HomeMy WebLinkAboutemail Wimberly on amendment James commentPage 1 of 2
Gieringer, Eve
IN
From: James, Donna
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:56 AM
To: Gieringer, Eve
Subject: RE: MSP07-02
I'm not sure, When the plat was reviewed the setback along Pinnacle Valley should have been
consistent with arterial setbacks or not less than 35 -feet. I can't recall if a variance was approved to allow
a reduced setback or not. The road was reviewed at the time of platting as a four lane arterial. Setbacks
are to property lines. It was my understanding the required right of way would not change.
-----Original Message -----
From: Gieringer, Eve
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:46 AM
To: James, Donna
Subject: FW: MSP07-02
Donna, Do you know the answer to this question?
Eve
-----Original Message -----
From: Neal Wimberley [ma iIto: Neal. Wimberley@agheritagefcs.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:43 AM
To: Gieringer, Eve
Subject: RE: MSP07-02
Will the alignment affect the setback of my property?
From: Gieringer, Eve [mailto:egieringer@littlerock.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:42 AM
To: Neal Wimberley
Subject: RE: MSP07-02
Neal,
I spoke with our Public Works department regarding your questions. One of the
city engineers, Mike Hood, sent this in response to your email:
It
The plan now being proposed is a two lane road with paved shoulders. As a
part of the project, some of the vertical and horizontal alignment of the roadway
will be adjusted to make the roadway safer.
It is the policy of the Little Rock Board of Directors to not place speed humps on
arterial and collector streets for public safety and traffic considerations. Arterial
streets by design move large volumes of traffic including emergency responders
at higher design speeds. Speed humps are sometimes used on local streets to
deter speeding where there are documented problems with speeding.
For the development that includes Waterford Drive, the developer paid a fee in -
lieu of constructing the improvements. The funds are being held for future
roadway improvements. "
I hope this answers your questions.
Eve Gieringer
10/25/2007
Page 2 of 2
-----Original Message -----
From: Neal Wimberley [mailto:Neal.Wimberley@agheritagefcs.com]
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 2:31 PM
To: Gieringer, Eve
Subject: MSP07-02
To whom it may concern,
I am a resident of 2 Waterford Dr, fronting Pinnacle Valley drive (approx 1/2 mile
south of Hwy 10). It has been brought to my attention that the Planning
Commission is requesting that the master plan be altered to reduce the status of
this road from a 4 lane arterial to a 2 lane road with shoulders. I am in no way
in favor of this road becoming a 4 lane road for many reasons.
The county road is 2 lane and the traffic count in no way supports a larger road.
There is relatively no room for significant widening of the road, and the city has
stated that they lack the funds to even improve the current road as is. There is
a widespread occurrence of speeding on this road, with relatively no police
presence.
would request that the road status be changed and that the city install a series
of speed bumps on the road which might help deter the speeding and help
enforce the speed limit.
I would also request that I be provided with the information to find out if the
developer of our subdivision was supposed to improve the section of road
fronting our homes in lieu of paying development fees to the city. If so, when is
the timeline for this to be completed? Or even started?
Neal Wimberley
Credit Officer
501-210-4011 (w)
501-529-0258 (c)
10/25/2007