Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResponse letters received from citizens Mar 19991009 Beacon Hill Court Tittle Rock. AR 72211 March 7, 1999 Mr. Jim Lawson City of Little Rock Zoning Commission, Department of Planning And Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR Dear Mr. Lawson: Subject: Proposed Development on N. Shackleford Road We are writing to express our opposition to the proposed development of the green space located across from Terry Elementary School on H. Shackleford Rd. There are several aspects of this development which we find disturbing. The first is the added traffic to Shackleford Rd. The developers discussed the possibility of there being an additional two to three thousand cars each day using Shackleford, a street which cannot be widened through our neighborhood (nor would we want this). Secondly, this added traffic would seem to pose a danger to the neighborhood children who walk to Terry Elementary each day. Also, green spaces and undeveloped acreage in West Little Rock are coming an endangered species. Does West Little Rock really need another hotel or restaurant? Would it not be more pleasant to see a green hillside rather than the side of a building? Trees and green areas add value to our homes and to the quality of our lives. Please leave this hillside green! Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. Sam Derby CAD Coleman Vaughan 1118 Kings Mountain Little Rock, AR 72211-2515 Jim Lawson Planning Division - LU Amendment 723 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Jim: I writing to voice my disapproval for the land use classification being changed to C from residential for the state owned property at the northeast intersection of Shackleford and Mara Lynn. Shackleford is already too busy and development of any sort would only continue to increase the unfair burden that Walnut Valley already bears with traffic on a residential street that was never considered to be what I think is termed a "feeder" or "arterial." You would see a decrease in property values that not only affected our members homes who will back up to it, but a further decrease in value of those homes who line Shackleford. The safety of the children who walk to and attend Terry School has to remembered also. Let's not forget either, the loss of another very visible hillside that is seen everyday in west Little Rock. I think most everyone down there at City Hall recognizes that a different approach needs to be made with residential and other concerns in mind as we look at the growth of Little Rock. I urge you strongly to not recommend the approval of this change. Coleman Vaughan, Walnut Valley Board of Directors Mr. Jim Lawson and Little Rock Planning Commission City Hall Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Lawson and Planning Commission Members: The Executive Committee of the Terry PTA was quite surprised to learn recently that there is a proposed land use change being considered for the tract of land that is directly across the street from our school. It's our understanding that the proposal is to change the land use classification to "C" which would allow commercial development. As you can probably imagine, there is a tremendous concern on our part on how the safety and security of Terry Elementary could be compromised by such development. The children who walk to school from the neighborhood to the north have to use the sidewalk that is located on the east side of Shackleford, the same side on which development would occur. Consider also the significant increase in traffic that would be generated at the already stressed intersection of Shackleford and Mara Lynn. Shackleford narrows from four lane (with no center tum lane) to two lane immediately. Simply widening that section to four lane would only push the bottleneck farther up the hill to the entrance of the Walnut Valley Subdivision. Since there is a shortage of recreational space in west Little Rock, why not consider using this nice wooded hill as a park? It would be a prime spot for a few picnic tables and a walking trail through the woods. I know Terry Elementary would take advantage of it as well as the people of Little Rock. This would preserve an "island" of what has always characterized an area of town that until the last few years was defined as "rolling and wooded". Please carefully consider your response to this proposed change and how it will affect those who are already having to deal with "too much going on in such a small space." ncer ly, /J � �r RECEIVED 1 MAR 0 9 1999 March 5, 1999 Mizan Rahman Little Rock Planning Commission 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Rahman: We are writing in regard to the proposed change in land use classification of the land behind the Walnut Valley Subdivision. This is the state owned land directly across from Terry Elementary School, bordered by Kroger, I-430 and our subdivision. As you are aware, the proposal would change the land use classification from its current designation of R-2 (single family residential) to C (commercial). As homeowners in Walnut Valley, we are strongly opposed to this change and believe that the land use plan for this property should remain the same. Our home is located at 1422 Kings Mountain Drive, a beautiful, winding cul-de-sac off Shackleford. Our backyard is fenced with a chain link fence that lets us view the woods directly behind our home. We step out on our deck and immediately feel that we are not in the middle of a major metropolitan area, and yet we are only minutes from I-630, I-430 and any local business we may need. My husband and I have lived in Little Rock for nine and a half years and bought our home in 1991. I remember our realtor telling us that the vast majority of first-time home buyers sold their home and bought a new one within five years; and when we had each of our two children we talked about moving to a bigger home. But we have not found a neighborhood or location that we like as well as where we are now. As recently as a few months ago, we were talking about how we had decided that we would stay here to raise our family. The proposed land use change would affect us directly, by destroying the woods behind our home and replacing them with commercial development, literally in our backyard. We also feel that this change would be detrimental to the entire neighborhood. Walnut Valley residents are very proud of our shaded streets, our park, and our common areas. Kings Mountain Drive is a quiet street where the neighborhood children walk to the park and ride their bikes on the street without parents being unduly worried about their safety. We feel strongly that a commercial development located that close to our homes could change this. Another concern we have about the proposed change in classification is the wildlife. What would happen to all of the different animal life if the woods were cut down and replaced with pavement and concrete? We have seen squirrels, raccoons, possums, rabbits and even coyote in those woods -all from our backyard. Turtles migrate through there every year -we watched a mother turtle dig a hole and lay her eggs one year. My daughter was fascinated, and my son will not have a chance to see something like that if the woods are destroyed. As the city grows, there is less and less room for the wildlife, and we believe that whenever possible, natural areas like this land should remain a haven for Arkansas animals. That is a big part of the charm and beauty of Little Rock -it is not a city solely of concrete and buildings. page 2 Mizan Rahman Little Rock Planning Commission RECEIVED MA 0 9 1999 BY: Y I � We do realize that all cities grow and change, and we feel that it is the role of the planning commission to ensure that this is done with the best interests of the residents of Little Rock in mind. We do not believe that the proposed land use classification change would be in the best interests of the residents and taxpayers of Walnut Valley, the people who will be most directly affected. It would have a negative impact on our neighborhood and on the wildlife in this area, and, as we stated earlier, we are already within minutes of all that Little Rock has to offer. We are asking you to think about the best interests of our family and all of the residents of Walnut Valley and vote against the proposed land use change. Thank you for taking the time to read our letter and please feel free to call us to discuss this issue. Sincerely, Michael and Becky Weaver 1422 Kings Mountain Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72211 227-9398 CC: Hugh Earnest, Bob Lowry, Bob Lowry, Bill Putnam, Pam Adcock, Judith Faust, Rohn Muse, Craig Berry, Herb Hawn, Obray Nunnley, Jr., Russell Lemond-President, Walnut Valley Property Owners Association WAR -08-59 11:49 RM COLORMRKERS+FOX 5012235325 P.01 Attn: Brian Minyard Planning & Development From: Russell Lemond Walnut Valley Homeowners Association Follawimg plow f3ntd lease that were ad&=W to the Wahwt Valley KMWWnsrs Assooiahm fr fiorwarding to the Little Ruck Pb n % Commieaion and ftff PLaae melte sues theca latters are on file as being opposed to the Lad use change that was proposed Ear the state owned Maty at the northeast mterseotion of Shedrld' and Main Lynn. It's my understanding that a fiallow up letter deem your office was being sent to those mdmA%dls who you abeady bad letiers Aum. I would foe these people nwhded also in that fallow up If there aze =W quwkns, please feel fine to canted me at wo[k (223-5300) cr at home (224-5547). Tbank you, LumorJd,Prouden2 --_. Wahmt ValleyHowtommss Association MAR -08-99 11:49 AM COLORMAKERS>FAX 5012235325 P-02 MAR -08-95 11:50 AM COLORMAKERS+FAX 5012235325 P.03 �� cl ARKANSAS CHAPTER SIERRA CLUB P.O. Box 22446 Little Rock, Arkansas 72221 beo +�'1 (501) 224-2382 February 23, 1999 Mr, Russell Lemond, President Walnut Valley Home Owners' Association 5 Kings Mountain Court Little Rock, AR 72211 To Whom It May Concern: The Conservation Committee of the Central Group of the Arkansas Sierra Club endorses the position of the Walnut Valley Flome Owners' Association in opposing proposed rezoning of the property at the northeast corner of Mara Lynn and Shacklef'ord for commercial use. In the interest of preserving green spaces and not allowing more commercial development which would add to the congestion and air pollution in west Little Rock, Sierrans believe that the property should retain its residential zonin.= designation, or be used for a low -impact park. West Little Rock cannot afford another hillside clearing such as occurred recently on Napa Valley! We believe that our position reflects the opinion of the citizens of Little Rock who attended the Smart Growth Initiative meetings sponsored by the Planning Commission. There was expression of a preference for preservation of trees and consideration of environmental impact before new developments are approved. Respect for the citizens-' voice will be appreciated. Sincerely, John E. Hill, Chairman Conservation Committee MAR -08-99 11:54 AM COLORMAKER$�FAX 5012235325 P.01 +kk:M.WkY %,%*%+ :KW * TRANSACTION REPORT * MAR -08-99 11:51 AM.* * FOR: COLORMAKERS4FA; 50122357-25 * SEND * LATE START RECEIVER PAGES TIME NOTE * MAR -02 11:49 AM 3716$63 3 1'5,2°} JAM C;� t�k�k0UF� MOR -08-99 11:55 OM COLORMOKERSsFOX 5012235325 P.02 G1�tJUC_ C'v2t-�oN / /.(AM WAcKKle LNlc�ke-- Atm �rzz�� March 1, 1999 To Whom It May Concern: We, the Owners of the property at 820 N. Shackleford Rd, oppose the development of the property along Schakleford Rd. north of the Kroger shopping area and directly across from the school. Continued development of this area would endanger the school children, add to the already too heavy traffic load, remove a green belt from the community, add nothing positive to the subdivision. We ask the Hoard of Directors to vote against any building or change in the current use of this land. ,I NAR -08-99 11:55 RM COLORN@KERSaFRX 5012235325 P.03 708 N. Shackleford Rd Little Rock, AR 72211 March 5, 1999 Jim Lawson Dear Sir: I am writing regarding the request to review and amend the Land Use classification of State-owned land along N. Shackleford Rd. and across from Terry Elementary School, a change from R-2 to C Real Estate Central is proposing that this land be developed with a hotel, restaurant, office space and possibly a retail complex. I am totally opposed to this change as are the Board of Directors of the Walnut Valley Subdivision and many others I've talked to who live in the subdivision My reasons for opposing this change to a commercial classification are many. Chief among these reasons are. • Increased traffic on North Shackleford • Decreased property values, particularly along North Shackleford • Increased traffic danger to the young children attending Terry as they go and come to classes • Loss of one of the few remaining belts of green space between Rodney Parham and Kanis Rd. Increased traffic: currently, North Shackleford Rd. handles over 20,000 vehicles a day. North Shackleford is a two-lane residential street from Mara Lynn north to Walnut Valley Drive. Those residents living along this stretch (of which I am one) have major problems getting out of their own driveways, especially during the busy times before and after work. Long lines of cars are backed up during those times at the stop signs at Kings Mountain Drive and Breckenridge Drive, Running these stop signs is common. North Shackloford has become the main thoroughfare from the shopping areas along Rodney Parham to the major shopping areas along West Markham and die office complexes along Commercial Drive and the highway 630/430 interchange. A new commercial area at Mara Lynn and North Shackleford can only increase the traffic with no relief in sight. If a hotel is built, the traffic would be increased at all hours of the day and night. Decreased property values: increased traffic along North Shackleford and proximity to commercial development will decrease property values. Currently, homes on North Shackleford cost less than those on less busy streets. These values would become even lower with more traffic and commercial development within view of these homes. Our investment in our home is our largest single investment and we can't afford to have this investment decrease in value Increased danger to children: Terry Elementary School is directly across the street from the proposed entrance to the land whose use is proposed for commercial development, Many of these young children (ages 6-11) walk to and from school each day. A commercial development along the route these children take would increase the danger of traffic accidents and fatalities to these children to an unacceptable level Lass of green area: The loss of yet another green area in West Little Rock would be a great one. With the clear cutting of the parcel off Napa Valley Drive near Bowman Curve and the outrage generated by this clear -cutting, more clear cutting is unacceptable to the residents of this area, This area currently serves as a buffer between Walnut Valley and the commercial activity of Kroger and the whole area in the northeast corner of North Shackleford and West Markham. With these problems in mind, I respectfully request that the reclassification of this land to C be denied. Sincerely, Patricia S. Keightley Clyde Bailey MAR -06-95 11:56 AM COLORMAKERS+FAX 5012235325 P.04 vle- aoa- XL MAR -08-99 11:56 AM COLORMAKERS+FAX 5012235325 P.05 1006 Green Mountain Drive Little Rock, AR 72211 February 22, 1999 Little Rock Planning Commission 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Attn: Mr. Hugh Earnest, Chairman Re: Proposed Land -Use Change Shackleford and Mara Lynn Adjacent to Walnut Valley Subdivision Commission Members: 1 wish to express my disapproval at the above -proposed land -use change next to xroger on Shackleford Road in west Little Rock, We reside in the Walnut Valley area on Green Mountain Drive and are very dissatisfied with all of the commercial construction and tearing down of terrain in this area. We would appreciate your sincere consideration and rejection of the proposed land -use change. Sincerely, !� ulia A. House (Mrs.) cc: Walnut Valley Homeowners Association 1205 N. Shackleford Rd. Little Rock, AR 72211 MAR -08-99 11=57 AM COLORMAKERS+FAX 5012235327 P_06 Law Offices of Treeca J. Dyer, P.A. 10121 N. Rodney Parhon, Suite 4 Utne Rock, Arkansas 72277-5590 Obray Nunley, Jr. Little Rock Planning Commission 1522 West 24'° Street Little Rock, AR 72206 February 22, 1999 RE: Proposed zoning change from R-2 to C Shackleford Road across from Terry Elementary Dear Mr. Nunley: 00FIV Telephone (sm) T19•B3w Paceimue (501) 219-930a I am a property owner and resident in the Walnut Valley Subdivision; the street where my home is located, Cobble Hill Road, feeds onto Shackleford just South of where it intersects with Breckenridge Drive. The re -zoning of the area across from Terry Elementary School, adjacent to the Walnut Valley Subdivision, will only exacerbate the problems of suburban blight and sprawl which surround our neighborhood. Specifically, the re -zoning would not be in the best interest of the neighborhood or any of those who use Shackleford as a connecting arterial. The traffic is already congested on Shackleford; the daily traffic count is far beyond what was ever anticipated for a two-lane residential street. Many days, the traffic is backed up for three to four blocks South of the three-way stop at the comer of Shackleford and Breckenridge. To get out onto Shackleford from Cobble Hill between 5;00.5:30 p.m. requires a motorist being kind enough to let me into the flow of traffic going North. Re -zoning this area will only add to the traffic and congestion on a primarily residential street. A second consequence of re -zoning that would not be in the best interest of the neighborhood would be the increased traffic on the East side of Terry Elementary School. I recognize that the school is fenced along Shackleford Road, which provides some degree of safety for the children playing on the school grounds. However, there are many children who walk to and from this elementary school; the increased traffic from a commercial development across the street would do nothing but escalate the chances of one of these children being struck by a vehicle. In addition to this danger, the after-school pick-up traffic on Mara Lyn would find access to Shackleford more difficult; traffic jeff .ey c. )Otie� MARCH 2ND, 1999 DEAR SIRS: IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION THAT A PROPOSAL IS UNDER CONSIDERATION TO AMEND THE LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM TERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. I URGE YOU TO REJECT THE CHANGE. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES LITTLE ROCK IN GENERAL THE AND WALNUT VALLEY AREA IN PARTICULAR A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE IS THE TREES AND GREEN SPACE. ALLOWING THAT LAND TO BE DEVELOPED WILL DETRACT FROM THE BEAUTY OF THE AREA AND OF THE CITY. IN ADDITION, THE TRAFFIC ON SHACKLEFORD ROAD IS BAD ENOUGH WITHOUT ADDING MORE TO IT. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. 1 m/ JEFFREY C. JONES 1204 N. �41j9Mef0R(D R0-69 IDI1-1'iae ROM `l RK`IM-T 5- 72211 501-227-5548 Jf naluu"N ^9140 JIN Lo'd 9z2s2zzTos xddfsdEAvwdo Eoo WO Ls=IS 66-50-?JHW MAR -08-99 11:57 AM COLORMAKERS�FAX 5012235325 P.08 Mr. Obray Nunnley, Jr. February 22, 1999 Page 3 Thank you for your consideration of my position on this issue. I am certain that you will consider all the views and concerns expressed here as you make your decision on March 18s'. Yours very truly, recce J. Dyer cc: Walnut Valley Home Association We7n'tVaUeyReZo I.,$qQ MAR -08-99 11:58 AM COLORMAKERS3FAX 5012235325 February 23, 1999 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Little Rock, AR xxxxx Re: Proposed Amendment to change in Land Use Classification of property owned by State near Walnut Valley Subdivision across from Terry Elementary School on Shackleford by Kroger. Review set for March 18th at 4:00 at City Hall. Dear Planning Commission Member: P.09 I write this letter in strong opposition to the proposed change from R-2 to C. This proposed change is about nothing but keeping developers busy. with what has happened to Bowman Road, Chenal, and Napa Valley, it would seem that we would learn our lessons. First, Shackleford is a two-lane road that is probably more traveled than Mississippi Road. It can not handle the traffic increase. Second, that dangerous traffic will be right next to our neighborhood elementary school. Third, through development we are removing much of the natural beauty of western Little Rock(i.e.- Napa Valley by Bowman where they placed those ridiculous apartments on the side of a hill.) Lastly, Walnut Valley is a quiet subdivision that already has a tremendous traffic load due to Shackleford and Green Mountain Drive. Currently, it is nearly impossible to walk across those streets with your kids. Also, that state land serves as a natural buffer between Kroger and the subdivision. Please support our opposition to this proposed change. It makes no sense from a traffic load viewpoint, safety factor for our school kids viewpoint, or a destruction of the natural setting viewpoint. The only reason it could be justified is if the Commission just wants the developers to have another "deal", regardless, of the impact on the surrounding area. Well, too many more "deals" and West Little Rock won't be worth living in anymore. I look forward to your response. Jim Gonzalez 11319 Ethan Allen Drive Little Rock, AR 72211 work 221-9163 fax 221-1930 copy: Walnut Valley Homeowners Association MAR -08-99 1iF58 AM COLORMAKERSsFAX 5012235325 P.10 russell lemond ("Proposed Land Use Change" from "Craig A. Curzon" <courzonQpsyerchftects.00m>) Subject: Proposed Land Use Change From: eraig A. Curzon Data: Mon, 22 Feb 190914:28:40 -0800 Please present this letter to the Little Rock Planning Commiaion and let me know if I can help in any other way, February 22, 1999 Dear commisioners: I am writing to voice my strong opposition to the Land Use classification being changed for the state owned property across from Terry Elementary School on Shackleford Drive I am a property owner in the Walnut Valley neighborhood just north of this property, I am also an intern -architect who all too often has seen the damage done by commercial developments near residential areas in Little Rock. One area that bears a striking resemblance to the above property is the shopping center near the intersection of Reservoir and Rodney Parham Road. The shopping center (T.J. Maxx, etc.) development was allowed to tear away the base of the hill in order to flatten the site. This left the condos to the north literally "perched" on the side of the cliff. I could name many similar developments along Bowman and Chenal Parkway. It is amazing to me, as an architect+ how developments like these are allowed to take place while we (architects) have all sorts of problems getting something built that is aesthetically pleasing and contributes to the overall quality of the community. I urge you to not allow the Current Classification (R-2) of the above mentioned property to be changed to C -Commercial. Thank you for your consideration: Sincerely, Craig Curzon 10 81 t 3'"C,�-khk-k173C,I, L iTA�P_ ���� A'2 -► zz k I 03/04/2021 07:03 5018347341 REAL ESTATE CENTRAL PAGE 01 REAL ESTATE CENTRAL 5321 John f, Kennedy • North Little Rock, AR 72116 • (501) 758-3500 • 1-800-880-0610 March 5, 1999 Delivered Via Fax Transmittal: 501-371-6863 Mr. Brian Minyard City of Little hock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Ref: Zoning Application Schakelford Road Dear Mr. Minyard By my signature below I am requesting that you remove our land use . change request without prejudice from your March IS meeting. I appreciate your assistance in. this matter and if you have any questions, . please do not hesitate to call. Sincerel Brooks.6. McRae as Agent . . 'The Home.Folks' OFFces in Little Rock 0 North Little Rock • Jacksonville • Cabot • Conway Susan McGee 1100 King's Mountain Drive Little Rock, AR 72211 (501)224-2806 March 3, 1999 Little Rock Planning Commission 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 To Whom it may Concern, rezd 5-1557 I moved to Little Rock from the Washington DC area about 4 years ago. The thing I loved most about Little Rock was the nature - the trees and greenery on many of the roads I traveled. I remember being told to get somewhere by driving out Chenal and that it would be gorgeous. It was! It no longer is. Driving down Mara Lynn and seeing the trees on Napa Valley always made me catch my breath. Now it makes my stomach turn over to see the trees gone. I used to run to Target during my lunch break. Now it is too far away, and the empty shopping center on Barrow is a saddening eyesore. I could go on with the list of beauty and convenience that has been ruined since I moved here a mere 4 years ago. At the rate you are going Washington DC will seem like a green wilderness in comparison to Little Rock. I have just heard that you intend to replace yet another area of green with more chain stores with no personality - or worse, empty store fronts. I drive past the area between Kroger and Walnut Valley on Shackleford on my way home from work. The greenery after a tough day always helps me leave work worries behind and focus on home life. It was one of the things that attrached me to Walnut Valley in the first place - the proximity to shopping with the green buffer. have told my friends back home how beautiful Little Rock is. I no longer tell them that. Please don't remove still more of its beauty! Leave the area between Kroger and Walnut Valley on Shackleford green! Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Susan McGee MAR 04 199 15:40 FR March 4, 1999 Jim Lawson Director, Neighborhoods and Planning 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR Dear Jim: TO 93716063 P.01 You have been responsive to Walnut valley neighborhood concerns in the past.Thank you! I write today to seek your support once again and finding an alternative to a harmful reclassification proposal of 20 acres on North Shaddrford Road. I can document serious downside to reclassifying the 20 acres from Residential to Commercial. 1. Driver behavior at Intersection of Markham and Shackleford. a. I see drivers speeding through yellow and red lights every day during am and pm rush hours and during the weekend. They are using that intersection to go north, south, east or west and don't like to wait 4 minutes for the traffic light cycle. b. I met with the Kroger Store Manager Mr. King last month and he shared a growing problem of drivers CUTTING THRU the Kroger parking lot from West Markham to enter North Shackleford near the intersection with Mara Lynn Drive (near Terry Elementary School). You can see the cars lined up by the snow -cone kiosk. Mr. King installed speed bumps in the Kroger parking lot in an attempt to deter drivers, but shoppers tripped on the speed bumps and he had to remove them. c. The traffic count average for North Shackle -ford is 13,000/day (through our residential area on two lane road). I suspect traffic count at Markham/Shackleford and in front of Kroger store is much higher. Any commercial development on the 20 acres would add to this stress at a point where Shackleford becomes a two lane (from a 4 lane) road. 2. Commercial Pressure already visible with the 20 acres. This property is under stress from vandals, vagrants, and the occasional teenage trespasser. Kroger spent $2000 for a privacy fence and it was knocked down within 72 hours. Off-duty policemen have been hired by Kroger's to "sweep" the area in addition to protecting their parking lot. We have one of the best organized, professional neighborhood associations in the City. After we defeat this Land Use classification, we want to work with the City and State on what can be done to protect one of the last green spaces in this section of town. Of particular interest to our neighborhood association is a Conservation Easement, or low impact urban park. Thank you for your work to date, and I look forward to your support. MAR 04 '99 15:40 FR Sincerely, Paul D. Dickson 915 Kings Mountain Drive Little Rock, AR 72211 h 501-227-9550 w 501-370-2463 TO 93716863 P.02 ** TOTAL PAGE.02 ** March 2, 1999 Mr. Jim Lawson Little Rock Planning and Development Commission 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Lawson, I've just learned of preliminary plans to develop a hotel/motel across from Terry School adjacent to Kroger on Shackleford Road. I want to be on record as strongly opposing this development. Thirteen years ago I owned and lived in a home in the Walnut Valley subdivision. Then, as now, Sbackleford Road was a popular route for access to the freeway. I've followed the discussions and developments to discourage this traffic through the neighborhood. I don't believe much has truly been accomplished to reduce the volume. Development of a motel along this overly busy neighborhood street will only add to the current problem. Additionally, this type of development seems to be incompatible with single family dwellings. Surely construction of a motel on this site will adversely impact the value of nearby homes. And while I don't have a financial stake in this (we sold and moved from Walnut Valley to another West Little Rock subdivision 13 years past), I can certainly sympathize with those home owners. Further, the character of West Little Rock is being destroyed by large scale developments. Witness the destruction of the hillside along Napa Valley Road for the sake of an apartment complex. The same is true along Hinson Road between Green Mountain Drive and Napa Valley - again for an apartment complex. A beautiful hill was literally leveled to buildthenew Target, and I've noticed the same large scale earth moving being done across from Target. West Little Rock was an area of rolling, wooded hillsides but is rapidly becoming a parking lot. While it isn't my place to tell the experts how to do their job, I do believe that there is something terribly wrong with the chaotic development on the west end of town. Maybe the best use of the land proposed for the motelonShackleford-road is to leave it the way it is - as a green belt buffering the commercial developments beginning with Kroger and extending south - from a quiet middle class neighborhood. The Planning Commission could win a few friends by spearheading a drive to convince the current landowner to donate the property to the City Parks department for greenspace. At the very least, I expect the Planning Commission to preserve the integrity of neighborhoods and maintain the qualities of areas in all of Little Dock. Sincerely, . . C. Beattie 03/02/99 17:11 FAX 501 371 4498 LITTLE ROCK AR CITY MGR CITY OF LITTLE ROCK OFFICE OF THE MAYOB FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM -/61 -3� Mayor Jim Dacey / 21Ld COMP Y: DATE: A/z , 4 FAS NUMBER TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER Z PHONE NUMBER SENDER'S FAX NUMBER (501) 37IA498 RE: ❑ URGENT ❑ FOR REVIEW ❑ PLEASE COMMENT ❑ PLEASE REPLY Cl PLEASE RECYCLE 71. � -d.4 �.,,;, �• t,,,e -7L 4 r q CITY HALL ROOM 203 500 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 (501) 371-4510 0 O1 03/02/99 17:11 FAX 501 371 4498 LITTLE ROCK AR CITY MGR 0 002 February 25, 1999 Little Rock Board of Directors 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Board Members: As residents in the Walnut Valley Subdivision in west Little Rock, we have recently learned of the possible commercial development of the property adjacent of Terry Elementary School and parallel to the Kroger store both off of North Shackleford Road. We are extremely opposed to this development due to the following reasons. First, the current development has caused excess traffic in our neighborhood and enough people in the neighborhood. The traffic is horrendous not only during work and lunch commutes, but also throughout most days and weekends. Furthermore, the road is not wide enough to handle the turns to enter or exit that area. In addition to the traffic, we are concerned about the welfare and safety of the 525 school children enrolled at Terry Elementary. We feel the children will be at greater risk from added traffic. We are also troubled with the thought of strangers that would be patronizing whatever new facility was to be built, could influence small children into undesired situations. Thirdly, there are alcohol issues to address. Should the property become a hotel or restaurant, we feel that drinking and driving will not mix with the 525 Terry school children. There are people that drink at lunch and throughout the day that will try to operate their vehicles while the Terry Elementary children are dismissed from school. Would you want it to be your child? Fourthly, any commercial building will cause extra congestion and disturb the neighborhood peace. The development will require tall lighting, truck deliveries, and create noise and litter due to added people and traffic, which will intrude on the surrounding neighborhood families. Lastly, what is wrong with having some beautiful trees in our neighborhood? It is pleasant driving to and from work every day and seeing what few trees are left in the Walnut Valley Subdivision of west Little Rock. Our neighborhood association goes to great efforts to keep our neighborhood cleaned and groomed and we want to keep it that way. Please, ask your developers to renovate an existing eyesore or keep going west on the main roads. Yo sntrnully^^ Jill Marchese & Gerry Booe 1116 Briar Creek Road Little Rock, AR 72211 (501) 228-9265 (501) 227-8551 March 1, 1999 Mr, James Lawson Director of Planning & Development. 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Lawson: I am writing this letter to you regarding the proposed zoning change on Shackleford Road in West Little Rock from Residential to Commercial.. As a resident of the Walnut Valley I am strongly opposed to the zoning change from Residential to Commercial that has been proposed by Real Estate Central. I have lived in Walnut Valley on Kings Mountain Dr. for over 11 years and I oppose this change for several reasons. First: As a parent of school children, I am concerned for the children of this neighborhood who walk to Terry Elementary School each day. The children walk down a sidewalk to the school right in front of the land that would be changed to commercial. The children in Walnut Valley must walk down that side of the street to reach the school since the sidewalk for the entire length of Shackleford Rd. is on the side that would be commercial. Also, after reviewing the blueprint submitted by the developers, two cuts to Shackleford are proposed. The children would have to cross each of these cuts into the commercial area without the aid of a traffic light to reach the corner of Mara Lynn Rd. where they cross Shackleford Rd. to get to school. I am concerned for the safety of the children who attend from the neighborhood and walk to school. These children are as young as 5 years old. Second: I am concerned about the increased traffic to Shackleford Road. At the present time the traffic conditions on Shackleford are overcrowded. At peak times, morning and afternoon rush traffic is backed up at the corners of Kings Mountain Dr. and Breckenridge Dr. with as many as 20 cars waiting. At these times the traffic at Kings Mountain Dr. stop sign extends all the way down the hill ( in front of the proposed land). At the other end of Shackleford at the corner of Breckenridge Dr. the traffic continues to back up past the WV park till Jamestown Rd. I have sat in this traffic for 20 minutes just getting from my house on Kings Mtn. to Rodney Parham Rd. Please take the time to view these traffic conditions during rush hour morning or evenings. I cannot even imagine what the the increased traffic from additional stores and business would add to an already congested Shackleford Rd. Third: I am concerned about the homeowners in the neighborhood losing property value on our homes. Although my home would not back up to the commercial area these homeowners would see significant property value loss. I am sure you are aware of the property value loss to the homeowners of homes in Birchwood. A friend of mine whose home backs up to Best Buy parking lot has lost $10,000 from the value of her home since the commercial area was built. This is a significant loss to homeowners whose property is valued around the $ 100,000 range. Please do not let this happen to homeowners in Walnut Valley. Lastly. I am concerned about the loss of the open land and the wilderness. This area has remained undeveloped since Walnut Valley was created in the early 1970's. It serves as a reminder to the preservation of wooded areas in Little Rock. I remember reading in the AR. Democrat -Gazette last month that the City of Little Rock Planning and Neighborhood Department had an Task Force open forum meeting about open lands within the city. The purpose of this meeting was to strengthen zoning ordinances to prevent wooded areas from having the same loss as Napa Valley Dr. and the new Target store area. Many good ideas were proposed at this meeting. This land is one of the few woodland areas in West Little Rock that has Residential zoning classification. Please do not change this area to commercial to develop yet another strip mall of business in an already congested residential area.. I am proud to say that I am a homeowner in Walnut Valley. I love the neighborhood and the cooperation of the neighbors in maintaining our neighborhood. I cannot even begin to tell you about the number of volunteer hours that our neighbors devote to maintaining our streets, park, pool and common areas. Our neighborhood has been awarded many grants and awards for our efforts. We need your vote against this pnWosa[ for rezoning to commercial property to preserve the neighborhood. Please consider what you would feel if this change were occurring in your backyard. Thank you for taking the time reading this letter. Sincerely, qo' UA -1 Maureen C. Dickson 915 Kings Mountain Dr. Little Rock, AR 72211 xc: Russell Lemond, President WV Homeowners Association Rep. Jim Magnus, AR State Representative District 55 AR STATE BUILDING SERVICES 41 1515 WEST 7th STREET, SUITE 732 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 (501) 682-5568 FAX (501) 682-5589 To: Brian Minyard, City of Little Rock, Fax#: 371-6863 Planning & Development From: Anne W. Laidlaw, Leasing Section Data: March 1, 1999 501-682-5568 Re: Notice of Lease Termination for Pages: 2 (including cover letter) Herbert J. Jones - Shackleford Road Property, Little Rock CC: UM" For Review Please Comment Please Reply Please Recyal COMMENTS: As requested pursuant to Freedom of Information Act -�0.'TO'd COSS EW TOS T 0 33ind3s sma-line 31015 dd 77:£T 666T-TO-dHW d -Idlol SbSArkansas State A�nSs Building Services Mike Huckabee, Governor • Robert L. Laman, Director Suite 700 • 1515 Building • 1515 W. 7th • Little Rode, AR 72201 • (501) 682-1833 • Fax (501) 682-5589 • TDD (501) 682-1487 February 24, 1999 Mr. Herbert J. Jones, Sr. Jones Toyota -Volvo 5909 South University Little Rock, Arkansas 72209 RE: Rezoning extension request for Lease Number #60-000-N9084 19.94 acres of land located in the #3004400 block of North Shackleford Road, Little Rock Dear Mr. Jones: John Selig, Interim Director of the Division of Mental Health Services, is in receipt of your request letter of February 18, 1999 and has elected not to grant an extension for the zoning application period- DMHS will be returning the $10,000 fee being held in escrow. Therefore, pursuant to paragraph two — "Term " of the above referenced Lease, this letter is your notification that the Lease is hereby declared null and void as if it never existed. Sincerely,, ARKANSAS STATE BUILDING SERVICES L ING SECTION 71 s4auc� Anne W. Laidlaw, RPA Leasing Administrator Cc: John Selig, Interim Director, DHS-DMHS Robert Laman, Director, SBS Susan Wilson, Attorney, SBS Frank Arey, OCC, DHS "An Equal Opportunity Employer" 802e'd 68SS C69 TOS T 0 3Dind3s JNIQ-iina 31H15 dd b7:£T 666T-TO-dHW February 25, 1999 Little Rock Planning Commission 723 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Members of the Commission: As residents in the Walnut Valley Subdivision in west Little Rock, we have recently learned of the possible commercial development of the property adjacent of Terry Elementary School and parallel to the Kroger store both off of North Shackleford Road. We are extremely opposed to this development due to the following reasons. First, the current development has caused excess traffic in our neighborhood and enough people in the neighborhood. The traffic is horrendous not only during work and lunch commutes, but also throughout most days and weekends. Furthermore, the road is not wide enough to handle the turns to enter or exit that area. In addition to the traffic, we are concerned about the welfare and safety of the 525 school children enrolled at Terry Elementary. We feel the children will be at greater risk from added traffic. We are also troubled with the thought of strangers that would be patronizing whatever new facility was to be built, could influence small children into undesired situations. Thirdly, there are alcohol issues to address. Should the property become a hotel or restaurant, we feel that drinking and driving will not mix with the 525 Terry school children. There are people that drink at lunch and throughout the day that will try to operate their vehicles while the Terry Elementary children are dismissed from school. Would you want it to be your child? Fourthly, any commercial building will cause extra congestion and disturb the neighborhood peace. The development will require tall lighting, truck deliveries, and create noise and litter due to added people and traffic, which will intrude on the surrounding neighborhood families. Lastly, what is wrong with having some beautiful trees in our neighborhood? It is pleasant driving to and from work every day and seeing what few trees are left in the Walnut Valley Subdivision of west Little Rock. Our neighborhood association goes to great efforts to keep our neighborhood cleaned and groomed and we want to keep it that way. Please, ask your developers to renovate an existing eyesore or keep going west on the main roads. Yo rs truly, 1f� ILlJ1.C�� Jill Marchese & Gerry Booe 1116 Briar Creek Road Little Rock, AR 72211 (501) 228-9265 (501) 227-8551 RECEIVED MAR 11999 BY:� reC-,d 2(zs(gy Sandra Dillon #2 Kings Mountain Court Little Rock, Arkansas 72211 (501) 224-5141 February 23, 1999 Little Rock Planning Commission 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Little Rock Board of Directors 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Walnut Valley Proposed Land -Use Change Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: I am a resident of the Walnut Valley community, and I have recently heard of a developer wanting to develop commercial property in our neighborhood. I am strongly opposed to this. The traffic on Shackleford is already backed up to the top of the hill from the red light at Mara Lynn Drive every weekday. There is also an elementary school and a daycare on that busy corner. We do not need our neighborhood children fighting even more traffic walking to and from school. Breckenridge Village is within 3 miles of this property. We have Market Street Plaza, and the Kroger Center at the bottom of Shackleford. There is a movie theater and a hotel within our Walnut Valley community. We also have a large apartment complex. We have all of the commercialism we can stand. There are numerous "Strip Malls " all over this town with vacancies. I don't believe our city needs anymore commercial buildings, but my neighborhood certainly doesn't need any more. We do not need the additional strangers that close to our homes, and our children's day care and elementary school, much less the traffic, as I mentioned earlier, nor the noise. I believe that property should remain zoned as single family residential property. I hope you will not consider doing this for a developer who will come in, clear cut all of our trees, dig out our hillside, replace our small piece of woodland with concrete and brick buildings, then leave us to live with the after effects. I have noticed that none of the people listed on the 1999 Little Rock Planning Commission Roster have addresses near our Community. I hope you will take the time to see the area concerned and think about if you lived there would you want to see MORE commercialism than we already have if it was your backyard. If you have any questions, or comments, if there is anything further I can do to prevent this zoning change, please contact me. Sincerely, SANDRA DILLON 4 eJ aoa wal homes ssociation 1205 North Shackleford Rittle. Rock, Arkansas 72211 Mr. Jim Lawson and Little Rock Planning commission Department of Planning and Development 723 W Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Jim: March 1, 1999 The Board of Directors of the Walnut Valley Homeowners Association strongly urges the denial of a land use classification change (LU99-02-01) being considered by the Planning Commission. We've seen Shackleford change from a quiet ending cul-de-sac in 1982 to an over thirteen thousand cars a day_ residential street. While it was never considered to be a major thoroughfare, it has certainly evolved into exactly that with the growth and severely limited north/south access in west Little Rock. The Planning Commission should also take concern with the negative impact this will have on property values in the area and increased safety concerns for the students of Terry Elementary. This is a neighborhood school and bear in mind that these are elementary children. Commercial development can in no way make a positive impact on such a closely surrounded school. The infrastructure in this area has been stressed too much already. The latest traffic count for Shackleford just north of Markham was nineteen thousand cars a day! There is no center turn lane on that section of road and traffic backing up across Markham is not uncommon. Finally consider the uproar that arose when the hillside of Napa Valley was destroyed. Our situation could be very similar. You have a highly visible hillside seen by thousand and thousands of people each day. If I may speak for them, we've actually felt betrayed by what is perceived as the lack of thought that went into some of the decisions over the past few years. There's got to be a way that we can preserve this piece of land for the good of not only Walnut Valley or Beverly Hills and surrounding neighborhoods, but for the people of Little Rock and the State of Arkansas. West Little Rock is hurting terribly for park space of any kind. What a nice place for an area that could accomodate a few picnic tables and maybe a wallking trail. It's something that could surely come closer to being the "highest and best" use of the land than more commercial development. Recent activities by City Hall have seemed to finally turn an ear to concerns of people like us as exampled by recent "town -hall" and "community" focus sessions. Let's hope they produce results that will make us proud of how Little Rock1 s to the future. r R ssell Lemond, President --Walnut Valley Homeowners Association FEB, 24. 1999 9: 33AM UA? R FAX COVER SHEET N0. 1601 P. 1/3 INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENT UNIVERSITY OFARKANSAS AT LITTLE ROCK LIBRARY 5TH FLOOR 2801 S. University Little Rock, Arkansas 72204 FAX NO. (501) 569-8538 TO: INSTITUTION/AGENCY: CITY/STATE: FAX N0: _ 3 -) / - 6 9 OFFICE TELEPHONE NO NO. OF PAGES: (includes cover sheet) DATE TRANSMITTED: MESSAGE: J . 24, 1999 ' 9:33A27 PMUALR;TITUENCY SERVICES Theecn ssaac, follolvipg, this cover oaae is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to wbicli it is addressed and may contalir, infarmatinn _lhaC__ 1s_j?r'rivd¢2ed co�dential and a<C1rIDt from disclosur��t" anolic ,e 1¢w. 1f the reader of thus message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notiGcd that any disscminafion, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have rtreived this eornmurucadons in error, please notify us immediately by telephone and return the original message to us via the U.S. postal 5ervice. If problems occur during trauscrssrv:, please call (501) 68Z• 7771 and Che receptionist will assist you. FAX K 5016823479 N0, 1601 P. 2/301/02 Arkansas House of Representatives State Capitol, Room 350 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1089 501-682-7771 To' C KLhlV11 bti LMM,�SI Fax t#: From: Date Iii 1 3i% Pages: Message: cover sheet) 5B, 24. 1999 - 9:33A1b-7 pHUALR;TITUENCY SERVICES FAX N0. 5018823479 NO. 1601 P. 3/302/02 rEAkESXIJYA77VE Jim magnvs 10 Cies rrmn \alley Dd•c Littic Rock. AR 72212-3602 Glwn�: 501-220-5243 Bwincsa 50t-227-0464 Rn:dnsce 501.Z20.5639 r•AX DISTRICT 55 Cawslia= 11"t �i P,J.,Ii Co�niy COMMITTEES Rcvanue anJ Taxa lleq in1.,�anc..nd Ce:.,ment February 13, 1999 Mr. John Selig, Deputy Director Arkansas Division of Human Services P.D. Box 1437. slot 329 Little stock, AR 72203.1437 Dear John1 I formally request that you reject any request from Mr_ Herbert Jones, Sr. for nn extension of the lease on the Shackleford Road property. Mr. Jones missed at least one and possibly two opportunities to begin obtaining zoning permission to use the property. With nearly 120 days to make substantive process. Mr. Jones filed his first paperwork with the City of Little Rock only two weeks prior to expiration of his lease. There is little possibility of him even obtaining his land use amendment to start his zoning request before the sixty-day extension, mentioned in his lease agreement, would expire. It is virtually impossible that he could obtain the zoning change given his delay in beginning the process. John, I am frankly disappointed that the SIS Board has pursued this course to begin with. I hope you will stop this now by not extending the lease any further. Slneerel OAK J' Magnus State Representative cc; Gov. Mike Huckabee Kurt Knickrehm Bob Laman Russell Lemond, Walnut Valley property Owners