O � L {� C a o m Q L � 3 � Lin fA ® 3 2= W i -= IL 0. o LO z W 0 y o O) fL U Z 8 �-Na r 1 .a Z a w 3 • O a y O v� a� y� NRAA Ur� W Gb ° : .� C11 L` Or C a o m Q L c y � 3 Wse� —4 J W 0 y o O) Cy < a �y E d Cd Cd O 7 w 0 r�- ✓7 _�� 0� y a 162 41 ho w E- a N , O II��� 6 IT-S1,2T4-91-993 gabt'Jdv USE =-:0-1 God PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered Q to addressee RECEIPT Received the nun tiered antic -le described Mow. REGISTERED N0.SIGNATURE OR NAME QF ADARESSEE (hlun eixa}s b4 fiI!eai ;n) CERTIFIED N0. 1 i 909517 2 SIGNATURE OFAD ESSEVSAd-ONT,IFAIIY' INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (oa3 if rogrrested) 3 058-18-71$11 847-198 aPo PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). I REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered E to addressee RECEIPT R,ece4ed the numbered ert4ele dt ribed below. � REGISTERED N0. SIGNAT E 6{T NAME OF ADErRES (t13rnFr always be d yin) CERTIFIED NO. t G� 90_9516 2 SIGNATURE OF ADDRESS AGENT, IF ANY INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED SHOW MERE DELIVERED (only if r gaef d) ea8--19.^71848-11 347-198 apo PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. rTt Show to whom, date and address Delivdr ONLY elivered 1:1 to addressee` RECEIPT Received the numbered article described belbW. REGISTERED NO. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE { &St "aiwayr be fdhd in) CERTIFIED NO. 1 �#j•/1....t��' 909519 2 SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AgtliL IF ANY( INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if n11140rd) ,cwb- 1b -71b49 -1i 34:L-198 )P0 M 1 I w� I\I` ch If+l DATE DELIVERED me r ® a ac o Z u y �o J } s a' 2 b F r R N 1 URED N0. s DATE DELIVERED me r ® a ac u y' } s a' 2 b F r R N LI p z CC) w> LL O W Y aZ i N W cm o L WJ V 6 li U aL. 6 L. N Q O 0. II-855IL-9T—S4o PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. , Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where, delivered ® to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED NO. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (lllusr uluv:;vs bol"�" in) _ r CERTIFIED N0, 1 Est y 909523 r IGNATURfOFADDRESSEf3'At#EN,TJFANY .F INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requevred) I(/ --7c 3 000--10-1154ii-11 a47-198 at o PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S), REQUIRED FEE(5) PAID. Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered to addressee, RECEIPT _ Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED N0. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (tllrrse xlwrr •s } frl.ad in) CERTIFIED N 0. 2 A 909522 - r 6961'JdV t1.0 'MM� 'moi U1 W r x �I 0) m '-1 T—) a USE tu"A Goa T -1111 -7 - FNS SHOW WHERE DELIVERED {Pray if requested) 055-16—ZL548-11 QCT -198 cpo PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. L_ N['� Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered 11 to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below.- CERTIFIED elow: CERTIFIED 140.- 909521 INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED /C✓s ?0 SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (blast itw - SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY SHOW WHERE DELIVERED {only if cb5-16-71548-11 547-I2a Gpo URED N0. z DATE DELIVERED me ® a ac 6961'JdV t1.0 'MM� 'moi U1 W r x �I 0) m '-1 T—) a USE tu"A Goa T -1111 -7 - FNS SHOW WHERE DELIVERED {Pray if requested) 055-16—ZL548-11 QCT -198 cpo PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. L_ N['� Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered 11 to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below.- CERTIFIED elow: CERTIFIED 140.- 909521 INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED /C✓s ?0 SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (blast itw - SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY SHOW WHERE DELIVERED {only if cb5-16-71548-11 547-I2a Gpo j i� o I .>.i z [A n z A Gm7 11I o c C.0 O O a CNI z Ln o z 1 w i 0 -0 O CNI CQ i its t i v r rn L! W r*+ � S ®t a o in a� m 3 m m a- ;0;0 C f0 3 I�v n CL oaiCl.-nCL rn — M0 Vyl v M � 0 � o I'i x rn M 0 m � CL N O Q Z W s z 0 co 1T-9SST4-91-91P 6961'1dV TTS£ LUAQA G®d PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. , Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED NO. ^ SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (M:cst alw, CERTIFIED N0. 90952_3 2 ?SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'$AGENT,rFANY INSURED NO. f DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) %' a I e5 —IB -71&18-11 84 198 Gro irJ PLEASE FURNISH SERVICES) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY ® where delivered 0 to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED N0. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE( Jr always & filled in) CERTIFIED NO. 909522 INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED /G S ffyRE 4F ADD SEE'S AGENT A} - SHOW WHERE DELIVERED, (only if rrquestsd) c55-18-71548-It�'847-198 Gro PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. 12 Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered 0 to addressee REGISTERED NO. CERTIFIED NO. 909521 INSURED NO. RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below: SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (Mast alwa SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY PATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if -pelted) '4 055-19^71548-11 847-198 GPO O CNI CQ bLC O) 'd II a 4 Ch � 1T-9SST4-91-91P 6961'1dV TTS£ LUAQA G®d PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. , Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED NO. ^ SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (M:cst alw, CERTIFIED N0. 90952_3 2 ?SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'$AGENT,rFANY INSURED NO. f DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) %' a I e5 —IB -71&18-11 84 198 Gro irJ PLEASE FURNISH SERVICES) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY ® where delivered 0 to addressee RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below. REGISTERED N0. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE( Jr always & filled in) CERTIFIED NO. 909522 INSURED NO. DATE DELIVERED /G S ffyRE 4F ADD SEE'S AGENT A} - SHOW WHERE DELIVERED, (only if rrquestsd) c55-18-71548-It�'847-198 Gro PLEASE FURNISH SERVICE(S) INDICATED BY CHECKED BLOCK(S). REQUIRED FEE(S) PAID. 12 Show to whom, date and address Deliver ONLY where delivered 0 to addressee REGISTERED NO. CERTIFIED NO. 909521 INSURED NO. RECEIPT Received the numbered article described below: SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (Mast alwa SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY PATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if -pelted) '4 055-19^71548-11 847-198 GPO aaa ai INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE W 'O addressee . (Additional charges regaired for these services) a RECEIPT DATED VERED SHOW WHERE, DELIVERED (only if requested) Received the numbered article described on other side. m SIGNATURE OR NAME OFl7RPSSEE (must always 6e R�ifj in) I • SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY. _ -- DATE DELIVERED_ SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if riQuested) I f 4 r. ` C55— 16-71549-`,aP47 =O O 0 h = %"' !i y « M F••I ZZ, u u r a ? W 2 m QI INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE O a O t+s U 'U a O ❑Deliver ONLY to Show address where addressee ❑ a o y M p a 0.? a e z Q1 za a RECEIPT 612 cLe W_'a E u u M , O q co side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must olwvys be filled in) C3 z 4 v L w � < q g D [7 -VQ a Q 4— P a' v < n p , U c� 2 a s w M 'y W 1 N o � z 0 4w a Z _ O > O O aOd v � ;. w o v U 'fie � z �C. ® vv .a q `:.'4 C � > _ W I M2 td El CJ i INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE ❑Deliver ONLY to Shot address where addressee ❑ delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (n.W alwowq be filed/'+s) Mw, SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE ❑Deliver ONLY to Show address where ❑delivered addressee . (Additional charges regaired for these services) a RECEIPT DATED VERED SHOW WHERE, DELIVERED (only if requested) Received the numbered article described on other side. m SIGNATURE OR NAME OFl7RPSSEE (must always 6e R�ifj in) I • SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY. _ -- DATE DELIVERED_ SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if riQuested) I f 4 r. ` C55— 16-71549-`,aP47 INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE ❑Deliver ONLY to Shot address where addressee ❑ delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (n.W alwowq be filed/'+s) Mw, SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY DATED VERED SHOW WHERE, DELIVERED (only if requested) I _ -- i! C55—I6-71549-5—F GPO =O O 0 , - - - ul !i y « M F••I I u r a ? W 2 m QI INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE O a O t+s U 'U a O ❑Deliver ONLY to Show address where addressee ❑ a o y M p a 0.? delivered • (Addittorrul cbrtrgc: r-,quired for these services) , e z Q1 za a RECEIPT W W i c� r0) a Received the numbered article described on other , O q co side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must olwvys be filled in) C3 z cc w i N rn v � In: z _12 m SIGNATUR OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY D [7 -VQ a Q 4— P a' v o z m 00 , U c� 2 a s C) dl Z O w O z 1r DATE DELivERED -. .. SHOW WI RE DELIVERED (only if`{equested) O` I+ M u, r o � 4w a U 6961 'd@S a Ilee suaoA aOd b C55—I6-7I5oe-57Ft GPO I 1 1� c c 0 G 0 c ad: 1z 0 'o ad tm MO lu p •H r ® � V Cq 3 a O •e 0" O Cd O W ` N � cU.L�® Z 7° LLS a ce "O c V Q COr Z O. P ii _ C . ® o C a 71 "u 12.2 Z ++'i Ln a v J cry " -0 cc I 1 1� c c 0 G 0 c ad: 1z 0 'o ad tm MO lu p Mac j x { Cq 06 Cd O W ` N � Mac x 06 Cd O W Z O Q COr O. P ii _ C . W F r L— "u 12.2 Z ++'i U cry " -0 cc z. = m 0 B -Ord 1-' 4 -'2 � U . — O tC] Z O YG ss ti W w o :N M N •S V W W GC °v V ? a� �l C96 -daS I. I Sit asJo3 OOd INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE I NLY to Show address where delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (musf always be Filled in) SIGNATbItE OF ADDRESSEE'S Adtot. IF ANY DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) -341- 7e) CSS—t6-71548-5—F GPO INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE ❑Deliver ONLY to � Show- address where addressee delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (musf always be filled in) SIGNATURE OF A`a S S AGENT, IF ANY DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) w C55 -16-715d5-5— F GPO INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE Deliver ONLY to ❑ Show address where addressee delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT ~ Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must alwpys be Filled in) iz SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY .Y DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requesW) _ 1 C55 -16-71548-9—F GPO INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE I�( Deliver ONLY to j� Show address where lJ addressee L! delivered (additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF//AA/DDyyDDR]]ESSEE (must always be filled in) OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF DRATE AX V t 1. 7il SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) C55— 16-71548-5—F i INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE Deliver ONLY to11Show address where addressee delivered (Additiontsl ch, ---get required for these services) RE C E;IP, T Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEEa4weys $ filled in) sIdNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY C55-16-71548-5^9 GPO € D44Y ' SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) r �• ' O �* C55 -16-71548-5—r GPO LU Cq V C+z3 G 1� `1 c O w � C31a �4 INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLO Ll �'a W o W Oo ❑ Deliver ONLY to ❑ Show address where r W p ¢ addressee delivered o xo W (additional charges required for these services) o < m RECEIPT () ~" Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be filled in) s;N`� Zs� m 0 L� D-VC4 O p SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY' LJ o Q1 z O o to «. K N, VELiVER5 SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) z L) C961. 'day «l; su�o! cod C55-16-71548-5^9 GPO �v9 � ti b SIGNA��Tp"UURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be jjF,11.d`in) SIGNATURE OF XODRESS:E'S AGENT, IF ANY DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) � O :J r: CSS-16-715},liM3-F � a G _ EJ ti 1&A-1 z c W 09� C14 u CD ,a x i 0 m rI w 4 V S actF ''- O O t�j a b Z q -9 addressee delivered o p o f INSTRUCT, e DELIVERING EMPLOYEE a Deliver ONLY to Show address: where ❑ addressee ❑ delivered 1 ; (Additional charges r,-ttt.•ir,�tf for these services) 'N RECEIPT Received the nunbered article described on other side. I SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be Sited in) 1 1 SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY DATE DELIVERED 5MC& WHEPE DELIVERED (only if requesved) css-I6-7154e-5-+F,:_- INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE ❑Deliver ONLY to Show address where addressee ❑ delivered (Addition4l charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNA��Tp"UURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be jjF,11.d`in) SIGNATURE OF XODRESS:E'S AGENT, IF ANY DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) � I r: CSS-16-715},liM3-F � a 30 p W 09� C14 u ,a x = S m rI w 4 M INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE S actF ''- O O t�j a ❑ Deliver ONLY to Show address where ❑ � ' s c� 7 addressee delivered o p o f (Additional charges regvired for these services) " > w o Ra Q RECEIPT „a CO Received the numbered article described on other side. O < co w a w � � SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must clwars be filled inJ . y=elp < � � •� . iz r 'I Y - SIGNATL." O A SEE' GCNT. IF ANro Y F"g `W O Z .� I v_ 6 O Z ATLIVE-RED SHOW WHEP.E D IVERED (only if requested) 0961 daS �$�° uuOA OOd Css—l6-7ty�-S—F GPO INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE ❑ Deliver ONLY to El waddress where addressee delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be filled in) J J7 SIGNATURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF ANY I i DATE DELIVERED AA SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested) C55 -16-71548-5-F GPO INSTRUCTIONS TO DELIVERING EMPLOYEE yr ❑ Deliver ONLY to❑ Show address where j addressee delivered (Additional charges required for these services) RECEIPT Received the numbered article described on other side. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be filled in) 41 ShRMURE OF ADDRESSEE'S AGENT, IF AN7 _ 0 I 0 e i �2 FQ C'I L�- O d a W {fl O .� W oc° m o O O U y� Cd _a 0 Cd i yyO o F+ -I ti;j aF O ry.Z a W .. [� C •.: n >c� Z CY) In d ,' N O 4 w "L'. O y W L L? R 17 f�` 9r v ' E a a z ,n 72 z Z ' D a -oz Cfl 1°p O Z LPA O M Z O 02 _ M e' £96 L --s L LIE 1"JOi Toa DATE DELIVERED SHOW WHERE DELIVERED (only if requested), *'- j(Jt�aY��� tom° t - •'-4 C59.6 -71548-5-F GPO it LID INSTRUCTIONS SO DELIVERINGShow rEMPLOYEE liver ONLY to where deliS�overedess ess where dressee (Additional charges regnrred for these services R.rC T scribed on other Side. Received the numbered article de M. SIGNATURE OR NAME OF ADDRESSEE (must always be n11ea i„ t SjbNATURE FAD SEE'S AGENT, IF ANY SHOW WIRE DELIVERED (an)requested) DATE DELIVERED r , C55 -I6 -71548-5-F 15PO