Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail Correspondence Staff and Opposers 033020Koenig, Alex S. From: Koenig, Alex S. Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 8:37 AM To: 'Ken Harrison' Cc: Dawn Prasifka Subject: RE: Z-5817-J - proposed drive-thru restaurant development Thank you, Mr. Harrison. The April 2 meeting of the planning commission has been postponed. We will have a determination Thursday if this will move forward on April 23`d or a later date. Please relay to your neighbors our thanks for sending us there comments and to all of you —be safe. Alex Koenig Development Administrator City of Little Rock Planning & Development Department (501) 371-6821 From: Ken Harrison <kenharrisoncpa@hotmail.com> Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2020 10:09 PM To: Koenig, Alex S. <akoenig@little rock.gov> Cc: Dawn Prasifka <dawnprasifka@sbcgloba[.net> Subject: Z-5817-J - proposed drive-thru restaurant development Alex, I appreciate you and Jamie Collins ensuring that I received the Notice of Public Hearing regarding the Cantrell West Restaurant Center Short -form PCD (Z-5817-J). I have shared that with the Tulley Cove Neighborhood Association and have received their feedback on this proposal. The Tulley Cove Neighborhood Association unanimously opposes this proposal. Below are some of the reasons for our objections: 1. This undeveloped land has been treated as a transition area, appropriately separating the commercial node at Taylor Loop Road and Cantrell Road from residential areas. The plan for this land has been limited to planned office developments. We residents are very much in favor of the use of this land for planned office development. That use is in keeping with the development of a well planned area of our city. That plan protects 1 the residents from developers eager to acquire land that is cheaper than land in existing commercial nodes, such as the ones at Taylor Loop and Cantrell or, the next commercial node one Cantrell at The Ranch, and inserting commercial activity too close to residential areas. If the city allows this proposal, these developers will destroy the aesthetics of this area by building unsightly, high intensity commercial buildings. This would destroy the good planning done by past city leaders and the spirit of the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor. By sticking to the good planning already done, appropriate quieter, lower intensity businesses will eventually locate there. 2. This proposed development calls for 3 drive-thru restaurants crammed into an area too small for such corr mercial activity. This violates the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor DOD and the spirit of quality development. 3. This proposed development includes the use of Rummel Road, whicit is currently uie sole eiiiiance to a residential area, for one of its entrances into this proposed commercial development. Rummel Road and the streets intersecting it is, and should continue to be, solely a residential area. Rummel Road is not designed to serve the commercial traffic that will come as a result of this proposed development. Currently, Rummel Road is a primitive street, with no curb or gutter, that quickly twists and turns near its intersection with Cantrell. No traffic light is at the intersection at Rummel and Cantrell Roads. While turning left from Rummel onto Cantrell is currently challenging, it is manageable for its residential traffic. It would, definitely, not be if it had to service the commercial traffic this proposed development would bring. 4. This proposed development would require several variances from the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor DOD. This is a significant indicator that this development is a poor use of this land- -------A This proposed UeVeloplllellt `v`v'o uid be a fine commercial oppoi�nni��' :: it ::'ate located Jiist a short distance :'est at The Ranch. There., in this commercial node, it would benefit from the schools and businesses located there, There is a plenty of acceptable commercial land available for such a development at The Ranch. Good development for our city would encourage this developer to build this project there and not so near residential areas. Please oppose this proposed development in this inappropriate location. Please do not let this development scar our city. Please contact me should you have any questions or comments. Thank you. Ken Harrrisori 5504 Tulley Comae T ' , . 3 — 3 '/ J .Ude rwocK, iY �iisaS i 2223 Cell Phone: 501-804-83111.'' Koenig, Alex S. From: Celia Martin <thecook7@att.net> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2020 10:01 AM To: Koenig, Alex S. Subject: Rees West Cantrell Restaurant Center Mr. Koenig, I've seen the site plan for John Rees' West Cantrell Restaurant Center proposal. My family and many of our Westchester neighbors are adamantly OPPOSED to this type of development being considered in an undeveloped area of Cantrell that has a land use designation of Suburban Office. Restaurants, much less drive-thru restaurants, have no place in this type of land use even within the Planned Development area which does allow for variances that would not normally be considered appropriate. I hope you go back and review original discussions at the Planning Commission and BOD hearings as well as the documents for the formation of the Hwy 10 Scenic Corridor & DOD. I think you'll find that there was a hue and cry from the citizens of Little Rock that they wanted to preserve the natural scenic area that was prevalent along Hwy 10 west of 1-430. One of the rallying cries was "We don't want another stripped out Rodney Parham!" When we purchased our lot in 1988 there was no retail west of 1430 except for a convenience store and the cleaners and liquor store at South ridge/Walton Heights, the Toddy Shop in Panky, The Space Place Storage, an antique shop in the building where Capers located and the shopping center with Fuller & Son. That was it. There were no traffic signals west of Southridge/Walton Heights. Hwy 10 was in the beginning process of being expanded to its current width. The Board of Directors appointed a citizens group to come up with a plan that would allow for business expansion while protecting the scenic quality of the area. A major part of that plan was the designation of commercial nodes at specific intersection--Southridge/Walton Heights; Sam Peck; Taylor Loop; Chennoncaeu; and Hwy 300/Chenal Parkway. There was to be an area of commercial developments using PCDs west of Panky School (where the new Panky Community Center sits to Taylor Loop. The idea was for commercial uses like restaurants, grocery stores, home improvement, convenience/gas stations, drug stores, etc. to be located in those areas followed by lesser uses spreading outward through Transitional and then Suburban Office land uses along the undeveloped areas ..... such as professional offices, some light neighborhood shops, and other things that wouldn't have high traffic or expanded hours. The vision was to have the types of heavier use and traffic at intersections that had traffic signals and the rest of the developments to be much quieter in scope leading to a more attractive and peaceful transition from commercial node to commercial node. And of course, all the developments incorporated a high level of landscaping both for aesthetics and for helping with environmental concerns like drainage and flooding. Unfortunately, as you can see, that plan hasn't been upheld especially in the Taylor Loop node. Although not the first developments to be built west of Taylor Loop and despite surrounding neighborhood efforts against the proposal, Burger King and the still undeveloped lot behind it was the first to be allowed to break the land use plan. That expanded the commercial node considerably. And set the path for the consistent filings for heavy commercial uses in the remaining lots, the latest being the approval of Zaxbys which turned into Tazikis and the withdrawn application for the tattoo place on the small lot next to Rummel Road. The only applications that fit into the land use category were an early approval for a office/limited retail development on the Taziki lot and the Magnolia Terrace lots and 2016 (1 think) for the Magnolia Terrace lots, for a medical office which never got off the ground. The surrounding neighborhoods supported that application because it fit into the Land Use category. As for Mr. Rees' current application. ■ 3 drive-thru restaurants on less than 3 acres? I understand that using the Planned Development format allows for some variances from the Hwy 10 DOD but this stretches the limit. Check out the denial of a McDonalds at the southeast corner of Hwy 10 and Chennancaeu some years ago because the lot was under 2 acres. Access safety was also a major concern and not only was it on a corner lot with access to both major streets. there was a traffic signal that would have helped in the safety of access. That is not the case here. • Entrances. The DOD recommends limiting access points at least 300' apart. This site has 2 in less than 500' plus the access to Rummel Road which becomes another access point to Cantrell and is less than 150' from the western driveway. if you recall, during our email discussion of the tattoo place. you stated that using Rummel Road as the access point for that development was in keeping with the 300' DOD stipulation as a safety measure. This proposal flies in the face of that. How will the eventual widening on Hwy 10 affect the safety of this. -it's my understanding that ADOT is now looking at expanding the highway past Taylor Loop to the bridge at Rummel Road. Will this development have to put in a deceleration lane like Burger King/Kaufman was required t_? Safety. Fven with the center lane available it is often difficult to make a left hand turn out of Regions or Burger King./Kaufman. This is especially true in the drive times of morning and afternoon. Our afternoon drive time �__ __ ,n +h_ 4.. I +:�.... +'1 + least Ly 1�+.,. Tb... .J f 4r ,U e.pins about 3 pryi wit' all illy Scullol _-losings and C,Jr'1 int es until a� least um or later. . The sueeu o uaffic heading west from Taylor Loop has reached at least the posted speed by the time it reaches this site. Check with the folks who live off Rummel Road as to how difficult -it to try to turn onto Cantrell either direction. Signage. 3 monument signs? I'vir. Rees self -described this as a "center" in the application title. Most other "centers" are allowed one sign with all the businesses listed. 3 signs in such a small space would certainly add clutter to the area which goes against the DOD concept trying to remain marginally "scenic". Variances. What other variances are being asked for? w_ will that t "I n OD ' + I d ' 1 viable that t is tO I understand filet litany will say i,lai ilia Hwy lv DOD is about 30 years old a;l,� is no longer a via..,A plan... at i o restrictive. It was designed to be restrictive so that this area Of Little ROCK could maintain some of its natural l J the City Board _._._roved :+ 'Eve 'fin ye do the beauty. The CILIZenS Of this Community CarTle Lip with the plan aria trle l.liy oudyu d��ruvela It. veil �tJ years uuvliil talc road we citizens still expect our city staff and leaders to uphold what they have written into the Municipal Code. One of the neighbors said that in his conversation with you, you said something to the effect that the Zaxbys/Taziki's approval set the precedent for other similar -uses for rest Of the property from it west to Rummel Road. Whenever I've mentioned precedents being set, 1 have consistently been told at every single level "There are NO precedents set. EACH proposal is judged on its own merit." Staff, Planning Commission members and Boards of Directors have all made those —statements tome —both rivat& anTpubiicf . "i be fifst-sLe p LO a hotd- 11 H 1Q`Scenic-'Corr dtfrDOD�i-sfor STAFF--tcl — p Y p v i � � recommend denial. Then it's up to the Planning Commission and the Board. I urge Staff to take that first step. Many iiy t.. :77 :9 for yiJUr ti77:e 317u yvi.er -:lvl �� 1»r van -IL Celia Martin 3 Canterbury Court Little Rock, AR 72223 501-517-5276 thecook7@att.net 2 Koenig, Alex S. From: Celia Martin <thecook7@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 10:59 AM To: Koenig, Alex S. Subject: Z-5817 Rees Cantrell West Restaurant Center Good morning, Mr. Koenig. I saw in yesterday's paper that boards and commissions were being allowed to meet virtually with the Planning Commission being specifically mentioned. While I certainly understand the City's need to continue conducting business during this unusual circumstance, I'm wondering how that's going to work when there will be citizens wanting to make presentations or comments that differ from the applicant's? This is especially concerning for those citizens who may not be comfortable using video conferencing (if they have access to it) as well as those of us who are only marginally competent at doing so. Will the May 14th PC meeting be the first virtual meeting of the PC or will have there been prior ones where some of the unforeseen problems might have been addressed? How will the regular format change? How will the chair be notified of whom wants to comment positively or negatively? What kind of real time technical assistance will be available to help folks who are having issues? What kind of information will be provided to the public prior to the meeting about how they can "attend"? I'm sure the staff is working on all these and more. Thanks for taking time to read my concerns. Stay well! Celia Martin 3 Canterbury Court Little Rock, AR 72223 501-517-5276 Thrower, Torrence From: Jimmy Brown, PhD <jimmybrownphd@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, May 4, 2020 11:32 AM To: LRzon i ng Subject: Rezoning Application Z-5817-J - Please Recommend Against Approval. Dear Zoning Staff. My name is Jimmy Brown and I live at 15621 Sorrells Rd, Little Rock, AR 72223. While developing this site according to the current land use plan of small suburban office would be welcomed, I am writing to ask that you recommend against the application Z-5817-J aka Cantrell West Restatruant Center as it does not meet with the land use plan, city code, or the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor overlay for the following reasons a) The current Zoning for one of the plots is R-2 and the other two are 0-1, a quiet suburban office. The land - use plan has all three plots as quiet suburban office. This application is asking for rezoning to Planned Development Commercial (PD-C). The latest plan dated 2/24/2020 is showing three drive-thru restaurants. As the city code only allows drive-thrus in C-2 (Shopping Center District) or above, that would make this zoning change a huge amount of zone creep. b) The city code appears to read that the minimum size for a C2 zones is 5 acres. This development would only be 3.13 acres on its own. Even if we count the Taziki's next to it what would still be only 4.6 acres. As such, not consistent with code c) Adding an additional commercial node here is unnecessary as there are already several not fully developed commercial nodes nearby including the one to the east at Cantrell and Taylor loop (.38 miles away which we have been told belongs to the same developer) and a very large one to the west Cantrell and Chenonceau (1.48 miles away) d) This would have a major traffic congestion impact. The one conversation I was able to have with the developer (after several attempts) and feedback from others is that they do not yet know what will go into these spots and as such have no firm info on expected traffic hours of operation or things like that. Based on the info I found on a 2014 article on the Motley Fool website (I can share for anyone who wants), the number of visits for a fast food restaurant could be up to 1971 per day, which for 3 stores means easily 5,913 per day. Even if we assume equal traffic from east to west that is still around 2956 cars slowing down to turn right. And the same number having to stop and wait for an opening to turn left. This would make another congested spot only .38 miles west of Taylor loop intersection that is already congested. e) The latest plan (dated 2/24/2020) shows and a driveway into this center approximately 315 feet up Rummel road into a sharp, steep, and all but blind turn. While the developer claims this would only be used by employees and hence have a low impact on traffic on Rummel, we've been told by Little Rock City Director Lance Hines that the Highway Commission is already planning to expand Cantrell (they are just waiting on funding) and part of those expansions will be limiting left-hand turns through this location. This means that when that is done, the only left -turn access to this center will be the proposed entrance onto Rummel road. As such, you'll have the previously mentioned 2956 cars turning into one intersection every day. Even if we can discount the massive negative impact on all the 58 families who live up Rummel Road (for which this is their only entrance and exit), this will create a huge bottleneck and traffic jam for everyone going east on Cantrell every day. e; When the highway commission expands Cantrell they will likely go north rather than south because going hits into the back yards of the people who live in Westchester and what is currently listed as a Parks and Recreation Zone. When that happens, this will lose a lot of frontages which could make this "drive -through food court" in violation of the standards set forth in the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor overlay. f1 The Hiahwav 90 SrQnir inrridor nvpriav -Sec.. 36-34& - Site design and developrnent standards subsection says "Building si eS. 71h_ ma�finumber of bbillings pe-T Commercial development shall be measureU a1'ioLh by minimum tract size and minim Lim frontage as follows. One (1) building every two (2) acres." This has 3 buildings on 3.13 acres, about double the guidance. Thank you for your time and please don't be shy if you have any questions. - Jimmy j1r-m, Brawn, PhD BC iir mybrownphdLci)pznaii.Gom 501.588.1930 - Desk 501.588.3529 - Fax vvww. 'lmm brown hc_ cam amazon.com/aL,ithor/jimmybrown Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 10:40 AM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Read: Planning Commission Meeting 5/14/20 - File Number: Z-5817-J Agenda Item: 13 -OPPOSED From: rfstoker@earthlink.net [mailto:rfstoker@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 10:39 AM To: Coleman, Stephen <scoleman@littlerock.gov> Subject: Re: Read: Planning Commission Meeting 5/14/20 - File Number: Z-5817-J Agenda Item: 13 - OPPOSED I apologize for this automatic reply to your email. To control spam, I now allow incoming messages only from senders I have approved beforehand. If you would like to be added to my list of approved senders, please fill out the short request form (see link below). Once I approve you, I will receive your original message in my inbox. You do not need to resend your message. I apologize for this one-time inconvenience. Click the link below to fill out the request: https://webmail.pas.earthlink.net/wamladdme?a=rfstoker(ia earthlink.net&id=l lea-8faf-c3fl08c6-bcab- 002128a4398e Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 1:45 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Opposed to Z-5817-J From: Ken Harrison [mailto:kenharrisoncpa@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 12:25 PM To: Herndon, Tim <therndon@littlerock.gov>; LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov>; Alex S. Koenig <akoenig@littlerock.gov>; Collins, Gilbert <gcollins@littlerock.gov> Subject: Opposed to Z-5817-J This is to let you know of my strong opposition to the proposed development of the restaurants described in file Z-5817-J. As the President of the Tulley Cover Neighborhood Association, on behalf of my neighbors, I am informing you here that we are unanimously opposed to the plan in Z-5817-J. I am a 20 year resident of the area affected by this proposed development. Since building my home on Tulley Cove in 2000, I have observed commercial development in the area immediately west of the commercial node at Taylor Loop and Cantrell Roads. Zoning creep has deteriorated the wise planning done many years ago in the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor Design Overlay District. Examples of violations of the spirit of the Highway 10 DOD are the Burger King at 14916 Cantrell Road and, more recently, the Taziki's restaruant at 15000 Cantrell Road. Both of these violate the spirit of this DOD by bringing in high traffic, commercial activities in an area intended for good transition between commercial nodes and residential areas. Now is the time to be sticking close to the wise, long-term planning codified in the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor DOD. Now is the time to resist developers who are looking for cheaper land to put in intense commercial activities. Now is the time to ensure these commercial activities stay within the confines of established commercial nodes. There is plenty of space available in those commerical nodes for the type of development proposed in Z-5817-J. The proposal in Z-5817-J, if approved, will: result in undesirable zoning creep which will degredate current spaces used for nice homes and professional businesses; 2. violate crucial aspects of the Highway 10 DOD, such as restrictions on lot size, lighting, noise, traffic impacts, drainage, etc.; 3. create horrible traffic issues on Cantrell Road, such as traffic backing up onto Cantrell in an area where traffic is moving at a higher rate of speed, as well as the dangers of traffic slowing to turn into commercial businesses; 4. aggravate current challenges with traffic coming out of Rummel Road. Rummel Road currently serves only residential traffic and is a primitive road with many curves and no curb and gutter. 5. inappropriately allow an entrance and exit into a commercial business from a street (Rummel Road) intended to be strictly used for residential traffic. Now is the time to have this developer prohibited from using this land area for commercial activity and have this developer move his plan to the very available, and more appropriate, land at nearby commercial nodes, such as the land available at The Ranch. Please recommend denial of the plan proposed in Z-5817-J. Thank you for year service to the citizens of Little Rock and for striving to keep Little Rock a beautiffil city into the future. Ken Harrison 5504 Tulley Cove Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 r� Cell Phone: 501-804-8311t:" l�• Moore, Monte From: Collins, Gilbert Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 8:53 AM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Opposed to Z-5817-J From: Ken Harrison <kenharrisoncpa@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 12:25 PM To: Herndon, Tim <therndon@littlerock.gov>; LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov>; Alex S. Koenig <akoenig@littlerock.gov>; Collins, Gilbert <gcollins@littlerock.gov> Subject: Opposed to Z-5817-J This is to let you know of my strong opposition to the proposed development of the restaurants described in file Z-5817-J. As the President of the Tulley Cover Neighborhood Association, on behalf of my neighbors, I am informing you here that we are unanimously opposed to the plan in Z-5817-J. I am a 20 year resident of the area affected by this proposed development. Since building my home on Tulley Cove in 2000, I have observed commercial development in the area immediately west of the commercial node at Taylor Loop and Cantrell Roads. Zoning creep has deteriorated the wise planning done many years ago in the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor Design Overlay District. Examples of violations of the spirit of the Highway 10 DOD are the Burger King at 14916 Cantrell Road and, more recently, the Taziki's restaruant at 15000 Cantrell Road. Both of these violate the spirit of this DOD by bringing in high traffic, commercial activities in an area intended for good transition between commercial nodes and residential areas. Now is the time to be sticking close to the wise, long-term planning codified in the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor DOD. Now is the time to resist developers who are looking for cheaper land to put in intense commercial activities. Now is the time to ensure these commercial activities stay within the confines of established commercial nodes. There is plenty of space available in those commerical nodes for the type of development proposed in Z-5817-J. The proposal in Z-5817-J, if approved, will: 1. result in undesirable zoning creep which will degredate current spaces used for nice homes and professional businesses; 2. violate crucial aspects of the Highway 10 DOD, such as restrictions on lot size, lighting, noise, traffic impacts, drainage, etc.; 3. create horrible traffic issues on Cantrell Road, such as traffic backing up onto Cantrell in an area where traffic is moving at a higher rate of speed, as well as the dangers of traffic slowing to turn into commercial businesses; 4. aggravate current challenges with traffic coming out of Rummel Road. Rummel Road currently serves only residential traffic and is a primitive road with many curves and no curb and gutter. 5. inappropriately allow an entrance and exit into a commercial business from a street (Rummel Road) intended to be strictly used for residential traffic. Now is the time to have this developer prohibited from using this land area for commercial activity and have this developer move his plan to the very available, and more appropriate, laird at nearby con mercia, nodes, such as ►he land available at The Ranch. Please recommend denial of the plan proposed in Z-5817-J. Thank you for your service to the citizens of Little Rock and for striving to keep Little Rock a beautiful city into the future. Ken Harrison 5504 Tinley Cove Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 Cell Phone: 501-804-8311k„' Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:32 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Registration for 5/14/2020 Planning Commission public hearing From: Ken Harrison [mailto:kenharrisoncpa@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 12:05 PM To: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Registration for 5/14/2020 Planning Commission public hearing RE: May 14, 2020 Planning Commission Agenda Item #11 (Application Z-5817-J, Cantrell West Restaurant Center) I would like to go on record as a registered objector to the proposed development referenced above and would like to speak at the public hearing against the proposal. Due to the current social distancing restrictions, I will be attending this hearing online. Below is the contact information to use for purposes of the record of citizens in opposition to this proposal and to contact me during the hearing - Ken Harrison 5504 Tulley Cove Little Rock, Arkansas 501-804-8311 Thank you. Ken Harrison 5504 Tulley Cove Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 CellPhone: 501-804-8311t- ' 1 Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:32 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Registration as Objector to Application Z-5817-J on May 14, 2020 Planning Commission meeting From: Dick Stoker [mailto:rfstoker@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:30 PM To: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Registration as Objector to Application Z-5817-J on May 14, 2020 Planning Commission meeting I want to go on record as a Registered Objector to the following item to be discussed in the May 14, 2020 Planning Commission meeting. Agenda Item #11 (Application Z-5817-J, Cantrell West Restaurant Center) Name: Richard F. Stoker Address: 11 Countryside Cv. City: Little Rock, AR 72223 Phone: (501) 352-9639 Date: May 11, 2020 Email: rfstoker@earthlink.net NOTE: I wish to attend this meeting Virtually due to my Covid-19 high risk conditions. 1 Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 10:39 AM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Planning Commission Meeting 5/14/20 - File Number: Z-5817-J Agenda Item: 13 -OPPOSED From: Dick Stoker [mailto:rfstoker@earthlink.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 10:29 AM To: Herndon, Tim <therndon@littlerock.gov>; LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Planning Commission Meeting 5/14/20 - File Number: Z-5817-J Agenda Item: 13 - OPPOSED I am a home owner and resident of the Countryside subdivision which connects to Rummel Road, and I am writing this email to document that I am against this proposed development northeast of the intersection of Cantrell and Rummel roads in west Little Rock for a "Cantrell West Restaurant Center." Some reasons for my opposing this application are as follows: 1 This application proposes to change plot zoning to PD-C to allow 3 fast food restaurants with drive through facilities. This would be a radical change from the current single family residential and quiet office zoning, and create a major congestion area of people and cars where none currently exists (especially when taken together with the existing Tazikis restaurant immediately to the east). This does not sound like a good planning decision to me. 2 Yes, there is already a fast food restaurant immediately next door. But 4 in a row?? I'm not aware of any other area in Little Rock where that occurs. Much better to use the plots for quiet office facilities and smooth out the congestion over a wider stretch of the Cantrell Scenic Corridor. 3 With respect to congestion, the Highway 10 Overlay District guidelines state that, for commercial zones, there should be one building every two acres. This proposal would result in about one building every one acre. So, even if zoning is changed to Commercial, the application is immediately in violation of the guidelines. 4 Also, this proposal would have a major impact on traffic congestion. I have seen some estimates that fast food restaurants can have as many as 1,900 visits per day. Multiply that times 3 restaurants takes you to 5,700 visits per day. When you consider that each visit requires 2 interactions with Cantrell Road traffic (1 entering and 1 exiting) the numbers get really big. 5 Traffic heading east on Cantrell would have to turn left into the restaurant center using the left turn lane in the center of the road. During periods of high traffic (e.g., lunch time), the car queue waiting to turn left into the restaurant center would back up and block Rummel road traffic entering Cantrell from turning left. This situation would create competition for use of the center turn lane (a.k.a., the "suicide lane") and would undoubtedly result in a higher number of traffic accidents in that section of Cantrell. 6 The application proposes that one entrance to the property be off of Rummel Road, in addition to 2 entrances off Cantrell. The entrances on Cantrell are within guidelines and code. The proposed entrance on Rummel is not. The issue is that commercial traffic should not be routed to residential streets that are not suited for it. Rummel can barely handle the current residential load. What is the reason for the entrance on Rummel? It would not appear to be needed. There are over 55 single family residences in the neighborhoods connecting to Rummel Road. People living in these neighborhoods have to get to and from their houses using the Rummel/Cantrell intersection — there is no other option. The area where the proposed businesses would connect to Rummel is in the middle of a narrow, curved section which is already a challenge to navigate. Adding business traffic to Rummel is not a good idea, and increases the risk of traffic accidents on that road In summary, l am opposed to this proposed development, and I am asking the Planning Commission to reject it. Regards, Richard Stoker 11 Countryside Cove Little Rock, AR 72223 Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 10:06 AM To: Moore, Monte Subject: Fwd: Planning Commission Meeting Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Phil Cox <PCox@hogantaylor.com> Date: May 12, 2020 at 8:40:02 AM CDT To: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Item #11 (Application Z-5817-J, Cantrell West Restaurant Center) I would like to go on record as a Registered Objector. Name: Phillip W. Cox Address: 5515 Tulley Cove, Little Rock, AR., 72223 Phone: (501)231-2083 Date: 05/12/2020 Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 10:06 AM To: Moore, Monte Subject: Fwd: Registered Objector for May 14, 2020 Sent from my Whone Begin forwarded message: From: Celia Martin <thecook7@att.net> Date: May 12, 2020 at 10:05:35 AM CDT To: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Registered Objector for May 14, 2020 Agenda Item #11 (Application Z-5817-J, Cantrell West Restaurant Center) I would like to go on record as a Registered Objector on May 14, 2020. Name: Celia Martin Address: 3 Canterbury Court 72223 Phone: 501-517-5276 Date: May 14, 2020 1 Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 1:47 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Z-S817-J From: Mickey [mailto:mickey-thomas@att.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 12:54 PM To: Herndon, Tim <therndon@littlerock.gov> Cc: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Z-5817-J Mr. Herndon: As a long time resident of the Cantrell Road corridor and Rummell Road neighborhood, Thomas Park, I am opposed to the proposed Z-5817-J. The plans do not meet the zoning requirements established to encourage business growth and protect residential safety. The required rezoning needed to allow this plan is another example of zone creep and in complete disregard for the standards set after much research to ensure both business and residential needs are met. Allowing business to enter/exit from a small, winding, sloped, neighborhood road is a huge concern. I have been driving and/or cycling through the intersection of Rummell and Cantrell for 40 years .... and routing additional traffic onto Rummell in order to access Cantrell is poor planning ... no matter how you look at it. Rummel is a small neighborhood road and was not designed to handle this traffic load or pattern. Exiting from Rummell to Cantrell gets more dangerous each year, and this plan will only make it worse. Keep Rummell residential. And if a business "needs" to use Rummell, it should be developed in one of the several nearby areas zone to meet those needs This proposed plan does not adhere to the Highway 10 Scenic Corridor. This overlay plan was designed to allow business development while protecting residential areas. The overlay and zoning regulations should not be circumvented or overlooked to allow business development at the expense of the people who live in the area. These regulations were well -researched and approved for a reason. And Z-5817-J isn't reason enough to ignore them. . . T�ia�'i� you_ � i'_.i j our consideration. JYbiAy i 40may Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 1:49 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Proposed Development on Rummel & Cantrell Roads. From: Mei-Mei Brown [mailto:mei_mei_k@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 11:34 AM To: Herndon, Tim <therndon@littlerock.gov>; LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Proposed Development on Rummel & Cantrell Roads. Good Afternoon Mr. Herndon and Staff, I am writing in regards to the proposed development by Rees Commercial located on Rummel and Cantrell Roads. I and several of my neighbors are strongly opposed to the approval of this application. There are several reasons why the current application should not be approved. Zoning The current zoning for these parcels are R-2 and 0-1. The intensity of use and traffic to rezone this area to a Commercial designation is far greater than what the zoning and proposed land use dictates. The use of not one, but three drive through restaurants is a far overreach of the current zoning as it stands. It is imperative that the community is able to rely on the consistency of the land use plan. The continuous effort to up -zone this area is in opposition to the intent of having a land use plan at all. This application is trying to convert something that is intended for quiet office use to something that is basically a drive through food court, which is a prime example of zoning creep. In addition, the developer has stated that they do not yet know which businesses would be located there. This is a substantial concern, seeing as how most fast food restaurants have extremely long hours, some even being open 24 hours. This is a substantial difference from what the likelihood of business hours would be for a small office. Effects on the land The effects of having three additional high traffic commercial areas would be detrimental to the already existing sewer and waste systems in place. Having a small office use, as is what it should be, would be far less of a burden on the current systems than what it proposed. Traffic Concerns According to Arkansas Department of Transportation, there are over 30,000 cars that utilize Cantrell Road between Taylor Loop and LaMarche. It is estimated that over 1500 vehicles will visit one drive through food establishment daily. Having not only one, but three of these businesses, will increase traffic on the corner of Rummel Road to potentially over several thousand vehicles per day. This will create a bottleneck for anyone on Cantrell Road, as well as the surrounding neighborhoods. This will provide congestion for both vehicles coming out of this center, as well as residents who live off of Rummel Road, who have this as their only means of ingress and egress. Highway 10 Scenic Corridor The Development Statement clearly states that only one building per two acres is allowed. This proposal has three buildings on only 3.1 acres. This is almost triple the amount allowed. In addition, when Highway 10 is expanded, the greenspace frontage will be lost, removing the aesthetic that the Overlay's intent is to preserve. This particular area is supposed to be a transitional section of Highway 10. There is a commercial node located at Taylor Loop and another at Chenonceau, The developer could easily move less than half mile up the street to an area that's alreadv zoned for its proposed use. In conclusion, I would like to state that 1 support growth and development, but in a way that is in line with the intent of the Board and the community, as shown by the previous approval of the current plan. Any business that proposes development on those parcels should fit within the current zoning and land use plans, otherwise the entire length of Cantrell Road will soon lose the intent of use for which the plan looks to preserve. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Mei-Mei Brown Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 1:45 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: OPPOSED: Cantrell West Restaurant Center <> Planning Commission Meeting 5/14/20 - File Number: Z-S817-J Agenda Item: 13 From: SHEPHERD, LANNY C [mailto:ls6093@att.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2020 12:07 PM To: Herndon, Tim <therndon@littlerock.gov>; LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: OPPOSED: Cantrell West Restaurant Center <> Planning Commission Meeting 5/14/20 - File Number: Z-5817-J Agenda Item: 13 I am a home owner and resident of the in the Pinnacle Valley Neighborhood off of Rummel Road (I live on Eagle Glenn Cv), and I am writing this email to document that I am highly against this proposed development northeast of the intersection of Cantrell and Rummel roads in west Little Rock for a "Cantrell West Restaurant Center." Like me and many of my neighbors, we travel Rummel Road several times a day and the traffic getting on/off of Cantrell will be terrible if this developer is allowed to a "Restaurant Center" for drive through fast food in the planned location. There are countless other places up/down Cantrell that are much more suited for this type development, some with existing vacant space in old restaurant locations and/or commercial shopping type areas — not the entrance to a quiet neighborhood with 50-60 houses that only have 1-way in/out (Rummel Road). There are several reasons for me & my neighbors opposing this application: 1 This application proposes to change plot zoning to PD-C to allow 3 fast food restaurants with drive through facilities. This would be a radical change from the current single family residential and quiet office zoning, and create a major congestion area of people and cars where none currently. 2 1 realize there is already a restaurant adjacent to these lots (Tazikis), but 4 in a row is ridiculous for this type of area when so many other areas that are already developed/cleared are available that are not part of this scenic area. It would be much better to use this area quiet office facilities and smooth out the congestion over a wider stretch of the Cantrell Scenic Corridor and reuse existing or vacant commercial locations more suitable for this type development. 3 With respect to congestion, the Highway 10 Overlay District guidelines state that, for commercial zones, there should be one building every two acres. This proposal would result in about one building every one acre. So, even if zoning is changed to Commercial, the application is immediately in violation of the guidelines. 4 This proposal would also have a major impact on traffic congestion. Based on some estimates that fast food restaurants can have as many as 1,900 visits per day, this could result in up to 5,700 visits a day for 3 restaurants. This would heavily impact the congestion in this immediate area near Rummel Road. 5 As one of my neighbors has already indicated in a similar letter to the City, the Traffic heading east on Cantrell would have to turn left into the restaurant center using the left turn lane in the center of the road. During periods of high traffic (e.g., lunch time), the car queue waiting to turn left into the restaurant center would back up and block Rummel road traffic entering Cantrell from turning left. This situation would create competition for use of the center turn lane (a.k.a., the "suicide lane") and would undoubtedly result in a higher number of traffic accidents in that section of Cantrell. 6 The application proposes that one entrance to the property be off of Rummel Road, in addition to 2 entrances off Cantrell. While the entrances on Cantrell are within guidelines/code, the proposed entrance on Rummel is not and would be a very bad idea to route commercial traffic through the residential streets (Rummel Rd) that are not suited for it. Rummel can barely handle the current residential load now and has needed repair for many years. The entrance on Rummel is NOT NEEDED and will be a major issue for residents in this area. As mentioned earlier, there are 50-60+ single family residences in the neighborhoods connecting to Rummel Road. People living in these neighborhoods have to get to and from their houses using the Rummel/Cantrell intersection — there is no other option. The area where the proposed businesses would connect to Rummel is in the middle of a narrow, curved section which is already a challenge to navigate. Adding business traffic to Rummel is not a good idea, and increases the risk of traffic accidents on that road I (along with all the neighbors in my areal am opposed to this proposed development, and I am asking the Planning commission to reject it. Thank you LANNYSHEPHERD S Eagle Glenn Cove Little Rock, AR 72223 Email: LS6093@att.com Email: Lanny.C.ShePherd@ maig i.com z Moore, Monte From: Coleman, Stephen Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 3:12 PM To: Moore, Monte Subject: FW: Cantrell West From: Lois Cox [mailto:loisjcoxl0@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 2:53 PM To: LRzoning <LRzoning@littlerock.gov> Subject: Cantrell West Agenda Item #I I (Application Z-5817-J, Cantrell West Restaurant Center) I would like to go on record as a Registered Objector. Lois COX 5515 Tulley Cove Little Rock, AR 72223