HomeMy WebLinkAboutemails and letters against case1�rCm I -?t ( l
Minyard, Brian 7BY:
CEIVED
From: Tom Hayes [thayes@legacycapgroup.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 6:24 PM Y 2 5 2000
To: Planning Commission; Mayor's Office; LR Board
Subject: AGAINST Hwy 10 Rezoning
Please accept this email as office response to the proposal before the Little Rock Planning &
Zoning Commission to rezone the intersection north of Highway 10 and Chenonceau from C-2 to
C-3.
We are strongly opposed to this rezoning proposal and are prepared to fight to maintain our
quality of life and property values in the Bayonne subdivision of Chenal Valley. We moved as far
west as we could 2 years ago to get away from the commercial congestion in the west little rock
area of Markham, Chenal Parkway and Shackleford.
We DO NOT want a Wal Mart SuperCenter, KMart, Target or any other gigantic retail store
located anywhere off of Hwy 10. In just the past year, traffic has increased two -fold in our area
and injury -related car accidents are on the rise. A private school sits right in the area where the
proposed rezoning is to take affect.
I speak for my family and neighbors in opposition of this proposal
Tom and Tiffany Hayes
16 Equennes Dr.
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Brian
From: Hayes, Tiffany [THAYES@arkbluecross.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 4:19 PM
To:'bminyard @I ittlerock. state. ar. us'
Subject: Against Re -zoning Hwy. 10
I live in Bayonne off Chenoceau and I am against any re -zoning of that
I -r-6m I Ii I, I
RECEIVEI
MAY 2 5 2000
BY:
area to com�_n_e_iLial retail.
Traffic is dangerous enough, we don't need a Wal-Mart or any other big retailer around that
intersection. Thank you.
Tiffany Hayes
Phone 501-228-8766
Fax 501-228-8768
ties@arkbluecross. com
Minyard, Brian
From:
Isbbadger@mindspring.com
Sent:
Wednesday, May 24, 2000 3:40 PM
To:
bminyard@Iittlerock.state.ar.us
Cc:
board@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:
rezoning at hwy 10 and chenonceau
RECEIVED
MAY 2 5 2000
BY:
This letter is to state our opposition to the proposed rezoning at highway 10 and chenonceau
from c-2 to c-3. this growth in this area needs to be carefully planned and developed in
cooperation with the residents of this area. to change the rezoning at this time would increase the
traffic to cantrell and thenal parkway. both of these roads have not been developed to handle
increased traffic flow. this area would become more dangerous and could negatively impact
property values. the residents in this area also need to be shown that police, fire, ambulance) are
able to handle both the ever-increasing residential needs and any new commercial growth.
as residents of this area, WE OPPOSE the change of zoning of the property at highway 10 and
chenonceau from c-2 to c-3.
susan and brute badger
42 durance drive
little rock, ar 72223
--reI e,& (, (
CEIVED
Minyard, Brian MAY 2 S 2000
From: kjanota@molex.com
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2000 3:11 AM By;
To: board@littlerock. state. ar.us; bminyard@little.gtei.net; rock.state.ar.us _ lit,
mayor@littlerock. state. a r. us; bminyard@littlerock. state. ar.us
Subject: Please Don't Re -Zone Ranch at Chenal
To the Mayor and the Planning Commission:
I am a property owner in the area of Chenal near the Ranch. My family and I will be affected
by your decision regarding the rezoning of the area on Highway 10 across from Chenonceau.
I will not be able to attend your meeting today as I will be at work at that time, endeavoring to
support my family, pay my property taxes, and generally trying to be a productive resident of
Little Rock. I would like to express to you my feelings and wishes on this.
I ask you please do not change the zoning of this area to C3! I do not want our family oriented
neighborhood to be left vulnerable to a large retail development sometime in the future, and to all
of the additional road traffic resulting from such a development. Rezoning this area would be an
irresponsible decision with respect to the safety of my children and the other children living in this
area.
Sincerely concerned,
Kenneth Janota
22 Rosaires Way
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Brian
From: William T. Harris Jr [wtharris@aristotle.net]
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board @I ittl rrock. state. ar. us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning on Hwy 10
To whom it may concern:
(e -m lI-ek(=I
MAY 2 5 2000
BY:�9(
As West Little Rock property owners, we wish to state our objection to the rezoning of the land
north of Hwy. 10 and Chenonceau and also Hwy 10 and Taylor Loop. The traffic on Hwy 10 is
bad enough, and new construction was started in the Ranch under questionable circumstances.
It seems that we have no say in how our city and more specifically our neighborhoods will look.
Zoned areas should not be so easily rezoned to accommodate business. We should all work
together, not just let money be the only voice heard. Our once beautiful city is in danger of being
destroyed. We need to stop now before it is too late. We too pay our taxes in this city.
William T. and Debra Harris
47 Ranch Ridge Rd.
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Brian
From: jriddle@regalware.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 3:00 PM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Fwd: Re: Rezoning of Hwy 10 & Chenonceau
--------------- cc: Mail Forwarded ----------------
From: John Riddle AT JAX_MAIL
Date: 05/24/2000 01:03 PM
To: bminyard@littlerock.ar.us AT INTERNET
To: board@littlerock.state.ar.us AT INTERNET
To: mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us AT INTERNET
Subject: Re: Rezoning of Hwy 10 & Chenonceau
May 24, 2000
To the City Board of Directors:
r -'e- M I?/,(
RECEIVED
MAY 2 4 2000
BY:
Re: The proposed rezoning of the intersection of Chenonceau from C-2 light
commercial to C-3 Commercial Retail
My family, friends, and neighbors are all adamantly opposed to the potential rezoning of this area.
The reason is the impact from the increased traffic. The present traffic flow is poor and can be
quite exasperating in the mornings and afternoons. Accidents are increasing and improvements
have not yet been implemented. Now, we are considering adding to this problem? The added
influx of traffic for a commercial retail area would be devastating to the traffic patterns.
The reality is that a reasonable foundation with has NOT been laid for such a development. Since
the traffic is already poor, an extensive flow study should be performed and the traffic system
foundation should be developed and (at least partially) implemented BEFORE commercial
development is considered.
A well planned Interstate or Highway Bypass would probably be required to accommodate the
greatly increased traffic flow as well as additional traffic lights and exit lanes off of highway 10.
The problem with such a Bypass in that it would probably have to come around the "Natural
State" focus for the Metropolitan area ? the Arkansas River Recreation Areas, Pinnacle Mountain
State Park, Lake Maumelle, etc, ? The beauty of this area should not be spoiled for the sake of
yet another horde of mass merchants. I would guarantee that, if given a vote, most Arkansans in
Metropolitan Little Rock do not want to over -commercialize the area surrounding some of our
most beautiful and enjoyable natural assets.
For more than twenty years, there has been a slow migration to the periphery of the city whether
it is towards Conway, Cabot, Ferndale, or Benton. Yes, these communities have developed too
quickly and also have traffic problems but the tax base for Little Rock has been lost. This city
needs a well-planned growth proposal, not knee-jerk rezoning for short-term economic gains.
Traffic congestion is one of the two primary reasons for the migration out of Little Rock.
I have lived in Little Rock all of my life. As a child I grew up in Southwest Little Rock. It is sad how
that area has deteriorated. Upon returning from College fifteen years ago, I moved to the
Bowman Curve area. It was a peaceful and beautiful area to live. Now, Chenal Parkway area has
been rezoned and subsequently overdeveloped and the traffic patterns are atrocious.
This year, I completed a new home in the Ranch Area in the western edge of the city. I strongly
considered several communities outside of the Little Rock area. The reason I did not is because I
have an allegiance to the city. I also believe that the Little Rock City Board of Directors
recognizes the impact of the higher income (higher tax base) families that reside in this part of
Little Rock.
I am hopeful that this city has enough vision not to alienate this lucrative tax base and negatively
impact the ability to promote our beautiful city as a community, not yet another commercial entity.
Please keep in mind that Arkansas has very poor incentives for new industries. With this in mind,
the biggest selling point for the Little Rock is the quality of life and we cannot overlook how shaky
this point could become without good planning for our future. This proposal can negatively impact
that quality of life.
Also, the residents of this area are aware of the rumors that Wal-Mart is interested in developing
properties on Highway 10. The Wal-Mart history includes the constant development of new
properties and abandonment of old buildings. These old building typically are rented to
economically undesirable "dollar store" and Bingo parlor type of stores, further reducing the value
of the surrounding property and the overall image of the city. For starters, consider the
abandoned Sam's club on 1-430, the Target on Barrow Road, the Wal-Mart in Rock Creek
Square, and the Wal-Mart in Jacksonville.
Frankly, whether we want to admit it or not, this state has prostituted itself for the advancement of
Wal-Mart. You may disagree but consider the frequent backlash nationwide and even worldwide
to the development of new Wal-Mart stores. Every day, more and more communities are rejecting
the Wal-Mart way. Unfortunately, Sam Walton has passed away and the tone of the corporation is
totally business. For example: whatever happened to the "Buy America" and "Buy Arkansas"
campaigns? The additional industry from such sales would help our city and state far more than
yet another Super -center.
Forethought is required to ensure that West Little Rock will not evolve into another South-West
Little Rock. The handwriting is on the wall based on what has already begun on Bowman Curve.
We do not want to carry the problem further across the city.
If this area is rezoned and my quality of life is affected as anticipated, I will strongly consider
relocating out of the city. I am confident that there are multitudes of taxpayers in this area that feel
the same. I hope that such "over -commercialization" does not continue in my hometown and
strongly urge you not to rezone this area.
The aforementioned statements are based on my first-hand experiences, not supposition. Please
feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
John Riddle
8725 Ranch Blvd.
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Brian I Tcm I f l I
From: SPursley@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 3:07 PM RECEIVED
To: bminyard@Iittlerock.state.ar.us MAY 2 4 2000
Cc: board @I ittlerock. state. ar.us mayor@Iittlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Proposed Rezoning at Hiway 10 & Chenonceau
BY: r
Members of the Little Rock Planning Commission:
We are writing concerning the proposed rezoning of the property north of the intersection of
Highway 10 and Chenonceau from C-2 (light commercial) to C-3 (commercial retail).
The traffic on Highway 10 is bad and getting worse. Vehicle accidents are becoming common.
Rezoning to "commercial retail' would exacerbate these problems and create virtual gridlock in
the area.
Additionally, the land destruction and environmental impact would change the character of this
area. There is no need for commercial retail on this part of the highway with all the development
just five minutes up Chenal Parkway in the Bowman/Kanis/Markham area.
We oppose this rezoning and respectfully request that you consider our opposition in your
consideration to rezone this property.
Beth & Scott Pursley
6 Bayonne Court
Little Rock, AR 72223
868-5072
David Bryles
8607 Ranch Boulevard
Little Rock, AR 72223
Little Rock City Planning Commission
Little Rock City Board of Directors
Mayor Jim Dailey
VIA Email: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Board§littlerock.state.an us
Mayorp,littlerock. state. anus
IT ILiJ.
RECR IED
MAY 2 4 2000
M.
RE: Case #LU 00-20-01
17800 and 17900 Cantrell Road
Dear Commission Members, Members of the Board, and Mr. Mayor:
I am a property owner in a subdivision adjacent to the proposed rezoning of the property referred
to above. The proposed rezoning is from 0-2 to C-3. I am against the proposed rezoning because
of the potential for an inappropriate use of the property at 17800 and 17900 Cantrell Road. It is
my understanding that the current zoning of 0-2 is for low intensity land usage and a park like
setting developed under a unified site plan approved by the commission. This is an appropriate
zoning for the property as a harmonious integration into the residential subdivisions that surround
the site.
The C-3 commercial district proposal is in direct conflict with a desired harmonious transition to
the surrounding residential neighborhoods and not appropriate for this site. Moreover, the owners
of the subject property have not disclosed their intent for development of the property under C-3
guidelines. Retaining the current classification will, at a minimum, require the developers to seek
approval from the commission and allow further input by adjacent property owners before the
property is developed. Approving a C-3 commercial district will allow the property developers to
develop the property without any further input from the commission or property owners.
In summary, the 17800 and 17900 Cantrell Road properties are adjacent to residential
subdivisions making the current 0-2 quiet office district a compatible usage for the area. The C-3
commercial usage proposed for this location is in direct conflict with compatible usage for
adjacent R-2 neighborhoods. I am asking that the Commission deny the request for rezoning of
the property.
Sincerely,
David Bryles
Minyard, Brian
From: DARBIEHEDGES@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 9:57 AM I iI
To: bminyard@Iittlerock.state.ar.us R�' -F Iii TL'
Cc: boa rd@littlerock. state. ar. us; mayor@littlerock. state. a r. us MAY 2 4 1ijy +
Subject: Rezoning A A
Little Rock Planning Commission,
G
Concerning the property north of the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau, that is
currently up for rezoning from C-2 to C-3. We are strongly opposed to the C-3,commercial retail
zoning of this property. There are currently 2 schools within approximatly 1 mile of the proposed
site with children from K-12 grade. The traffic on Highway 10 is already bad and getting
worse.Vehicle accidents with injuries are common in this area. Lets consider the safety of the
families of the school children and the young drivers that attend these schools. There are also
350 to 400 families that live in Chenals, Aberdeen Court and Bayonne place that are 1 block
away from this proposed rezoning. The intersection of Chenonceau and Highway 10 provides
their access to 1-430. Thank you for your careful consideration of these matters.
Sincerely,
Stan K. and Darbie Hedges
Minyard, Brian
From: Keith and Beth Heaton [bkheaton@earthlink.net] RECENVED
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 9:25 PM MAY 2 4 ? 00
To: LR Planning Commission n
Cc: Mayor of Little Rock; LR Board of Directors �LjJ�1L
[BY:
This is a note to let you know of my opposition to the proposed zoning
change from zone C-2 to C-3 for the land immediately north of the
intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau. I am a home owner in the Ranch
development that adjoins the land in question, and I am vehemently opposed
to the change. Highway 10 traffic is already bad and is getting worse,
and traffic accidents are on the rise. I do not feel that we should allow
the zoning change which would subsequently allow the placement of
additional retail stores (and the resulting rise in traffic) in the area.
The majority of the other 48 homeowners in the Ranch subdivision are in
agreement in our opposition to this proposed zoning change.
Thank you for your consideration of our position.
Sincerely,
Beth A. Heaton
8 Keeneland Dr.
LR, AR 72223
Phone (501)868-1034
Minyard, Brian
From: Kevin Barnes [kbarnes@tcby.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 4:10 PM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board@littlerock.state. ar.us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning property at intersection of Hwy 10 and Chenonceau
To Little Rock Planning Commission
I am writing with regards to a rezoning proposal that I was just made aware of last night regarding property
located immediately north of the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau. I am a resident of the
Aberdeen Subdivision of Chenal Valley which is located off of Chenonceau. As I understand it, this
property is currently zoned C-2 to C-3. I believe that such a change is not in the best interest of the area. If
you have spent any time in the area over the last few years, you have noted the increase in traffic which is
understandable given the growth in the area. However, due to the current zoning in the area, the changes
have been controlled and could be improved without substantial projects. However, a change to C-3 would
open the area up for the same traffic congestion problems currently occurring at various points along
Chenal Parkway which are still being studied to determined how to correct. Consequently, I want to notify
you on behalf of myself and my wife that we are OPPOSED to the rezoning of that property. I am not sure
what additional steps I can or should take to express my opposition to the rezoning, so any information you
can provide me would be deeply appreciated.
Kevin & Lynette Barnes
14 Aberdeen Drive
Little Rock, AR 72223
501-868-5048
CC: Little Rock Board of Directors
Little Rock Mayor's Office
Minyard, Brian
From: TERRALRU@aol.com I TOAAAl-A 4 , (
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 3:17 PM RECEIVED
To: bminyard@littlerock. state. a r. us
Cc: board @littlerock. state. ar.us; mayor@littlerock. state. ar.us MAY 2 4 2000
Subject: Highway 10 rezoning
Ladies and Gentlemen: BY: _ _.._....._.__.�
Please deny the application for rezoning from C-2 to C-3 of the Ranch Property Hwy. 10. As a
resident of the Ranch, we know first hand how congested this area has already become in the
last two years alone. Little Rock is in danger of becoming a non -attainable area this summer and
the addition of more high density shopping malls will add to the possibility of increased depletion
of clean air, and will make it more difficult to restore good air quality that we have enjoyed in the
past. Hwy 10 should stay a scenic corridor but it is fast becoming another Asher Avenue.
Developers Bob Schultz and Ed Willis recently snuck in a rezoning before any of us in this
development were aware of their plans. The new Southwestern Bell Building is going to add
about 250 people and cars to this presently beautiful area. Air pollution, traffic congestion, and
other urban blights will only increase this area's displeasure with the city board. It happened to
us recently. Please don't let this happen again.
Ed and Sheryl Dunn
49 Ranch Ridge Road
Little Rock, AR 72223
868-9853
Minyard, Brian
From: JoeFranz@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 8:00 AM Jn�--fvl ` I
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us RECEIVED
Cc: board@little rock. state. a r. us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning on Highway 10 MAY 2 4 200
BY: tir_j_ —
Dear Members of the Planning Commission:
I have lived in Aberdeen Court for over two years. I have been advised that the area immediately
north of the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau is up for rezoning from C-2 to C-3.
While I am not opposed to commercial development, I oppose this effort based on the lack of
transportation infrastructure to support continued massive development along the Highway 10
corridor. In two years, I have noticed a dramatic increase in traffic on Highway 10. With the new
development already underway near the Leisure Arts complex, the situation will be severely
aggravated in the near future.
How far must we go to realize that something must be done to alleviate attendant traffic
problems?? My advice would be to create a moratorium on future development until such traffic
problems are dealt with and the roadways are in place to support new growth.
On a related matter, not only is traffic congestion bad along Highway 10, but the number of
speeders and inconsiderate drivers compounds the problem. I am amazed at how many drivers
speed on this highway. Is the speed limit not 45? Why is it set at that limit? Obviously,
consideration was given to public safety, based on the prevailing conditions... but the conditions
are deteriorating, and I see little enforcement of the limits already in place. I guess my plea is to
aggresively enforce the limits—make Highway 10 a safe route—we don't have many alternate
routes!!
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Joe Franzetti
24 Chatel Dr.
Minyard, Brian
From:
Sent:
To:
Leah Zanetta [Izanetta@alltel.net]
Sunday, May 21, 2000 5:26 PM
bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
11i 1 J
, Y .[
EC rVE L_;
Cc:
board @I ittlerock. state. ar.us; mayor@little rock. state. a r. us
7MAY2 4 1000
Subject:
Rezoning of Highway 10 property
BY: 6 ukuJ
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen
Thank you in advance for your serious consideration of this request to preserve the rural quality
of Chenal Valley by maintaining the appropriate zoning classification in this area. Specifically, my
family and I ask that the zoning for undeveloped properties in and adjacent to Chenal Valley, and
most specifically along Highway 10, be maintained as C-2 (light commercial).
When we relocated to Little Rock, with ALLTEL, in 1996 we chose Chenal Valley in large part due
to the rural nature and the absence of retail development. Our children attend Joe T. Robinson
Elementary and play little league baseball at the Highway 10 Community Center - our daily livnes
are centered around this area. Allowing heavy retail and commercial development directly in and
around Chenal would negatively change the quality of life here, increasing traffic and spoiling the
scenic quality of the area.
As Chief Information Officer for ALLTEL Communications, I understand the need for progress; but
I also feel strongly we need to have balance. West Little Rock will be better for a decision, and
commitment, to maintain the appropriate zoning around Chenal Valley.
Thank -you very much for your attention to this matter and, hopefully, for your continued support.
Sincerely,
Lon J. & Leah Zanetta
19 Iviers Drive (Bayonne Place)
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Brian
From: Robert Wilimzig [bobzig@swbell.net] ( -q l(
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 10:39 PM IRECEIVEE
To: bminyard@littlerock. state. ar.us; board @littlerock. state. a r. us;
mayor@littlerock. state. a r. us MAY 2 4 2000
Subject: rezoning
BY; 6;rw�
This email is to notify you of my strong opposition regarding the rezoning of propBltyallthe
intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau in West Little Rock from C-2 to C-3. The primary
reason most of us have moved to this area of Little Rock is to get away from all of the large
commercial development that is occurring further east toward 1-430.
The Aberdeen POA Board President, Gary Cooper, has recently had a conversation with the
owner/developer, Mr. Ed Willis, and was given verbal assurances that there is no intention of
building anything like a Wal-Mart Super Center in this area, but from past experiences with some
very close friends that lived in the area behind the current Wal-Mart/Sams complex on Bowman
Road and Chenal Parkway, I know that verbal assurances are of no value when it comes to real
estate and commercial property development. Then only thing of concern to these people is the
$$$ that the property will bring with absolutely no regard for the surrounding residents. So much
beautiful land in West Little Rock has been ravaged by developers that it makes me sick. Case in
point, the total clearing of property at the corner of Sam Peck and Highway 10 by the land owner
because he was afraid the city might/should impose a tree ordinance. How many more months
or years will we be forced to watch this type of devastation of small parcels of land with abundant
trees for the sake of "development"? Does every square foot of land have to be developed
today?
I am urging the Planning Commission, the City Board and the Mayor to deny approval of this
rezoning.
Thank you for your attention to this request. Sincerely, Robert L.
Wilimzig, 17 Rosaires Way, Little Rock, AR 72223-9103, Aberdeen POA
member. email: bobzig@swbell.net
Minyard, Brian
From: Larry72223@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 9:42 PM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board @Iittlerock. state. a r. us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: zoning change 17800-17900 Cantrell Road
Dear Planning Commission members:
I--TG711A (`er I. I
REC117111vt�1 -1
MAY 2 4 2000
The purpose of this letter is to urge you to maintain the current zoning regarding 17800-17900
Cantrell Road. The proposed rezoning would likely create significant change in the traffic
patterns, noise and overall desirability of this attractive area of our city. In particular, the
dangerous and heavy traffic patterns, coupled with potential late night/24-hour activity make this
zoning change inconsistent with the entrances to several nearby subdivisions. While there are
many other areas of western Little Rock that would be appropriate for large-scale commercial
development, the drive westward on Hwy. 10 has the potential to be a ideal combination of
office/residential development. Please maintain the current zoning to protect this area from
becoming just another string of commercial sites that bring along with them the undesirable
results with which we are all too familiar.
Finally, it seems as a community we would want to maintain zoning and community standards
that have been important factors in the decision-making of many homebuyers. Once again, we
urgently request your vote to maintain the zoning that was an important factor in our decision to
maintain our home and business interests in Little Rock. Thank you for helping Little Rock
remain a great place to live!
Sincerely,
Larry & Terrie Root
28 Iviers Drive
Bayonne Place subdivision
Larry72223@aol.com
Minyard, Brian
From: Patricia Eudy [p.eudy@worldnet.att.net] {
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 7:50 PM IRECEBTED
To: bminyard@littlerock. state. ar.us; board @littlerock. state. ar.us; MAY 2 4
mayor@littlerock. state. ar.us 2000
Subject: Development on Highway 10 West 1 0 41 (1
My husband and I built our house in Aberdeen several years ago and enjoy the quie coup ry
setting. We are concerned with the overdevelopment we see on Highway 10 West
We understand that there is a request for rezoning from C-2 to C-3 north of Chenonceau Drive.
Please do not change this zoning as it will only increase traffic on an already overburdened
highway. We also fear a devaluation of our property as these megastores expand into west Little
Rock.
Another area of concern is the possible building of a Wal-Mart Supercenter across from Harvest
Foods. Wal-Mart is notorious for building acres of parking, a huge warehouse -like building, and
then abandoning the site in 10-12 years. This type of construction is not appropriate for our
neighborhood.
Little Rock leaders say that they want to preserve the beauty of our town; then at the next board
meeting allow the contractors to level hilltops, bulldoze all the trees, and pour acres of concrete.
Please do not allow the destruction of our neighborhood.
Charles and Patricia Eudy
15 Aberdeen Drive
Little Rock, Ark. 72223-9100
868-6677
Minyard, Brian
From: JDaleBaker@aol.com L !
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 5:01 PM RECEIVED
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us IMAY 2
Subject: Rezoning Hwy 10 & Chenonceau 2.000
BY:G
As residents of Aberdeen Court in Chenal Valley we are AGAINST the rezoning of Hwy 10 &
Chenonceau.
The traffic on Hwy 10 is bad and getting worse. Accidents with injuries are common. With the
rezoning, this condition would only get worse and make our neighbor hard to enter and exit. Hwy
10 is a scenic highway and this would certainly change that status.
Again our vote is AGAINST the rezoning.
Dale and Carolyn Baker
5 Gravelle Drive
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Brian
ITEC'► (�
From: rturns [rturns@ar.freei.netj
REC'ETVFD
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 12:09 PM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
MAY 2 3 2000
Cc: board @I ittlerock. state. ar.us
Subject: REZONING
BY:
WE ARE AGAINST THE REZONING OF THE PROPERTY NORTH OF THE
INTERSECTION
OF HWY 10 AND CHENONCEAU AND WEST OF THE RANCH.
WE FEEL THIS WOULD DECREASE THE VALUE OF OUR PROPERTY AND INCREASE
TRAFFIC AND NOISE.
ROY AND HARRIETT TURNER 24 BERNEY WAY DR.
ABERDEEN COURT
rturns@ar.freei.net
Get 100% FREE Internet Access from Freei.Net. 100% FREE, 100% Anonymous, 100% Jam
Packed with features. Check us out at http://www.freei.net.
Minyard, Brian
From: HeatonKeithM@exchange.uams.edu
Seat: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 11:24 AM
To: bminyard@littierock.state.ar.us
Cc: board@littierock.state.ar.us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
f C RTT- D
MAY 2 � 2000
BY: __
This is a note to let you know of my opposition to the proposed zoning change from zone C 2 to
C-3 for the land immediately north of the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau. I am a
home owner in the Ranch development that adjoins the land in question, and I am vehemently
opposed to the change. Highway 10 traffic is already bad and is getting worse, and traffic
accidents are on the rise. I do not feel that we should allow the zoning change which would
subsequently allow the placement of additional retail stores (and the resulting rise in traffic) in the
area.
The majority of the other 48 homeowners in the Ranch subdivision are in agreement in our
opposition to this proposed zoning change.
Thank you for your consideration of our position.
Sincerely,
Keith M. Heaton, MD
Asst. Professor of Surgery,
Division of Surgical Oncology
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Home address:
8 Keeneland Dr.
Little Rock, AR 72223
Phone 868-1034
Att00636
Message -ID: <ae.569677a.265bee85@aol.com>
From: Bkterral@aol.com
To: byminyard@Iittlerock.state. ar.us, board@ littlerock.state.ar.us,
mayor@ Iittlerock. state. ar.us
Subject: Rezoning of Hway 10 property
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 09:24:05 -0500
MIME -Version: 1.0
X -Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
X-MS-Embedded- Report:
Content -Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1 "
To Whom It May Concern:
I — — n A I
��++I (t,YVV 1 I-
RL�C I V E
MAY 2 3 2000
We live in the Bayonne Subdivision off of Chenonceau and Highway 10. We are
opposed to the rezoning of the property at the intersection of Chenonceau
and
Highway 10. The traffic on Highway 10 is already bad and getting worse
each
day. With the new Southwestern Bell building going up, traffic will
increase
again in the near future.
We moved here to try to escape heavy traffic and because we thought the
property values would remain up. If that is rezoned from C-2 to C-3,
property values will decrease.
Please consider the home owners in this area before you make your decision.
We feel it would be in everyone's best interest to not rezone this area.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Jim and Brenda Terral
28 Bayonne Dr.
Page:1
lTeA/L I'q,I�I
Minyard, Brian ECIZ I[7
From: SaucedoJorgeF@exchange.uams.edu
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 8:52 AM MAY 2 3 2000
To: bmi nyard @littlerock. state. ar.us
Cc: board @littlerock. state. ar.us; mayor@littlerock. state. a r. use:
Little Rock Planning Commission,
We want to express our opposition to the rezoning of the property immediately north of the
intersection of Highway 10 and Chenoncea from C-2 to C-3.
There is already a significant amount of traffic and vehicle accidents are not uncommon.
Respectfully,
Dr. and Mrs. Jorge Saucedo
18 Iviers Dr.
Little Rock, AR
LTnVL ( r% I
DECEIVED
MAY 2 3 2000
Minyard, Brian
From: MichaelGerwig@netscape.net BY:
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 9:18 AM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Reaoning of property on Hwy 10 and Chenonceau
Dear Sirs;
I would like to voice my objection to the proposed plan to rezone the property at "The Ranch" on
the corner of Chenonceau and Hwy 10 from 0-2 (general office) to C-3 ((retail) I am a resident of
the Aberdeen neighborhood off of Chenonceau and feel that if the area is rezoned, there will be
the possibility of a large retail project such as a Walmart or other such company building there. I
am not against growth, but that area is already starting to become a traffic problem. The Baptist
school system already has a school there and Walnut Valley is in the process of moving their
school complex there. In addition to this Leisure Arts and the new SW Bell Tel call center now
under construction. We have a nice area out there and would like to keep it such. Traffic is now
becoming an issue on the whole of Cantrell/Hwy 10. If the rezoning could be structured to keep a
large supercenter from being allowed I would favor that. Professional offices and small retail
centers would be nice to!
have in the area.
My voice is a small one, but with all the other residents of the area who support alot the property
tax income to the city we are joining as one to say NO! to the planned rezoning of this area.
Thank you for your consideration.
Michael H. Gerwig
19 Aberdeen Dr.
Little Rock, AR 72223
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at
hftp://home.netscape.com/webmail/
Minyard, Brian
From: Eproductionsllc@aol.com RE( -"T,- 'JV EA
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 9:22 AM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state. ar.us; board @littlerock. state. a r. us; MAY 2 3 2000
mayor@littlerock. state. ar. us
Subject: Highway 10 Rezoning BY:
Planning commission:
I am writing as a concerned resident of Bayonne Place, a neighborhood off Chenonceau Blvd. in
Chenal Valley. I was surprised and upset to hear that the property immediately north of the
intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau is currently up for rezoning from C-2 to C-3. I was
surprised because the growth out Highway 10 — at least up until now — has been so carefully
planned. I was upset because a large retail outlet on this property will make an already tenuous
traffic situation even worse. I urge the planning commission to stop this rezoning plan. The
minuses far outweigh the plusses for the residents of the Chenal Valley and the Highway 10 area.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
Ralph Eubanks
24 Iviers Drive
Minyard, Brian
From: c.k.marlin@att.net
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 8:00 PM
To: board @littlerock.state.ar. us; bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us RECEIVED
Cc: mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning of Hwy. 10 at Chenonceau MAYV
2 3 2000
To whom it may concern: BY. (41
As property owners at 32 Bayonne Drive in the Bayonne Subdivision, it has come to our attention
a potential rezoning may occur from C-2 to C-3 of property north of the intersection of Hwy. 10
and Chenonceau. With the ongoing construction of the Southwestern Bell Call Center on Hwy.
10, we have no idea how much additional traffic will be moving on Hwy. 10, Chenonceau and
Chenal Parkway. We are concerned that Chenonceau will become the cut through street for
many motorists. The highway infrastructure is not equipped to handle major business and
residential traffic. With this concern of ours, we request the aforementioned property remain
zoned C-2.
Sincerely,
Charles L. and Kay L. Marlin
Minyard, Brian
From: whereyou@aristotle.net
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 6:34 AM RECEIVED
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board@Iittlerock.state.ar.us MAY 2 3 2000
Subject: case #Lu00-20-01 17800 & 17900 Cantrell Road V("f BY: `
Dear ladies and gentlemen;
I write this letter to implore you to not allow the property on the north side of the intersection of
Chenonceau and Highway 10 (Cantrell Road) to be allowed to be rezoned from 02 to C3. VOTE
"NO" TO RE -ZONING 02 TO C3.
I am a homeowner residing in the Ranch subdivision. My house, like several others, looks out
over the property being considered for such purposes as a Wal-Mart Supercenter or similar such
large-scale commercial tenants. Our family and our neighbors would be adversely effected by
the visual, audial, environmental and traffic impacts that would be caused by a "C3" district in our
midst. All of the neighboring homowner's quality of life and property values would be adversely
effected should you allow this quiet office district to become an intensively commercial zone. This
would impact residents on both sides of Cantrell and those who commute to work past this stretch
of Cantrell.
"C3" zoning in this location will cause the following problems that do not exist with the "02 zoning
designed in the masterplan and in place.
1. Visual impacts would change from quiet business (9-5 hours of business) with small-scale
buildings and parking lots to large-scale parking lots with lights that burn around-the-clock
(C3 allows Wal -Marts, private nightclubs, bars, taverns, etc. that operate 24-hours/day, seven
days a week).
2. Noise pollution would accompany this around-the-clock bombardment with "C3" allowing
restaurants with drive-thru windows and their loudspeakers, convenient stores with gas
pumps, auto repair shops, etc.
3. Heat, dust and exhaust from this sea of cars will carry on the prevailing winds directly to our
neighborhood. Large-scale businesses surrounded by seas of parking lots will contribute
heat, dust glare and exhaust fumes -something that is not possible as it is currently zoned
"02."
4. The same traffic that will be drawn to a "C3" district will further snarl traffic and add to the
danger of the two intersections immediately effected. These two intersections already have a
history of injuries and deaths without the added traffic count a change in zoning is sure to
cause. A "C3' zoning change would create rush-hour traffic to collide with school traffic and
business traffic at least twice a day.
5. Laudromats, service stations, animal clinics, butcher shops, and other environmental and
health -impact concerns would be allowed to build in a "C3". Again, being in a path directly
downwind, my neighbors and I am concerned for our families health.
Our residential property is near the area now zoned "02 office and institutional district". To quote
the code, the primary characteristics of this district is to provide "low intensity of land usage and a
park -like setting." This masterplanned zoning is compatable with the surrounding masterplanned
residential neighborhoods. "C3" zoning is not.
The masterplan keeps the area beautiful and helps to limit the traffic congestion, noise and
pollution immediately adjacent to residential areas. Cantrell Road is a scenic path that has been
protected in the past. We should strive to continue to preserve it as others have before us.
Preserving the quality of Cantrell both as a place to live and as a corridor to Downtown is of
benefit to all of Little Rock. For these reasons, the re -zoning to "C3" should be denied.
Thank you for consideration.
Sincerely,
George H. Thompson, Jr. AIA
Minyard, Brian
From: SLselig@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 9:30 PM
To: bminyard@Iittlerock.state. ar.us; board@littlerock.state.ar.us; � ��V�D
mayor@littlerock. state. a r. us
Cc: sselig@maverickusa.com MAY 2 2000
Subject: Rezoning proposal on Hwy 10
Dear Commissioners, Board of Directors, and Mayor Dailey:
I urgently request that you say no to the proposal to rezone the property north of the intersection
of Highway 10 and Chenonceau from C-2 to C-3. Highway 10 is becoming busier by the day with
commuters from other communities and with the addition of more schools in the area. This is
even before the traffic created by the addition of the Southwestern Bell building currently being
erected at The Ranch.
I also urge you to say no to protect the integrity of this once very scenic Highway. Please do not
turn this in to another University Ave. or Geyer Springs Road.
I am writing this letter as a fairly recent property owner in the Bayonne subdivision of Chenal. I
was attracted to the area because of the scenic and sometimes peaceful drive along Highway 10
and because I liked the peaceful residential area away from "all the stuff' in the central part of the
city. I actually lived in Walnut Valley for 20 years and I was tired of listening to traffic all day and
the sirens of fire trucks all night. I don't have that here now, and I had to pay to get away from it.
Please don't bring the City and the shoppers to our Residential area. There are plenty of places
to shop "in town."
I urge you once again to vote no to the proposed change and to listen to the citizens of this area.
We have already been handed a new Office Building that will create traffic problems. Don't make
other unwanted changes without considering the views of residents paying a great deal of
property taxes.
A concerned citizen,
Stephen Selig
slselig@aol.com
Minyard, Brian
From: SUZKJOHN@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 9:40 PM[RECEWED
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us; board @Iittlerock. state. a r. us;
mayor@little rock. state. ar.us MAY 2 3 2000
Subject: RE:rezoning of Highway 10 and Chenonceau
Dear Sirs: BY. `41
We are strongly opposed to the rezoning of Highway 10 and Chenonceau from C-2 to C-3 status.
As members of Aberdeen Property Association, we have already experienced significant
increases in traffic on Highway 10 and subsequently, more accidents. The infrastructure of the
highway cannot and will not support increased volumes of traffic for commercial retail. The end
result will be (as we have seen in so many other poorly planned areas of Little Rock) decreased
property values, strip shop after strip shop, and traffic nightmares. The qualities that made living
in Chenal Valley appealing will be removed permanently. Please, do not be short sighted in
planning for this most prosperous portion of Little Rock. Let us plan not only for our city's
development, but for our community's development as well.
Sincerely,
Susan and Charles Johnson
5 Aberdeen Drive
suzkjohn@aol.com
Minyard, Brian
From: eturner@absc.org
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 9:17 AM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us; board@littlerock.state. ar.us; IVSD
mayor@ I ittle rock. state. ar. us
Subject: C-2 to C-3 on Cantrell Road MAY 2.3 2000
BY. - I /- K.,
Planning Commission,
Please do not approve the rezoning of the land north of Hwy 10 and Chenonceau from C-2 to C-
3. When my wife and I bought and built there, we did so with the understanding that our
neighborhood would be protected from the traffic and congestion of retail business. We feel we
and our neighbors have, through our efforts at building and improving, increased the value of the
property in question. If you change the zoning you are punishing us for building a desireable
residential community. Our property would go down in value. Furthermore, the traffic load on
Hwy 10 is tremendous, even as far west as J.T. Robertson High School. To rezone this area to
retail use would make it ever worse. Those of us who live in this area are not in favor of such a
rezoning.
Emil & Mary Turner
7 Iviers Dr.
LR, AR 72223
"Emil Turner" <eturner@absc.org>
Arkansas Baptist State Convention Phone: 501-376-4791
525 W. Capitol Ave - PO Box 552 Fax: 501-374-2754
Little Rock Arkansas 72203 Arkansas only: 800-838-2272
http://www.absc.org
Minyard, Brian
From: George Thompson, AIA [gthompson@fletcherfirm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2000 8:03 AM RECEIVED
To: bminyard@little rock. state. ar.us; board@littlerock.state. ar.us;
mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us MAY 2000
Subject: Fwd: case #Lu00-20-01 17800 & 17900 Cantrell Road r
Dear ladies and gentlemen; �Y�— ^�
I write this letter to implore you to not allow the property on the north side of the intersection of
Chenonceau and Highway 10 (Cantrell Road) to be allowed to be rezoned from 02 to C3. VOTE
"NO" TO RE -ZONING 02 TO C3.
I am a homeowner residing in the Ranch subdivision. My house, like several others, looks out
over the property being considered for such purposes as a Wal-Mart Supercenter or similar such
large-scale commercial tenants. Our family and our neighbors would be adversely effected by
the visual, audial, environmental and traffic impacts that would be caused by a "C3" district in our
midst. All of the neighboring homowner's quality of life and property values would be adversely
effected should you allow this quiet office district to become an intensively commercial zone. This
would impact residents on both sides of Cantrell and those who commute to work past this stretch
of Cantrell.
"C3" zoning in this location will cause the following problems that do not exist with the "02 zoning
designed in the masterplan and in place.
1. Visual impacts would change from quiet business (9-5 hours of business) with small-scale
buildings and parking lots to large-scale parking lots with lights that burn around-the-clock
(C3 allows
Wal -Marts, private nightclubs, bars, taverns, etc. that operate 24-hours/day, seven days a
week).
2. Noise pollution would accompany this around-the-clock bombardment with "C3" allowing
restaurants with drive-thru windows and their loudspeakers, convenient stores with gas
pumps, auto repair shops, etc.
3. Heat, dust and exhaust from this sea of cars will carry on the prevailing winds directly to our
neighborhood. Large-scale businesses surrounded by seas of parking lots will contribute
heat, dust glare and exhaust fumes -something that is not possible as it is currently zoned
"02."
4. The same traffic that will be drawn to a "C3" district will further snarl traffic and add to the
danger of the two intersections immediately effected. These two intersections already have a
history of injuries and deaths without the added traffic count a change in zoning is sure to
cause.
A "C3' zoning change would create rush-hour traffic to collide with school traffic and business
traffic at least twice a day.
5. Laudromats, service stations, animal clinics, butcher shops, and other environmental and
health -impact concerns would be allowed to build in a "C3". Again, being in a path directly
downwind, my neighbors and I am concerned for our families health.
Our residential property is near the area now zoned "02 office and institutional district". To
quote the code, the primary characteristics of this district is to provide "low intensity of land
usage and a park -like setting." This masterplanned zoning is compatable with the
surrounding masterplanned residential neighborhoods. "C3" zoning is not.
The masterplan keeps the area beautiful and helps to limit the traffic congestion, noise and
pollution immediately adjacent to residential areas.
Cantrell Road is a scenic path that has been protected in the past. We should strive to
continue to preserve it as others have before us. Preserving the quality of Cantrell both as a
place to live and as a corridor to Downtown is of benefit to all of Little Rock. For these
reasons, the re -zoning to "CY should be denied.
Thank you for consideration.
Sincerely,
George H. Thompson, Jr. AIA
Minyard, Brian
From: FIREMAN [FIREMAN@ARISTOTLE.NET]
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Potential rezoning of Hwy 10 at Chenonceau Blvd
To the members of the Little Rock Planning Commission:
In regards to the possible rezoning of the property at the intersection of Highway 10 and
Chenonceau Blvd. from 0-2 to C-3, I would like to express my opposition. I am a resident of the
Aberdeen Court subdivision. My family moved here 2 years ago from the Cedar Ridge subdivision
near the Chenal Parkway/Markham intersection. One of the primary reasons for this move was
the unchecked seemingly willy-nilly development in that area and a desire to get further away
from the traffic and congestion. Now I fear that the same thing will occur in the Highway 10 -
Chenonceau area. Please consider carefully the impact that rezoning would have on the
neighborhoods involved including increased traffic and congestion and the possibility of
decreased property values. I ask that you not approve this rezoning. Thank you for your attention
to this matter.
Sincerely,
Janet Floyd
16 Aberdeen Dr.
LR, AR 72223
868-9175
RECEIVED
MAY 2�-3( 2000
BY: V, /
Minyard, Brian
From: Troy Deal [TADEAL@baptist-health.org]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 12:29 PM
To: bminyard@Iittlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Little Rock Planning Commission Meeting
May 22, 2000
Troy Deal
24 Margeaux Dr.
Little Rock AR 72223
To Whom It May Concern:
I- em I -x, 1.
RECEIVED
MAY 2 2 2000
BY:
This letter is in regard to the rezoning of a property immediately north of the intersection of
Highway 10 and Chenonceau from C-2 to C-3. I am strongly against the rezoining of this
property. This rezoning would result in a significant increase in the traffic. The area across from
this said property is a residential area and rezoining would endanger the lives of persons
especially children in the area. This particular residential area is used for pedestrian traffic. In
no way would C-3 zoning belong directly across from this property. I would appreciate serious
consideration before any changes are made in the zoning.
Sincerely,
Troy Deal
24 Margeaux Dr.
Little Rock AR 72223
T-rn Id
RECEIVED
Minyard, Brian
MAY 2 2 2000
From: Brenda Smith [bsmith_lr@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 11:43 AM BY:
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board @I ittlerock. state. ar.us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Re -zoning of Property @ Highway 10 & Chenonceau
To the Little Rock Planning Commission:
We understand that the re -zoning of the property located at the intersection
of Highway 10 and Checnonceau is being considered from C-2, light
commercial(offices) to C-3, commercial retail. We are strongly against the
re -zoning of this piece of land. The traffic out Highway 10 is already
getting congested and allowing this piece of land to be re -zoned as commercial retail will only
worsen the problem. It would also disrupt the "neighborhood" feel of the subdivisions located
close by. The reason we moved to the Bayonne subdivision was because it was country living "at
it's best". We love the quietness of the area and putting in a commercial retail center would
definitely increase the noise level not to mention the potential for crime would be greater. We
want the subdivisions to remain quiet, peaceful and safe neighborhoods for our children.
There are also several schools located within a 2 mile radius. Having a commercial retail center
located across the street from these schools would make them less safe. There are already
problems every morning with parents taking kids to school and trying to pull out on Highway 10.
Several of the schools have had to hire policemen to stop traffic in the morning just so they can
pull out on Highway 10. There have been numerous accidents on this Highway already and
adding a retail center would only compound this problem that already exists. The committee
should take a drive out there between 7:45 am & 8:30 am and they can see the problem for
themselves or look at the accident reports from Highway 10.
Please do not re -zone this area for the sake of all the families who live nearby.
Sincerely,
Dean and Brenda Smith
#4 Essay Drive
Little Rock, AR 72223
501-868-8409
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmaii.com
«em l �(
Minyard, Brian DECEIVE
From: Dale G. Schimmel [gup@swbell.net]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 11:00 AM MAY 2 2 2000
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning vote 44 BY:
Dear Planning Commission:
As a resident of the Bayonne Subdivision off of Chenonceau I would like to express my concern
over the possible rezoning of the property immediately north of the intersection of Highway 10
and Chenonceau from C-2 to C-3.
The traffic is already getting out of hand in this area to the point that I am going to suggest a
speed bump on Chenonceau next to the pool area to slow traffic down cutting across from Chenal
to Highway 10. One of the considerations for moving into this area was how the area around the
homes in the subdivision was zoned in order to determine if I would later, as development
continued, be living in a shopping area or a professional business area. The zoning of C-2 for the
ranch area insurred my family and I that the area would remain light commercial (offices) instead
of commercial retail.
Please leave this area C-2 as originally planned and keep this area as professional as possible.
Thank you,
Dale G. Schimmel
#8 Grayan Court
Little Rock, Arkansas 72223
Minyard, Brian RECVE
From: Brianewins@aol.com
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 11:01 AM MAY 2 2 2000
To: bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board @I ittlerock. state. ar.us; mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject: Rezoning Ranch site from C-2 to C-3 BY:
eeU4=
Dear Commissioners and Directors,
Please do not change the zoning of the property immediately north of the intersection of Highway
10 and Chenonceau from C-2 to C-3. I live in Bayonne Place subdivision near this intersection
and have noticed how bad the traffic already is at this intersection. I don't know if there has been
a fatal accident at this intersection, but it already concerns me even without the rezoning. I
believe the traffic is heavy due to the Little Rocks continued migration west but also due to the
many schools, churches and subdivisions in the area. The schools include: Robinson, Arkansas
Baptist and Walnut Valley. Changing the zoning in this area would increase traffic congestion
and place the public including school aged children at a higher risk of an accident. I believe C-3
zoning should be reserved for areas that don't have the high concentration of schools, churches
and subdivisions this areas has.
Sincerely,
Brian Winstead
17 Essay Drive
Minyard, Brian RFCF IV h
From: Gary Cooper [garyc@jpmscpa.com]
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 10:06 AM MAY 2 2 2000
To:'bminyard@Iittlerock.state. ar.us'
Cc: 'mayor@littlerock. state. a r. us'; 'board @littlerock. state. a r. us' BY:
Subject: Rezoning
I am writing concerning the rezoning of the land on Highway 10 by the Ranch across from
Chenonceau. The meeting for this rezoning from C-2 to C-3 is scheduled for Thursday, May 25tH
As a resident of the Aberdeen subdivision I oppose this rezoning. This rezoning will inevitably
bring about a large "mega" center of some kind that will not only increase traffic in an already
dangerous area, but deplete this part of the city of it's natural landscaping and appeal. The traffic
in this area is already very dangerous.
People moved out this far from town for a reason - to get away from the congestion and have a
nice quiet neighborhood where they can raise their kids safely. I like paying low prices for my
household items just like everyone else, I just dont want a store like this as my next door
neighbor.
Sincerely,
Gary Cooper
64 Aberdeen
Little Rock, Arkansas 72223
Minyard, Brian
From: Brenda Smith [bsmith_lr@hotmail.com] MAY 2 2 2000
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 11:43 AM
To: bminyard@Iittlerock.state.ar.us
Cc: board@ littl erock. state. ar. us; mayor@ littlerock.state.ar.us BY:
Subject: Re -zoning of Property @ Highway 10 & Chenonceau
To the Little Rock Planning Commission:
We understand that the re -zoning of the property located at the intersection
of Highway 10 and Checnonceau is being considered from C-2, light
commercial (offices) to C-3, commercial retail. We are strongly against the
re -zoning of this piece of land. The traffic out Highway 10 is already
getting congested and allowing this piece of land to be re -zoned as commercial retail will only
worsen the problem. It would also disrupt the "neighborhood" feel of the subdivisions located
close by. The reason we moved to the Bayonne subdivision was because it was country living "at
it's best". We love the quietness of the area and putting in a commercial retail center would
definitely increase the noise level not to mention the potential for crime would be greater. We
want the subdivisions to remain quiet, peaceful and safe neighborhoods for our children.
There are also several schools located within a 2 mile radius. Having a commercial retail center
located across the street from these schools would make them less safe. There are already
problems every morning with parents taking kids to school and trying to pull out on Highway 10.
Several of the schools have had to hire policemen to stop traffic in the morning just so they can
pull out on Highway 10. There have been numerous accidents on this Highway already and
adding a retail center would only compound this problem that already exists. The committee
should take a drive out there between 7:45 am & 8:30 am and they can see the problem for
themselves or look at the accident reports from Highway 10.
Please do not re -zone this area for the sake of all the families who live nearby
Sincerely,
Dean and Brenda Smith
#4 Essay Drive
Little Rock, AR 72223
501-868-8409
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at htt:llwww.hotmaiI.corn
ITEM L4XW
Minyard, Brian
From: Gina 8. Maddox [g,b_maddox@worldnet.att.netj REC EIVED
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 9:02 AM MAY 2 2 2000
To: bminyard@]itherock.state.ar.us
Subject: Highway 10 Rezoning
BY:
May 22, 2000'
Dear Sirs:
My family and I live in the Bayonne Place subdivision, located immediately south of the
intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau Blvd., an area which is currently being considered
for rezoning—from light commercial to commercial retail.
When we moved to Little Rock in 1997, we could have chosen any number of homes located
near convenient shopping. There is no shortage of retail shopping in west Little Rock! However,
we were attracted to our Bayonne Place home because of the peace and beauty of the pastoral
surroundings. Of course, we realized the scenery would change somewhat through the years
due to progress, but we never expected to find a "big box" store in our back yard, which could
happen with the proposed zoning change.
Please keep in mind that this stretch of Highway 10 is already dangerously congested with the
traffic of several subdivisions, schools, and business offices emptying onto it. Police officers
already are needed each afternoon to direct vehicles through a nearby intersection. Furthermore,
we also experience a high volume of "recreation travelers" driving to Lake Maumelle and Pinnacle
Mountain State Park, towing boats and trailers of all sizes. This area simply cannot safely
accommodate the additional traffic that a large retail store would bring.
Please deny the rezoning request. Thank you for considering the peace and safety of our
neighborhoods.
Gina B. Maddox
12 Iviers Drive
Little Rock, AR 72223
Minyard, Briars
R
ECEIVE
From: Lezle C. Rupert [lezle1@alltel.net] MAY 2 2 2000
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 9:11 AM
To: bminyard@littlerock.state. ar.us; board @I ittlerock. state. ar.us;
-M4UJ
mayor@I ittlerock. state. a r. us
Subject: rezoning of Chenal land from C-2 to C-3
I am writing pleading the commission to deny the rezoning of the property immediately north of
the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau. I know itis up for rezoning from C-2 to C-3
which is commercial retail. I strongly believe this will greatly deteriate the quality of living and
greatly lower the investment we have made as homeowners. I believe it is the Planning
Commission and the mayors office to insure that this does not happen. This is an area where the
community rallies around outdoor events. The children of neighborhood thrive on the freedom to
ride their bikes and roller blade along the roads.
I ABSOLUTELY believe that if this is open to commercial retail then you will see crime rates
increase and the freedom of the neighborhood decrease. If you look at the crime stats in this
area they are very low. This area is what Little Rock should be striving for SO PLEASE DO NOT
BEGIN TO TEAR down what we are trying to build.
Thanks for listening and please say NO.
Jason Rupert
Minyard, Brian
EC; IVED
From: Ray Cox [rcox@wlj.com] MAY 2 2 2000
Sent: Monday, May 22, 2000 8:46 AM
To: 'Little Rock Planning Commision' BY.
04JU'j-
Cc: 'Little Rock Board of Directors'; 'Mayor'
Subject: Rezoning of Property at Highway 10 and Chenonceau
I am a property owner in the Bayonne Place area along Chenonceau just south of a piece of
property that is being considered for rezoning from C-2 to C-3. I understand that the Planning
Commission will be considering the rezoning request at its meeting this Thursday. My main
concern is that we do not know at this time what kind of development is being considered for this
site. While some type of commercial development will eventually be built on this site, the
particular type of development may have consequences for the entire area that can only be
considered when the particular development is known. Decisions should not be made in an
information vacuum. Until a specific development is being proposed, I would urge the Planning
Commission to defer any rezoning decisions.
Ray F. Cox, Jr.
Wright, Lindsey & Jennings LLP
200 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2200
Little Rock, AR 72201-3699
(501) 212-1290
Fax (501) 376-9442
e-mail: rcox@wlj.com
l I'cM
Minyard, Brian
From: Rob Hutcherson [hutman@aristotle.net] RECEIVED
To: bminyard@littlerock. state. ar.us; board @littlerock. state. ar.us; MAY 2 2 2000
mayor@littlerock. state. ar.us; Jillh@heathcott.com Subject: RezoningIBY:Jq-����
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
I am a homeowner in the Bayonne subdivision. It has come to my attention that the property
immediately north
of the intersection of Highway 10 and Chenonceau is currently up for rezoning from C-2 to C-3. I
wanted to
express my strongest opposition to this move. I have spoken with several neighbors who share
my concerns.
Traffic is already a major concern with many people moving west. This move would only congest
the area more.
Accidents causing injury are now common in the area. This would add fuel to the fire. Another
reason many of
us moved to the area was because of the way it is zoned. We wanted to get away from the
commercial retail area
to raise families. This would be a bad move for this area and those involved! We realize that
Little Rock has
to grow, but lets do it in a way to benefit everybody. We don't see shopping centers going up in
the Heights or Hillcrest areas. Let's keep things the way they are and the way it was originally
planned. Thanks.
Rob and Jill Hutcherson
Minyard, Brian
From:
RedPony95@aol.com
Sent:
Monday, May 22, 2000 12:33 AM
To:
bminyard@littlerock.state.ar.us
Cc:
mayor@littlerock.state.ar.us
Subject:
Hwy. 10 at The Ranch rezoning issue
Lynn Reynolds
24 Durance Drive
Little Rock, Arkansas 72223
Members of the Little Rock Planning Commission
Department of Planning and Development
Little Rock City Hall
723 W. Markham
Little Rock, Arkansas 72201
May 19, 2000
Dear Sirs,
(Tr--rn I q,1,1
RECEIVED
MAY 2 2 200
BY:
As a Little Rock property owner residing at 24 Durance Drive in the Bayonne Place subdivision off
Chenonceau Blvd., I am very disturbed to learn that the acreage on Hwy.
10 west of the Ranch Blvd. is proposed for re -zoning from C-2 to C-3 commercial use. It is my
understanding that a commercial zoning of C-3 would allow retail businesses which could include
a business like WalMart Super Centers. Any type of retail businesses on this acreage would
increase the traffic on Hwy. 10, Chenonceau Blvd., and Chenal Parkway; these areas are
sufficiently congested at this time and would not handle the increased traffic in a sufficient
manner to insure the safety of the residents in this area.
I feel the people in the area have not been sufficiently notified of this proposal. I found out about
the rezoning plans because I happened to notice the small green rezoning sign between
Chenonceau and Ranch Blvd. , which in my opinion was not placed in a spot that is as noticeable
as it needs to be. After driving west on Hwy. 10, 1 found a larger sign; the larger sign is placed
where people turning into The Ranch, Chevaux Court, Bayonne Place, Aberdeen Court,
Margeaux Place would be unlikely to see it. Everyone I have mentioned the re -zoning to had not
noticed the signs. I also feel that a change to C-3 zoning could result in increased traffic which
would be a danger to students attending Arkansas Baptist Junior and Senior High Schools
( located directly north of this property), to residents of The Ranch subdivision, students attending
Walnut Valley Christian Schools (on Hwy. 10 west of this property), children and their parents
using the Aberdeen pool and park area on Chenonceau Blvd., and residents of Chevaux Court,
Bayonne Place, Aberdeen Court, and property owners in the Hwy. 10 and Chenal Parkway areas.
I hope you will look at what is truly best for the citizens of Little Rock who live in the area of this
property and vote not to allow a re -zoning change to C-3 for the acreage between Ranch Blvd.
and Patrick Country Road on Hwy. 10.
Respectfully,
Lynn Reynolds