The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZ-4411-D Application 8Page 1 of 4 Carney, Dana From: Brode Morgan [brodem@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 9:20 AM To: Carney, Dana Cc: Cloie Morgan Subject: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long Form PCD Z -441 1-D Little Rock Planning Commission Attn: Mizan Rahman, Chairman Re: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long Form PCD Z -4411-D (Opposition) I have lived at 10 Cedar .Branch Drive for 14 years. I must share my perspective on a development seems to be out of control in my immediate neighborhood both in scale and in effect. The proposedhat development is the Pleasant Ridge Development across from Walton Heights on Cantrell Road The Pleasant Ridge Development regime has already destroyed the neighborhood along Summit Road. One by one the homeowners have succumbed to the economic pressure of development Ridge no reasonable person can imagine. The total 60 foot cutting down of the hill under S on scale boggles my sense of proportion as excessive. wtimit Road On the date that I began to write this letter, a second "Far Sale" sign had gone up on m street — Cedar Branch Drive and Fairview. I expect that others will follow as the homeownersY at escape the uncertainty of property value loss and loss of quality of life with constructioPlan n oiise and Y to dust. My wife and I chose our home lot in what in 1990 was zoned residential and MF -6 in ad' ' properties. We built here on a hand picked lot. We knew of and anticipated the possibility of theng development of residential and multi -family apartments in the area. There was always the knowledge that something undesirable can happen on property you don't own and it has certainly happened Historically developers (including those for churches) in my neighborhood pp to us. proposal with the Planning Deponent in m have won nearly every tion neighbors have mostly given up on fighting the Years and are moving— with minor out as I Ions. My consider.now forced to My wife attended the August 26 planning commission meeting (after having promised ears to do that again) and I watched the re -play of the proceedings on TV cable since I was out of tap never business on a delayed basis. I found the side meeting in the hallway to be especiallydistasteful, w e the developer made several verbal concessions and attempted to gain approval without a written Perceive that the developer gave in on the following points to save the tefen where neighborhood opposition by: en plan. Project and muzzle the • Closing the south exit and roundabout at Woodland Heights 10/6/2004 akf_ ,, 4 E � f:. I Page 2 of 4 Proceeding with Fairview Road improvements now instead of delaying for an indeterminate period Addition of another traffic signal at Woodland Heights and Cantrell Road. In retrospect, the impact of these concessions to Cedar Branch subdivision is not positive in that all southbound traffic will now be on Fairview or Woodland Heights. It is my belief that the developer is cutting corners and circumventing the existing rules concerning the planned corridor of Highway 10. If allowed to construct this project as presented, the corridor plan will be gutted in the area of Pleasant Ridge. In addition, the developer is seeking a waiver of the excavation rules to permit an economic scalping "pre -grading" of Summit Road hill, without promise of any development ever taking place. History says that homeowners and city planners should beware of this open-ended arrangement which will allow for changes in the plan. The developer planted the August 26 meeting development proponents with those having a vested interest, which he certainly has the right to do. I was disappointed to hear previous homeowners on Summit stand in favor, now that their property has been acquired, after knowing that they opposed the development as long ago as 20 years ago to my direct knowledge. I have a reliable report that the developer offered to buy a Cedar Branch home near the development to silence the opposition and appease the owner's inability to sleep and eat because of stress about this issue. I was troubled by the disarray the planning commission exhibited August 26 in being knowledgeable of project and its impact to what remains after its completion. The disarray concluded with a disposition that a deferral was in order, but the whole issue would not be revisited at the next meeting October 8. The city traffic engineer indicated that addition of another Cantrell Road traffic light was mandatory to prevent gridlock. My morning and evening drive experience certainly supports that contention at present traffic peaks. I am uncertain whether any consideration was given by the traffic engineer to other major developments and constriction activity along Cantrell Road between I-430 and Chenal. It is unconscionable that the big box department store rear service entrance may be faced to Cedar Branch Subdivision. The dumpsters and clatter are an unwelcome replacement to the existing gently sloping grove of hardwoods south of Summit Road. The project architect announced at the August 26 meeting that pedestrian was king in the project. I believe he erred and should have stated that the developer is king in the city. I oppose the re -zoning for Pleasant Ridge development as depicted for all the following reasons: 1 • It harms the value of my neighborhood which I selected 14 years ago from a citywide search. 2. It harms the quality of life in my neighborhood. 3. It likely will strand some Of MY neighbor's investment in their homes by the loss of property value below present value and limit buyers. 4. The project is totally out of proportion with the Cantrell Road plan and street infra- structure. 5. It rewards a developer running afoul of the letter and the intent of the community planning 10/6/2004 Page 3 of 4 rules by seeking variances. 6. It mocks the "Land Alteration Act" created as direct result of this developer's actions in scalping the existing hill. 7. The natural hilltop barrier to deflect Cantrell Road noise from my neighborhood will be hauled away. 8. I wish to retain the quality of life in the locale I purchased and have improved with my home. 9• IF approved, It indicates that city zoning has no value for protecting the rights of homeowners from dramatic zoning changes. 10. There will be no quiet time since the project use is night and weekend driven. 11. The developer has gambled several million dollars on property acquisition and development costs before the project is approved — destroying in the process an entire community along Summit Road. 12. The developer was given an "inch" when he scalped the Cantrell location without benefit of any plan. He now plans to take a "mile" by re -zoning the adjoining property and again scalping before giving any assurance of what will be constructed. 13. The property to the west of Fairview Road will be next in line to be shaved. During the 26 August meeting, it was stated by the developer that it was assumed that the Logue property would likewise be shaved to the new grade by a future project. 14. When the Logue property becomes valuable enough, it to will fall to move development and scalping of the hill directly north of my home. The approval of this re -zoning rewards an aggressive developer intent on short term gain at the long term expense of property owners who have been zoned out of the area. The rape of the Cantrell hillside in its present state by the same developer spurred passage of a "Land Alteration Act" to prevent other developers from scavenging the hills before stating what would be constructed. If this ACT goes ull-enforced the result will be distress sales of adjoining property owners while the zoning matures to become commercially zoned. I am not happy that noise and light pollution will fill my bac only 14 years ago when we selected this site to build a homeard from what was residentially zoned I am offended and damaged that the past and present efforts of the community residents to manage growth have been mostly ignored when developers bring re -zoning to the planners.The zoning histo at the vicinity of Fairview Road, Summit Road and Pleasant Ridge is tortured one anry d a matter of public record. It is a foregone conclusion that some development will occur at the present "pre -graded" site and I can accept what looked to be a reasonably proportioned development at Cantrell and Pleasant Ridge Road as now graded. But, I truly never expected the whole hill under Summit Road to be removed — exposing me and my neighbors to Cantrell Road and the back of a mall. For a project of this magnitude, the developer is not doinghis part to make the neighborhood whole. Fairview Road is now a dangerous road, which the City can not afford to fix apparently. I suggest that the developer be held to the strictest interpretation of the existing planning and ordinances, with no variances granted. To grant variances rewards the aggressive developer at the expense of surrounding property quality and value. 10/6/2004 Page 4 of 4 Respectfully submitted, Brode D. Morgan 10 Cedar Branch Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 501.223.8277 brodem@comcast.net 10/6/2004 taCity of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 732 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 DATE: June 8, 2004 ❑ ENTERGY (2) ❑ ARKLA ❑ Southwestern Bell Telephone (2) ❑ Central Arkansas Water ❑ Little Rock Wastewater Planning Zoning and Subdivision NAME: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD TYPE OF ISSUE: Shopping Center FILE NUMBER: Z -441 1-C LOCATION: SEC Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge Road ❑ Pulaski County Planning ❑ Little Rock Fire Department ❑ Public Works: Engineering, Traffic (2) ❑ Parks and Recreation Department ❑ Planning and Development — Site Plan Review ❑ Planning and Development Graphics ❑ CATA TO WHO IT MAY CONCERN: On July 15 2004 the Little Rock Planning Commission will consider the above referenced issue. NOTE: The Interdepartmental Meeting at which this issue will be discussed will be held on June 18, 2004. NOTE: The Subdivision Committee Meeting at which this issue will be discussed will be held on June 24, 2004. A copy of the plan for the referenced issue is enclosed for your consideration, and your comments and/or recommendations will be appreciated. Sincerely, Donna James Subdivision Administrator (371-6821) (Please respond below and return this letter with your comments for our records.) Approved as Submitted. PLEASE RETURN COMMENTS BY June 21, 2004. Easement (s) required (See attached plat or description.) *To all utilities: If an easement is requested which is in excess of 10 feet in width, provide justification for the easement or the request will not be included in the Planning Commission agenda. Comments: By: Enclosure e-Y'KC4('CeJ 4 -Z -5-0<F NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION ON A REQUEST FOR A REZONING THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO ALL RESIDENTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY AT: GENERAL LOCATION OR ADDRESS: Road located South of Cantrell Road and East of Pleasant OWNED BY: Pleasant Ridge Development, LLC REQUEST: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD Z -4411-D — A request to revise a previously approved Planned Commercial Development to allow the expansion of the site to the south and allow future construction of 270,000 square feet of retail and restaurants ace. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for Rezoning —(Planned Develo ment of the above property has been filed with the Department of Planning and Development. A public hearing will be held by the L. R. Planning Commission in the Board of Directors Chamber, second floor, City Hall, on July 15, 2004 at 4:00 P.M. This notice is provided in order to assure that area residents are aware of issues that may affect their neighborhood. Information requests should be directed to the Planning Staff (Donna James) at 371-4790. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION ON A REQUEST FOR A REZONING THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO ALL RESIDENTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY AT: GENERAL LOCATION OR ADDRESS: located South of Cantrell Road and East of Pleasant Road OWNED BY: Pleasant Rid - e Development, LLC REQUEST: Pleasant Ride Revised Long -form PCD Z -4411-D) — A request to revise a previously approved Planned Commercial Development to allow the expansion of the site to the south and allow future construction of 270,000 square feet of retail and restaurants ace. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for Rezoning — fanned Development] of the above property has been filed with the Department of Planning and Development. A public hearing will be held by the L. R. Planning Commission in the Board of Directors Chamber, second floor, City Hall, on July 15, 2004 at 4:00 P.M. This notice is provided in order to assure that area residents are aware of issues that may affect their neighborhood. Information requests should be directed to the Planning Staff (Donna James) at 371-4790. OCCUPANT Z -2502-A OCCUPANT Z- -A O CUPANT Z -2502-A 4107 GILMAN ST 4124 POTTER 42 1 GILMAN ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 LITTLE RO , AR 72204 LI LE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 4203 GILMAN ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 4222 POTTER ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204, OCCUPANTZ-2 024 7824 W 40TH ST LITTLE ROCK, A 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8003 W 41 ST/8T LITTLE ROCK. AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8017 W 4grIl ST LITTLE R�yCK, AR 72204 OCCUPA_I Pf' Z -2502-A 8021 W 41 ST ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 2 CEDAR BRANCH DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 6 CEDAR BRANCH DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 4207 GILMAN ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 4224 POTTER ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 7900 ASHER AVE LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8005 W 40TH ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8017 W 41 ST ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8022 W 41 ST ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z4411 -D 4 CEDAR BRANCH DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 7 CEDAR BRANCH DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 208 POTTER ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 7800 W 40TH ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8000 W 41 ST ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8016 W 40TH ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8018 W 41 ST ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -2502-A 8024 W 40TH ST LITTLE ROCK, AR 72204 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 5 CEDAR BRANCH DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 10 CEDAR BRANCH DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 3924 WOODLAND HEIGHTS RD 4000 WOODLAND HEIGHTS RD 4020 WOODLAND HEIGHTS RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 4024 WOODLAND HEIGHTS RD 4212 N RODNEY PARHAM RD 11000 SOUTHRIDGE DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11211 CANTRELL RD 11300 CANTRELL RD 11401 CANTRELL RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11500 FAIRVIEW RD 11505 SUMMIT RD 11508 SUMMIT RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11510 FAIRVIEW RD 11511 SUMMIT RD 11515 SUMMIT RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11516 SUMMIT RD 11518 FAIRVIEW RD 11523 CANTRELL RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11523 FAIRVIEW RD 11524 FAIRVIEW RD 11525 SUMMIT RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11600 FAIRVIEW RD 11600 PLEASANT RIDGE RD 11601 CANTRELL RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11601 PLEASANT RIDGE RD 11601 SUMMIT RD 11604 SUMMIT RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11605 SUMMIT RD 11609 CANTRELL RD 11611 CANTRELL RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11611 SUMMIT RD 11612 SUMMIT RD 11615 CANTRELL RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11616 SUMMIT RD 11617 SUMMIT RD 11618 SUMMIT RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11620 SUMMIT RD 11621 SUMMIT RD 11811 FAIRVIEW RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11820 FAIRVIEW RD 11905 FAIRVIEW RD 11909 FAIRVIEW RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72223 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D OCCUPANT Z -4411-D 11912 FAIRVIEW RD 12509 PLEASANT RIDGE RD 12515 PLEASANT RIDGE RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OCC NT Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z -4562-D 1 CASTLE ROCK CV BERTY BEL CT 1 WOODBERRY RD LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, A 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z -4562-D 2 CARMEL DR 2 CASTLE R K CV 2 OLD DELMONTE DR LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROC , AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z 62-D OCCUP NT Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z 552-D 3 CASTLE ROCK 3 LIBE Y BELL CT 3 MELROSE CV LITTLE ROCK, A 72212 LITTL ROCK, AR 72212 'Z LITTLE ROCK, A 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OCC Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z -4562-D 4 CANNON C, 5 CANNON CT 5 CASTLE OCK CV LITTLE ROC , AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE CK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OC UPANT Z -4562-D 5 MELROS CV 6 CANNON CT 7 ANNON CT LITTLE RO K, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 L LE ROCK, AR 72212 OCCUPANT Z -4562-D OCCUPANT Z -4562-D Z -4562-D 7 CASTLE ROCK CV 7 MELROSE CV 8 CANNON CT LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 LITTLE ROCK, AR 72212 ---l) _ 1.) ZONING C-Orl% %A-01 Case:�4411-C "� �►-, w, - Location: SOUTH EAST CORNER OF � ANTRELL ROAD AND PLEASANT VALLEY RIDGE ROAD Ward: 4 PD: 1 0 250 500 1,000 Feet CT: 42.09 TRS: T2NR13W21 City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Developmen!Planning Zoning and 723 West Markham Subdivision Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 13 (501) 371-4790 FAX COVER SHEET DATE: l D l )510 1 TO: COMPANY: FAX NUMBER: Da5- No lc' PHONE NUMBER: FROM: �� DIVISION: FAX NUMBER: (501) 399-3435 PHONE NUMBER: (501 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: COMMENTS: iv WQA �r[s.., , JJ k —e— o 08/23/2904 09:57 5012213722 SERVATRON INC PAGE i++_ Walter Malone, Planning Manager .Little Dock Planning Commission 723 West Markham FACSIMILE ONLY Little Rock, AR 72201 SUBJECT: File No. Z441 l -D Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD 11is letter represents the majority opinion of the Walton Heights Candlewood Horne Owners Association (WHCHA) Board of Directors concerning the subject development. We do not overall object to the development, as it has been presented to us by Schickel Development. However, this development will seriously impact our neighborhood and we have some strong concerns. The clearing and excavation of a portion of the site several years ago has been an eyesore and we want assurances that, when and if any more clearing and excavation is done that it will not lay fallow for any extended amount of time. We are very concerned about traffic. We were shown a traffic study but noted that it was done during the s+^miner and does not reflect the heavy traffic that ocLras during most of the year when the many schools around us are Qpem What will be done about the traffic in this area? Will it be even more difficult to exit or enter our neighborhood during peak traffic hours? Many of our members do not want to am more excavation at this site. They would prei'er that the retail development be done on the site, as is presently excavated, and the higher level be lett, for townhouses or condominiums, We also realize that this might inhibit the development of the lower site for high end retail development and we do not want to do that. We trust the Planning Division to choose the best usage of the land but do went to register our concerns. We are not comfortable with the expectations of the developer that only high end retailers will be allowed in this development. What assumce do we have that lower end retailers won't appear if there is difficulty in finding high end retailers? Do we have any future control over this? We have representatives from WHCHA at this meeting and will be glad to discuss any considerations with you. Respectfully, M. lacl. , vice President Walton Heights Candlewood Homeowners Association September 13, 2004 Planning Commission Little Rock, AR Reference Pleasant Ridge Development. This letter is in opposition to the Pleasant Ridge Development at Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge. The Westchester/Heatherbarae Neighborhood Organization represents 189 property owners. This large development is dehvnental to surrounding neighborhoods and to the Highway 10 area in general. The theory that it will have little effect on the traffic in this area defies common sense. This property was cleared just in advance of the Tree Ordnance and has been an eye sore for many years. This request does not conform to Land Use Plan, The River Mountain Neighborhood Action Plan and Hwy. 10 as a Green Belt. The River Mountain Study was made in March 1998 and October 2002. Both times this study was done over months of meetings and discussion and the conclusion was the same that this area should be Suburban Office and not commercial. This is the desire of the majority in this area and should not be changed by the desire of one individual. This large commercial area will undermine the tranquillity of the entire surrounding neighborhoods and hasten the deterioration of this area. Your disapproval of this request will be appreciated by the families and property owners in this area. Sincerely, Christine Hasler President Elect Westchester/Heatherbrae Neighborhood Association Oct 06 04 09:10a CAROLYN MAY 501--224-8570 P . 2 Robinwood Property CNynieYS Assr,�c.�ialian P.0. tine 2!095 Wulc Rod,, ,1H 72227 October 4, 2004 Little Rock Planning Commission 723 W.'blarkham Stroet. Little Rock, AS, 72201 Dear Planning Commission I am writing to ,you as a resident cfthe Robinwood neighborhood and as the President of the. Robinwood Property Owners Association. We are joining with rhe Pleasant Forest, Walton Heights, pleasant Valley and River Ridge Assoziations in opposing the proposed swopping development. on Cantrell Road across from Walton Heights. We are particularly in opposition to waivers that would allow the remaining uncut area to be clear cul, and the removal. of 60% of the hillside which has been proposed by N/h-, Schickel (owner of the property). This is an increase of 30°/a over that allowed under the city ordinances. If these waivers are granted, there wilt be serious drainage and erosion issues on this property. Other areas which are of great concern to our residents include: 1) the total area of land proposed for the shopping center is 20% great .r than Park Plaza; (2) the huge increase in traffic that will occur in this predominantly residential area; and 3) the increase in crime which generally follows commercial development. Trldic and crime are problems teat all the surrounding neighborhoods are currently dealing with, and we feel that the approval of this development will only increase those problems. We would greatly appreciate the Planning Commission's consideration in denying this proposed development. Cordially, Carolyn M* President, Robinwood POA Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 July 30, 2004 Mr. Joe White White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 Planning Zoning and Subdivision Re: Pleasant Ridge Shipping Center Revised Long -form PCD (Z -4411-D), located south of Cantrell Road, East of Pleasant Ridge Road Dear Mr. White: After completing the review of the information submitted to staff after the June 24, 2004 Subdivision Committee meeting the following items remain unresolved: 1. The development sign located on Highway 10 does not indicate a sign area. In addition the restaurant signs located on Highway 10 indicate a total square footage but do not indicate a maximum height. The shopping center sign located adjacent to Highway 10 also does not indicate a maximum sign height only a total sign area. 2. The development sign located near the rear entrance to the center indicates maximum allowed by ordinance. Since the request is a planned development request there are no limits therefore you must indicated the design type, total height and total area. 3. The proposed site plan indicates the 40 -foot landscape strip along Highway 10 measured from the "old property line". Per the Ordinance the 40 -foot landscape strip is to be measured from the new property line, after right-of-way dedication. 4. The site plan indicates an area to the east, which was included on the original submission as future acquisition area. The site plan does not indicate the proposed use of this area. 5. The proposed site plan does not indicate the proposed screening of the dumpsters located along Fairview Road. Provide a note on the site plan of the proposed material and height of the proposed screening materials. 6. The proposed site plan indicates a bus stop near the southern entrance along Fair View Road. This location is not acceptable. CATA has indicated their desire is to enter the site at a traffic signal and to exit the site at a traffic signal with an area set aside for layover. 7. The proposed site plan does not indicate pedestrian access to Buildings B and C. 8. The indicated site plan appears to delineate areas for interior landscaping but based on the scale of the drawing it is difficult to determine if the areas are sufficient to meet ordinance requirements. 9. All building setbacks have not been delineated. It appears the minimum land use buffer to the south is not sufficient to meet typical minimum ordinance requirements. 10. The proposed site plan does not include the proposed screening material for the area to the south adjacent to residentially zoned property. 11. Provide proposed building elevations, construction material and the treatment of the rear of the buildings. In addition provide details for Building A and the treatment of the service bay area and dumpster location with regard to screening this area from Highway 10. (Staff has concerns with the proposed locations of the service bay and the dumpster location adjacent to Cantrell Road.) Page 2 Mr. Joe White July 30, 2004 12. Cross sections and view corridor sections have not been provided. A cross section taken from Highway 10 has been provided. Provide a cross section from Fair View Road, Woodland Heights Road and the area near Cedar Branch Drive. Since the last subdivision committee meeting, Peters and Associates submitted a traffic study to estimate vehicle trip generation of the proposed development and analyze the intersection capacity for the signals on Highway 10 at Southridge Drive, Pleasant Ridge Drive, and Rodney Parham. That analysis assumed an isolated intersection scenario where each signal operates independently of each other and the operation of one signal does not impact the operation of an adjacent signal. Public Works engineers did not believe that type of analysis was appropriate because of the close spacing of signals in the vicinity and the fact these signals are currently part of the Cantrell corridor signal coordination plan. When modeled as a system, the intersections function at an un -acceptably low level of service. The consultant has been advised of this and are to provide a new analysis. Also of concern, the study was done using traffic volumes that didn't take into account school traffic. Staff has gotten several calls and one letter concerning increased traffic on Pleasant Ridge, Pleasant Forest, and Woodland Heights. Staff met with Craig Williams, President of the Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association and Peters & Associates Engineers regarding their concerns about the impact of the traffic generated by this development on their neighborhood. The main concern is that the traffic volume on Pleasant Forest has reached 5000 vehicles per day, which is the threshold for a collector that functions at a high level of service. Mr. Williams was concerned about the speeding problem on Pleasant Forest and that additional traffic due to the proposed development is likely to worsen the situation. The neighborhood is oppc6ed to the development unless some remedial measures to address traffic are included in the development plan. Peters and Associates are to address the above issues in a revised report. Once Traffic Engineering receives and reviews this information we will be able make final comments and recommendations. Please submit four copies of a revised plan to me on or before August 6, 2004 addressing the issues listed above and documentation addressing Traffic Engineering's concerns. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. nspectfully, 1 Donna a es, AICP Subdivision Administrator LaPETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. August 2, 2004 Ms. Donna James, AICP City of Little Rock Subdivision Administrator 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Bus: (501) 371-6821 RE: Addendum to Traffic Study dated June 28, 2004 for Pleasant Ridge Ms. James: We have reviewed the comments by the City contained in your letter, dated July 30, 2004, regarding the traffic study report dated June 28, 2004, by Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. As a result of the review, we offer the following responses: City Comment — Since the last subdivision committee meeting, Peters and Associates submitted a traffic study to estimate vehicle trip generation of the proposed development and analyze the intersection capacity for the signals on Highway 10 at Southridge Drive, Pleasant Ridge Drive, and Rodney Parham. That analysis assumed an isolated intersection scenario where each signal operates independently of each other and the operation of one signal does not impact the operation of an adjacent signal. Public Works engineers did not believe that type of analysis was appropriate because of the close spacing of signals in the vicinity and the fact these signals are currently part of the Cantrell corridor signal coordination plan. When modeled as a system, the intersections function at an un -acceptably low level of service. The consultant has been advised of this and are to provide a new analysis. Response — We have conducted additional analysis with all signalized intersections operating as a system. No significant changes are noted when compared to the previous analysis. All intersections continue to operate at LOS "C" or better during the PM peak hour. A revised Level of Service (LOS) table that contains the revised LOS results for each movement at all analyzed intersections follows. Ms. Donna James. AICP Page 2 August 2, 2004 The analysis results have been reviewed with the City Traffic Engineering Division. Our most recent communication with Mr. Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering Manager, indicated that there were no issues with the findings. Mr. Henry advised that he anticipates no additional required improvements beyond those recommended in the report other than dedication of right-of-way along Cantrell Road for a future third through lane (if not already dedicated). City Comment — "Also of concern, the study was done using traffic volumes that didn't take into account school traffic ... and.. Staff has gotten several calls and one letter concerning increased traffic on Pleasant Ridge, Pleasant Forest, and Woodland Heights. Staff met with Craig Williams, President of the Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association and Peters & Associates Engineers regarding their concerns about the impact of the traffic generated by this development on their neighborhood. The main concern is that the traffic volume on Pleasant Forest has reached 5000 vehicles per day, which is the threshold for a collector that functions at a high level of service. Mr. Williams was concerned about the speeding problem on Pleasant Forest and that additional traffic due to the proposed development is likely to worsen the situation. The neighborhood is opposed to the development unless some remedial measures to address traffic are included in the development plan. " Response — On July 29, 2004 we furnished to Nat Banihatti at the City additional analysis that addresses the issue of school traffic. This analysis used City traffic volume counts conducted while school was in session that have been updated to the current year plus site generated traffic. These volumes are lower than volumes used in our original analysis. We conducted additional analysis of the traffic impact to Pleasant Forest Road and Sierra Forest Drive for the peak hour traffic conditions of the shopping center traffic and school traffic combined. LOS analysis of school traffic was also conducted for the intersections of Fairview Road and Woodland Height Road, Fairview Road and Pleasant Forest Road, and Pleasant Forest Road and Rodney Parham Road. Site generated traffic is projected to have very little impact on Sierra Forest Drive and is projected to increase only 22 vehicles per hour (VPH) southbound and only 21 VPH northbound and on Pleasant Forest Road is projected to increase only 28 VPH eastbound and only 29 VPH westbound. These are all for this worst case school traffic peak hour. These findings are contrary to information published in the flier dated July 9, 2004, that was distributed by Craig Williams of the Pleasant Forest Property Owners Association (PFPOA). This flier erroneously reported that the shopping center "could add 2-300 cars per hour to existing traffic that will extend into the evening." o PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS tt w In um i 3 3 3 m m m m m 2 w N m N m m y �. 12 F C INTERSECTION IIIIIIIIIINI PM PEAK 14OUR - LEVEL OF SERVICE Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge Road SIG33AL A B A ❑ R I A E ❑ D ❑ D B Cantrell Road and South ridge Road 1 Access Drive A SIGNAL B A D a E D ❑ B D B Cantrell Road and Access Drive B SIGN A I C A F B nla Cantrell Road and Woodland Heights Road SIGN ❑ A E A F C F C Wa Cantrell Road and Rod nay Parham Road SIGNAL A B D B ❑ ❑ I C 0 C Woodland Heights Road and Fairview Road and Access Ddve C SIGN B C A A A nia The analysis results have been reviewed with the City Traffic Engineering Division. Our most recent communication with Mr. Bill Henry, Traffic Engineering Manager, indicated that there were no issues with the findings. Mr. Henry advised that he anticipates no additional required improvements beyond those recommended in the report other than dedication of right-of-way along Cantrell Road for a future third through lane (if not already dedicated). City Comment — "Also of concern, the study was done using traffic volumes that didn't take into account school traffic ... and.. Staff has gotten several calls and one letter concerning increased traffic on Pleasant Ridge, Pleasant Forest, and Woodland Heights. Staff met with Craig Williams, President of the Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association and Peters & Associates Engineers regarding their concerns about the impact of the traffic generated by this development on their neighborhood. The main concern is that the traffic volume on Pleasant Forest has reached 5000 vehicles per day, which is the threshold for a collector that functions at a high level of service. Mr. Williams was concerned about the speeding problem on Pleasant Forest and that additional traffic due to the proposed development is likely to worsen the situation. The neighborhood is opposed to the development unless some remedial measures to address traffic are included in the development plan. " Response — On July 29, 2004 we furnished to Nat Banihatti at the City additional analysis that addresses the issue of school traffic. This analysis used City traffic volume counts conducted while school was in session that have been updated to the current year plus site generated traffic. These volumes are lower than volumes used in our original analysis. We conducted additional analysis of the traffic impact to Pleasant Forest Road and Sierra Forest Drive for the peak hour traffic conditions of the shopping center traffic and school traffic combined. LOS analysis of school traffic was also conducted for the intersections of Fairview Road and Woodland Height Road, Fairview Road and Pleasant Forest Road, and Pleasant Forest Road and Rodney Parham Road. Site generated traffic is projected to have very little impact on Sierra Forest Drive and is projected to increase only 22 vehicles per hour (VPH) southbound and only 21 VPH northbound and on Pleasant Forest Road is projected to increase only 28 VPH eastbound and only 29 VPH westbound. These are all for this worst case school traffic peak hour. These findings are contrary to information published in the flier dated July 9, 2004, that was distributed by Craig Williams of the Pleasant Forest Property Owners Association (PFPOA). This flier erroneously reported that the shopping center "could add 2-300 cars per hour to existing traffic that will extend into the evening." Ms. Donna James. AICP Page 3 August 2, 2004 Please find attached Figure 1A "Peak Hour of Shopping Center and School" that depicts the project traffic volumes in the neighborhood south of the shopping center. The analysis shows that each of the intersections of Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road/Drive C, Pleasant Forest Road and Woodland Heights Road and Rodney Parham Road and Pleasant Forest Road are projected to operate at LOS "C" or better during this worst-case school traffic peak hour and that there are no capacity or operational issues for these intersections. Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road/Drive C, is recommended to be constructed as a roundabout. This type traffic control will provide very acceptable LOS "A" and will utilize only 43 percent of the intersection capacity. Additional analysis was conducted for the intersections of Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road, Pleasant Forest Road and Woodland Heights Road and Rodney Parham Road and Pleasant Forest Road for the condition of existing school traffic combined with shopping center traffic and without the construction of Drive C providing access to the shopping center. The volumes use for this analysis are shown on attached Figure 3A, "Peak Hour of Shopping Center and School, Without the Construction of Drive C." Without the construction of Drive C, traffic will use Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road access driveways into the shopping center. Traffic operational analysis results for these intersections for this condition also indicate very acceptable LOS. Detailed calculations for all the above analysis are attached. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us. Sincerely, PETERS & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, INC. Ernest J. Peters, P.E. President LL W J 0w0 i c mL ~0 wQ o E 3 c Z y rc r -a' -.2 =O w U E L 0 0 Q3 Y -t� QZZ o �« 00 a a =rou "o O 0000E = z>urnoo U) r� C14 It Lo n N N 15 p 00 4 68 195 p 130-0 o�=rn o-126 72 b~ w> r d 81 72 b 74gsn a4 4 a O M c (0 00 � 0. 3Q3 N A O `=C7 r W � .l C� = z Ci p Q z o C3 ate& 0 0 w J 9 cl ❑Q �oaq v 13 P❑ ❑Op47 PooDga ❑ W N ._ ---- a �d p g❑ ❑ aofl o � 4 a QQ p q LU � p V-1 CV ❑ 0 fl ❑ w I E- �z w$ 0 C) zv 22-0 o-21 W 7 o-7 Li LU 6Li vi o WW W ac W z d to a w z %D (U � I Un W _ )W NORTH E3 (r¢ ELM F 5W o O 2 0 a wQ A D = 0 N co 0Y �Q OO •m x ooi LL (V woLL E - S X a 3 c" Ci O m N Z U b `°Q 61 79 p U) m 9 E W W -6 t5.2 yrs �f 74 43 b r23 n 0 LO M vii 303 of ro d -,is L ---a L� 0 w Z CX a"mmiumm, d z Q x < m 0 0 Q W J -i F- _� a ` v o cp " Q ❑ 0- � J Z Q � DQ doaq C) 0 �� ❑ P❑ oQp47 Pooaga ❑ to._ ---- O opt ❑ �❑ ❑ Q pQ❑ ❑` o p 04 N d Cl 57 �] OQ ❑ b ❑ ao a o fl o o 0 R n n d ❑ W F 0 m co � CJ V] N 04 W o w CL W 61 Il, w ZN - - - F.. 1 i U n as con" LJ two LW 2 d C OL r- � > W Q oa E3o Z f'-�M 'o 01.2 W ER W+W+' P y i W U q H LL Z H O C Z Worm; a Qvo OJO =EcWr 000W"V 2 O V ZO > V O W O ri) 2 p r N LL NN 0 U) b b Q 131 p Z Z 195 O o EC O Q p Fo-cotND g] 2 V z W> d s 144 72 b 7g¢�D Q a w (Dk 80 -0 o- 84 M 04OD ^ v5 a a 3p h� ti � e �A' a O Q I coo 8 w ¢ �Q� 1 4 CO Z ��fl m as C) _ R � Q Q � cn 0 o w J alociQ -J 000 DCID I E3 P❑ oQpCJ PnoaQr;3 ❑ W N o � ._ _r... �f� �p ❑ g❑ 0 ❑ W� ❑ 10 Q � 0 N R 0 00 } ¢z w WO F 137-0 o- 140 ❑ z Z'~ w� 22-0 o-21 ZQ ❑w �� 7-0 o-7 d z L cu CQ a C, W w do W Z dN 0. W ZN I La H[SRT13 O F IY ¢ as '- -- HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 1 22: Pleasant Forest Rd. & Drive C/Woodland Heights 8/3/2004 Movement EBI. EBT WBT WBR SOL SBR = � Lane Configurations I # Sign"Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 68 175 262 207 195 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph�) 74 190 285 225 212 78 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type, None Median storage veh) Ubstream signal (ft) 163 pX, platoon unblocked vC; conflicting .volume 510 735 397 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf uol� vCu, unblocked vol 510 735 397 tC, single (t) ' 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) W (s) 2.2 3.5 33 p0 queue free % 93 41 88 cM capacity (vehh) 1055 360 652 Direction, Lane #"[6'�i .-58-:1, _:5 "..:_.:,-; '; ° • _ter Volume Total 74 190 510 212 78 Volume Left 74 0 0 212 0 Voiume Right 0 0 225 0 78 cSH 1055 1700 1700 360 652 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.11 0.30 0.59 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 0 0 90 10 ControlDelay ('s) 8.7 0.0 0.0 28.4 11,3 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 2.4 0.0 23.8 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 7.1 Infersection Capacity'Utilization 51:0°Io Analysis Period (min) 15 TCW Level, of S,ervice A P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; Proposed Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 1A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 2 23: Fairview Rd./Woodland Heights & Drive C/Woodland Heights 8/3/2004 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NST NBR SBL SBT SBR Right Turn Channelized Volume (veh/fi) 70 34 62 75 44 14 81 126 68 15 130• 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 76 37 67 82 48 15 88 137 74 16 1,41 78 Approach Volume (veh/h) 180 145 299 236 Crossing Volume,(veh/h) 239 301 129 217 High Capacity (veh/h) 1148 1093 1252 1168 High �v/c (veh/h) 0.1:6 0.13 0.24 0.20 Low Capacity (veh/h) 947 897 1040 965 Low vic (veh/h) -0.44 0.16 0.29 0.24 intersection Summary _ _t Maximum v/c High 0.24 Maximum v/c Low 0.29 Intersection Capacity -Utilization 43.6% ICU Level of Service A P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; Proposed Geometries Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 1A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 3 26: Pleasant Forest Rd. & Rodney Parham Rd. 8/3/2004 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.3 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 l 56.1% ICU Leve[of Service B t 15 C Critical Lane Group Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations it I Tt T r Ideal, Flow (vphpl) 1900 1=900 1900 1900 1900 19:00 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Ut l'Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 1863 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 1863 1583 Volume (vph) 113 257 325 303 415 144 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 123 279 353 329 451 157 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 239 0 0 0 145 Lane Group Flow (vph) 123 40 353 329 451 12 Turn Type Perm Prot custom Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 10.3 10.3 18.0 43.6 21.6 5.4 Effective Green, g (s) 10.3 10.3 18.0 43.6 21.6 5.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.25 0.61 0.30 0:08 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle EXtension-.(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 30 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 256 229 447 2164 564 120 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.20 0.09 c0.24 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio OAA 0.18 0.79 0.15 0.80 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 28.0 26.8 24.9 5.9 22.9 30.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 0.4 9.0 0.0 7.8 0.4 Delay (s) 29.5 27.1 33.9 6.0 30.7 31.0 Level of Service C C C A C C Approach Delay (s) 27.9 20.4 30.8 Approach LOS C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.3 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1% ICU Leve[of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 C Critical Lane Group P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; Proposed Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 1A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 1 22: Pleasant Forest Rd. & Drive C/Woodland Heights 8/3/2004 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Existing School Traffic; Existing Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 2A Movement EBL EBT WST WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations T 1+ Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 40 163 262 96 79 43 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourjy flout/ rate (vph) 43 177 285 104 86 47 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream esignal�(ft) 163 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 389 601 337 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2,'stage 2 conf vol- vCu, unblocked vol 389 601 337 tC, single (s) 4.1 8.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 222 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 96 81 93 cK�capacity (veh/h.), 1169 446 705 Direction, Lane it EB.1 EB 2 WB 1 S81 SB 2 Volume Total 43 177 389 86 47 Volume Left., 43 0 0 86 0 Volume Rig 0 0 104 0. 47 cSH 1169 1700 1700 446 705 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.10 0.23 0.19 0.07 Queue Length 95th (ft) 3 0 0 18 5 Control 0416y (s) 8.2 0.0 0.0 1'5:0 10.5 Lane LOS A B a Approach Delay (s) 1.6 0.0 13.4 Approach LOS B Inw ecbon Summary Average Delay 2.9 Intersection -Capacity Utilization 37.3% ICU Level of Servide A Analysis Period (min) 15 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Existing School Traffic; Existing Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 2A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 2 23: Fairview Rd./Woodland Heights & Drive C/Woodland Heights 8/3/2004 —► -,* 4- .— 4\ l' Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Sign Control Volume (vph) Peak Houi=-Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Direction, Lane # 1> Yield 34 0.92 37 EB 1 55 0.92 60 VV8 1 68 0.92 74 NB 1 Stop 44 0.92 48 Yield 74 61 0.92 0.92 80 66 Volume Total (vph) 97 122 147 Volume Left (vph) 6 74 80 Volume Right (vph) 60 0 66 Hadj (s) -0.34 0.16 -0.13 Departure Headway (s) 4.0 4.5 4.3 Degree U ilization, x 0.11 0.15 0.17 Capacity (veh/h) 852 764 803 Control Delay (s) 7.5 8.3 8:2 Approach Delay (s) 7.5 8.3 8.2 Approach,L'"OS A A A Intersection Summary Delay 8.0 HCM Level of Service A intersection Capacity Utilization 27.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Existing School Traffic; Existing Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 2A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 3 26: Pleasant Forest Rd. & Rodney Parham Rd. 8/3/2004 4\ t l Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations I r I tt T if Ide4l`Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Fit Protected 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1774 3539 1863 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 1863 1583 Volume (vph) 91 163 235 303 415 123 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 99 177 255 329 451 134 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 156 0 0 0 122 Lane Group Flow (vph) 99 21 255 329 451 12 Turn Type Perm Prot custom Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G (s) 7.3 7.3 12.8 37.1 20.3 5.4 Effective Green, g (s) 7.3 7.3 12.8 37.1 20.3 5.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.12 0.12 0.21 0.60 0.33 0.09 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension=(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 209 187 367 2125 612 138 v/s=Ratio °Prot c0.06 c0.14 0:09 c0.24 c0.01 vis Ratio Perm 0.01 vlc Ratio 0:47 0.1'1 0.69 0.15 0.74 0.08 Uniform Delay, d1 25.5 24.4 22.7 5.4 18.4 25.9 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.7 0.3 5.6 0.0 4.6 0.3 Delay (s) 27.1 24.6 28.3 5.5 23.0 26.2 Level of Service C C C A C C Approach Delay (s) 25.5 15.4 23.7 Approach LOS C a C Intersection Surnnia HCM Average Control Delay 20.7 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.61 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 61.8 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersectiori Capacity Utilization 49.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Existing School Traffic; Existing Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 2A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 1 22: Pleasant Forest Rd. & Drive CMoodland Heights_ _. 8/3/2004 Movement 1* EBL --IN- EBT 4- WBT i WBR \. SBL d SBI; Lane Configurations 190 T A . 7$ 'i r Sign Control 0 Free Free Volume Right Stop 0 Grade 0 0% 0% 1055 0% 1700 Volume (vWh) 68 175 262 207 195 72 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (yph) 74 190 285 225 212 78 Pedestrians D B Approach Delay (s) 2.4 Lane Width (ft) 0.0 23.8 Approach LOS Walking Speed (ft/s) C Percent Blockage Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 163 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 510 735 397 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 510 735 397 tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 2:2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 93 41 88 CM capacity (veh/h) 1055 360 652 Direction, Lane # EB 1 EB 2 WB 1 SB 1 SB 2_ ,; Volume Total 74 190 510 212 . 7$ Volume Left 74 0 0 212 0 Volume Right 0 0 225 0 78 cSH 1055 1700 1700 360 652 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.11 0.30 0-59 0.12 Queue Length 95th (ft) 6 0 0 90 10 Control Delay (s) 8.7 0.0 0.0 28.4 11.3 Lane LOS A D B Approach Delay (s) 2.4 0.0 23.8 Approach LOS C Intersection Summary Average Delay 7,1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square School Traffic and Shopping Traffic; Propsed Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 3A HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 2 23: Fairview Rd./Woodland Heights & Drive C/Woodland Hei hts 8/3/2004 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Right Turn Channelized Volume (veh/h) 34 127 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 Hourly :flow rate° (vph) 37 138 Approach Volume (veh/h) 175 Crossing, Volume (veh/h)' 152 High Capacity (veh/h) 1229 High v/c (veh/) 0.14 Low Capacity (veh/h) 1020 Low v/c (vehlh) 0.17 Infersection Summary Maximum v/c High Maximum v/c Low Intersection Capacity Utilization 140 44 144 131 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 152 48 157 142 200 299 157 37 1225 1345 0.16 0.22 1016 1125 0.20 0.27 0.22 0.27 45.7% ICU Level o€Service A P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square School Traffic and Shopping Traffic; Propsed Geometries Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 3A HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Page 3 26: Pleasant Forest Rd. & Rodnex Parham Rd. 8/3/2004 Movement s EBL EBR NBL t NBT l SBT �' SBR Lane Configurations 0.92 /' 0.92 +t 0.92 0.92 Ideal'Flow (Vphpl) 1900 1900 1,900 1900 1,900 1900 Total Lost time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 Frt 1.00 0.85 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.85 Flt Protected 0.95' 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (prot) 1770 1583 1770 3539 1863 1583 Flt Permitted 0.95 1.00 0:95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Satd. Flow (perm) 1770 1583 1770 3539 1863 1583 Volume (vph) 113 257 325 303 415 144 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow (vph) 123 279 353 329 451 157 RTOR Reduction (vph) 0 239 0 0 0 145 Lane Group Flow (vph) 123 40 353 329 451 12 Turn Type Perm Prot custom Protected Phases 4 5 2 6 8 Permitted Phases 4 Actuated Green, G'(s) 10.3 10.3 18.0 43.6 21.6 5.4 Effective Green, g (s) 10.3 10.3 18.0 43.6 21.6 5.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.25 0.61 0.30 0.08 Clearance Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lane Grp Cap (vph) 256 229 447 2164 564 120 v/s Ratio Prot c0.07 c0.20 0.09 c0.24 c0.01 v/s Ratio Perm 0.03 v/c Ratio 0.48 0.18 0.79 0.15 0.80 0.10 Uniform Delay, d1 28.0 26.8 24.9 5.9 22.9 30.7 Progression Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Incremental Delay, d2 1.4 0.4 9.0 0.0 7.8 0.4 Delay (s) 1 29.5 27.1 33.9 6.0 30.7 31.0 Level of Service C C C A C C Approach Delay (s) 27:9 20.4 30.8 Approach LOS C C C Intersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 25.9 HCM Level of Service C HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.67 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 71.3 Sum of lost time (s) 16.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.1% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical: Lane Group P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square School Traffic and Shopping Traffic; Propsed Geometrics Peters & Associates Engineers, Inc. Figure 3A A. P. ❑ TELEPHONED RETURNED YOUR CALL PLEASE CALL 1MI-L CALL AGAIN ❑ CAME TO SEE YOU WANTS TO SEE YOU. 11541 - r PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE Cantrell Road Tvnieal Weekdav Shopping Center 260,000 Sq. Ft. 820 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant* 5,000 Sq. Ft. 932 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant* 5, 000 Sq. Ft. 932 *These volumesadjustee to reflect 20% internal c<ap;ure TOTALS: 164 104 468 507 24 22 26 17 24 22 26 17 212 148 520 541 TOTAL ENTERING + EXITING office Park 849,420 Sq. Ft. 1 750 11 1317 1(IL_jl 178 1096 11 TOTALS:11 1317 161 11 178 1096 TOTAL ENTERING + EXITING i 5-os-zo-, VIA) w to James, Donna From: Bozynski, Tony Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 3:10 PM To: James, Donna; Carney, Dana; Malone, Walter Subject: FW: pleasant Ridge Shopping Center fyi -----Original Message ----- From: Banihatti, Nat Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 2:46 PM To: Haralson, Steve; Flood, Mike; Henry, Bill Cc: Turner, Bob; Banihatti, Nat; Bozynski, Tony; Minyard, Brian Subject: Pleasant Ridge. Shopping Center 0 2004-07-19 eighborhood Letter. We had a meeting w th the President of Pleasant ;forest Property Owners Association this morning. The neighborhood is very concerned about the impact of the Proposed Shopping Center on Cantrell Rd. across South Ridge. Attached letter details their concerns. Pleasant Forest already has a speeding problem and the traffic volumes have reached the maximum limit set for a collector (5000 vpd). The shopping center will no doubt increase the traffic on Pleasant Forest. In light of this, we need to require the traffic study to address these issues. In addition, Fair View Rd. and Woodland Heights adjacent to the shopping center is substandard to handle the projected traffic. They will need to be improved. -Nat Banihatti Traffic Engineering «2004-07-19 Neighborhood Letter.TlF>> •' Rim � '� �_ � r • LL • - •- �: ,^,-�. ,� �•:f�lt ... " •. • � , .• y M V ��• a •• � i . .' •,• • _ • �.' .�; �. , d= �- :.. f. � Vii. , ; � � ''� '�� ' ��+ ��.: �' � .1 '• • ' '�71 '4 •r,'�5. • `� ' � � � r �•• -�� • f .' � _ - t _. �, -`!kyr, ' AW so- ' ,yam • r' _ #,.y i f r : � -_� ,I � ' fir•: TI y r 1 rT.RWGE Air �^ WEST=,,,.L , s - --� :,__. � 1 tit' � � i�� - .;- :: - .-�• �� Ao + lk A �' ,,� - ■ - ?►. f Ari �`y:} F ' .. _►�•`!i !ire > :+ • �`- t•ti,:.-_ •r�+ ,•�s�:=e mfr +., r_ - - . "'f:. " ��~ �•x�� tN Aw Lrr . meati k , . a :- ' �i,•(f-q,.�� • y. • Com.. � k' •�z�••�• -r ..•_'-.{+�`�► y -hl a s r, }, •{.. it rt .wcx - I; L�r�� ,. ` � :��_ •,¢ter. ' �. _'ic � -''_ � �_- �!i � i�'J�p ' ~ `' q4x a• �. f •. r _r � 1. �, •i. - - `yrs—' e L _ •' 40 • �ypz-+ '� ,ill .6 0 �1 � � M iLU jL1 iLU w r s� ,r w "Oppvc - f■ ■,Iv op i r � r s ■ } � 1 Beach Abstract & Guaranty Company 100 CENTER STREET - P. O. BOX 2550 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203 TELEPHONE: (501) 376-3301 FAX: (501) 376.5667 (TITLE DEPT.) - FAX: (501) 376.5603 (ESCROW DEPT.) June 14, 2004 Mr. Brian Dale White, Daters & Associates, Incl 211 Rahling Circle Little Rock, Arkans,s 72223 Re: Property lying within 200 feet of Lot 1, Pleasant Ridge Square and Pert of Wood land Heights Subdivision Dear Mr. Dale; Vie have examined the records of Pulaski county, Ark- ansas, up to May 20, 2004 @ 8:00 A. M. as to the proprty lying within 200 feet of the property described on the attached sheet. We find that the property listed on the attached three sheets, lies within 200 feet of the subject property and that the names set out opposit the descriptions are the last appy rent owners of record of said property. We do not certify as to validity of.' title. Addresses of owners are not guarf:nteed to be accurate. Sincerely yours, E. A. Bowen, Jr. Chairman encl . Cy LOT I. PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE, AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS AS RECORDED IN PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, PLAT BOOK G. PAGE 321 RECORDS OF AND PART OF PLOTS 8, C. D. E. 1, J, K AND L, WOODLAND HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, LITTLE ROCK, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS 1NCLl1DfNG PART OF SUMMIT STREET, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS: SQUARE. SAID CORNER BEING ALSO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, PLEASANT RIDGE 3, SAID PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE; THENCE S78 30'49 E ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID LOT 3, 291.70 FT -TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, LYING ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF WOODLAND ROAD; THENCE S2704'56"W ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LIME, 1 fO.01 FT. TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SUMMIT STREET; THENCE N86 -49-01-W ALONG SAID NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 216.65 FT.; THENCE SOI' 1 0'59"W, 38.85 FT.; THENCE SO1'47'59"W, 219.10 FT.; THENCE N85'56'17"W, 110.40 FT. TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLOT L. THENCE N01'47'54"E ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 68.71 FT.; THENCE N84 -49-42N, 324.44 FT. TO A POINT ON THE FAST UNE OF SAID PLOT J. THENCE SO3'29'58`W ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 150.94 FT.; THENCE S0319'34"W CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 284.74 FT. TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PLOT J; THENCE N83'34'51"W ALONG THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID PLOT J. BEING ALSO THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF WOODLAND HEIGHTS ROAD, 141.30 FT. TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 2, FAIRVIEW PARK. AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS; THENCE NO2'11'43"E ALONG THE EAST UNE OF SAID LOT 2, 310.65 FT. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER 'THEREOF: THENCE N87'38'35"W ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2, 144.79 FT. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF, LYING ON THE EAST LINE OF LOT 1, SAID FAiFMEW PARK; THENCE N01'43'25"E ALONG SAID EAST UNE, 69.76 FT. TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT €; THENCE N8720'53"W ALONG THE NORTH UNE OF SAID LOT T. 316.34 FT. TO A POINT ON THE EAST RIGHT- OF-WAY UNE OF FAIRVIEW ROAD, BEING ALSO THE WEST LINE OF PLOT I, SAID WOODLAND HEIGHTS SUBDfVISION; THENCE NO1'52'04'E ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE. 364.84 FT. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PLOT 1; THENCE 610423'49"W, 39A3 3 FT, TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PLOT E, WOODLAND HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WEST UNE OF SAID PLOT E. BEING ALSO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF FAIRVIEW ROAD THE FOLLOWING; (1) NOT34'42"E, 150.00 FT.; (2) NOT'43'49"E, 74.18 FT. AND (3) NO2'23'52"E, 75.05 FT.; THENCE S72'26'55"E, 40.07 FT. TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH UNE OF SAID LOT 1, PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE -SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT I THE FOLLOWING: (1) S72'O 1'27'E, 125.29 FT.; (2) S02'26'07"W, 75.03 FT.; 3) S6701'45"E, 150.62 FT.; (4) S52'22' 16" E, 83.49 FT.; (5) SO 1' i 6'O6" W, 34.08 FT.; (6) S75'17'07E. 298.29 FT.; (7) S81'59'38"E, 178.30FT.; (a) S86'40'51"E, 140.01 Fr. AND (9) S78'30'49E, 50.01 Fr. TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 25,7188 ACRES MORE OR LESS. 1 x• lit or uktr IL s F$ Ill I !r Q. At 1 A40 wr.o, VT�� \\® . I& AWWF City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 732 West Markham Street Zoningand Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION ON A REQUEST FOR A REZONING THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO: Pleasant Forest Neighborhood Association _ ATTENTION: Crain Williams ADDRESS: P.O. Box 21214 Little Rock, AR 72221 REQUEST: Pleasant Ride Revised Long -form PCD Z -4411-D — A request to revise _a previously approved Planned Commercial Development to allow the ex ansion of the site to the south and allow future construction of 270,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. _ GENERAL LOCATION OR ADDRESS: located South of Cantrell Road and East of Pleasant RidLye Road OWNED BY: Pleasant Ridge Development, LLC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for Rezoning — (Planned Develn meet of the above property has been filed with the Department of Planning and Development.. A public hearing will be held by the L.R. Planning Commission in the Board of Directors Chamber, second floor, City Hall, on July I5 2004 at 4:00 PAI. This notice is provided in order to assure that neighborhood associations are aware of issues that may affect their neighborhood. Information requests should be directed to the Planning Staff (Donna James) at 371-4790. Tony Bozynski, Director City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 732 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION ON A REQUEST FOR A REZONING THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO: Piedmont Neighborhood Association ATTENTION: Chip Pruitt ADDRESS: 10 Piedmont Circle Little Rock AR 72223 REQUEST: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD (Z -4411-D) — A request to revise a previouslya roved Planned Commercial Develo ment to allow the expansion of the site to the south and allow future construction of 270,000 s ware feet of retail and restaurants ace. GENERAL LOCATION OR ADDRESS: located South of Cantrell Road and East of Pleasant Rid e Road OWNED BY: Pleasant Ridge Development LLC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for Rezoning — Planned Development) of the above property has been filed with the Department of Planning and Development. A public hearing will be held by the L.R. Planning Commission in the Board of Directors Chamber, second floor, City Hall, on July 15, 2004 at 4:00 P.M. This notice is provided in order to assure that neighborhood associations are aware of issues that may affect their neighborhood. Information requests should be directed to the Planning Staff (Donna James) at 371-4790. Tony Bozynski, Director City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 732 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE LITTLE ROCK PLANNING COMMISSION ON A REQUEST FOR A REZONING THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO: Walton Height — Candlewood Property Owners Association ATTENTION: Jane Baker ADDRESS: P.O. Box 17043 Little Rock AR 72221 REQUEST: Pleasant Ride Revised Long -form PCD Z -4411-D — A request to revise a previously approved Planned Commercial Development to allow the expansion of the site to the south and allow future construction of 270,000 s uare feet of retail and restaurants ace. GENERAL LOCATION OR ADDRESS: located South of Cantrell Road and East of Pleasant Ridize Road OWNED BY: Pleasant Ridge Development, LLC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT an application for Rezoning — (Planned Development) of the above property has been filed with the Department of Planning and Development. A public hearing will be held by the L.R. Planning Commission in the Board of Directors Chamber, second floor, City Hall, on July 15, 204_4 at 4:00 P.M. This notice is provided in order to assure that neighborhood associations are aware of issues that may affect their neighborhood. Information requests should be directed to the Planning Staff (Donna James) at 371-4790. Tony Bozynski, Director City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 732 West Markham Street Zoning and little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 DATE: June 8, 2004 ❑ ENTERGY (2) ❑ ARKLA ❑ Southwestern Bell Telephone (2) ❑ Central Arkansas Water ❑ Little Rock Wastewater ❑ Pulaski County Planning Little Rock Fire Department NAME: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD TYPE OF ISSUE: Shopping Center FILE NUMBER: Z-441 1-C LOCATION: SEC Cantrell Road and Pleasant Ridge Road ❑ Public Works: Engineering, Traffic (2) ❑ Parks and Recreation Department ❑ Planning and Development — Site Plan Review ❑ Planning and Development Graphics ❑ CATA TO WHO IT MAY CONCERN: On July 15, 2004 the Little Rock Planning Commission will consider the above referenced issue. NOTE: The Interdepartmental Meeting at which this issue will be discussed will be held on June 18, 2004. NOTE: The Subdivision Committee Meeting at which this issue will be discussed will be held on June 24, 2004. A copy of the plan for the referenced issue is enclosed for your consideration, and your comments and/or recommendations will be appreciated. Sincerely, C Doan ames Subdivision Administrator (371-6821) (Please respond below and return this letter with your comments for our records.) Approved as Submitted. PLEASE RETURN COMMENTS BY June 21, 2004. Easement (s) required (See attached plat or description.) *To all utilities: If an easement is requested which is in excess of 10 feet in width, provide justification for the easement or the request will not be included in the Planning Commission agenda. Comments: By: Enebsure Beach Abstract & Guaranty Company 100 CENTER STREET . P. O. BOX 2580 LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72203 TELEPHONE: (501) 376-3301 FAX: (501) 376.5667 (TITLE DEPT.) - FAX: (501) 376-5603 (ESCROW DEPT.) June 14, 2004 Mr. Brian Dale White, Daters & Associates, Incl 211 Rahling Circle Little Rock, Arkansrs 72223 Re: Property lying within 200 feet of Lot 1, Pleasant Ridge Square and Pprt of Mood land T!eights Subdivision Dear Mr. Dale; Vie have examined the -records of Pulaski 1,ounty, Ark- ansas, up to P -lay 20, 2004 ri? 5:00 A. M. as to the proprty lying within 200 feet of the property described on the attached sleet. We find that the property listed on the attached three sheets, lies within 200 feet of the subject property and that title names set out opposit the descriptions are the last appprent owners of record of said property. We do not certify as to validity of.' title. Addresses of owners are not guaranteed to be accurate. Sincerely yours, E. A. Bowen, Jr. Chairman encl LOT I, PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE, TO THE CITY OF UTILE AN ADDITION ROCK. ARKANSAS AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK RECORDS OF PUL45KI COUNTY, ARKANSAS, G, THEE CITY AND PART OF PLOTS B. C, D, E. I. J. K AND L, WOODLAND HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION, LITTLE ROCK, PULASKI COUNTY, ARKANSAS OF SUMMIT STREET. MORE PARTICULARLY I)ESCRI EBAS:INCLl1DINC PARI BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1, PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE, SAID CORNER SEfNG ALSO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 3, SAID PLEASANT RIDGE SQUARE; THENCE $78'30'49"E ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 3, 291.70 FT.TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER THEREOF, LYING ON THE WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY UNE OF WOODLAND ROAD; THENCE 52iO4'5fi W SAID WEST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 110A1 FT. TO A POINT ON THE NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF SUMMIT STREET; THENCE POINT O yy ALONG NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 216.65 FT.; THE S03"10,59 -W. AtaNGD FT.; THENCE SD 1'4 759" W, 219. T 4 FT.; THENCE N85'S6' 1759. 110.00 5 F7. TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLOT L; THENCE NOI'47'S4'E ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 7N84'49'42"W, 324.44 FT. TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF J; THENCE SO3'29'58"W ALONG SAID SAID S03' 19.34'VY CONTINUIEAST LINE, 154.94 Ff.; THENCE LOT NG ALONG SAID EAST LINE. 284.74 FT. TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PLOT J. THENCE N83 34'51'W SOUTH UNE OF SAID BLOT J. BEING ALSO THE NORTH RIGHT -WAY LINE OF WOODLAND HEIGHTS ROAD. 141.30 FT. TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF L. 2, FAIRVIEW PARK AN ADDITION TO THE CITY OF LITTLE ROCK, THENCE NO2-1 1'4iE ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 2, 3] 0.65 FT. OT TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE N87'38'35"W ALONG THE T. ' NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 2, 144.79 FT. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF. LYING ON THE EAST LINE OF LOT 1, SAID FAIRVIEW PARK; THENCE NOI'43'25"E ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 69.76 FT, TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 1; THENCE N87.20'53"W NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT ]. 316.34 r -T, TO ALONG THE OF -WAY LINE OF FAIRVfPOINT ON THE EAST RIGHT - EW ROAD, BEING ALSO THE WEST LINE OF PLOT I, SAID WOODLAND HEIGHTS SUBDIVISION; THENCE NOV52'04"E ALONG SAID EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, 354.84 FT. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PLOT 1; THENCE N04'23'49"w, 39.13 FT. TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF- ME) FSAID PLOT E, WOODLAND HEIGHTS SUBDMSION; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PLOT E. BEING ALSO THE EAST RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF FAIRVIEW ROAD THE FOLLOWING. (1) 1Y02'34'42 -E, 150.00 FT.; (2) N01.43'49"E, 74.18 FT. AND 3 S72'26'56 E. 40.07 FT. TO A {PAINT ON3 T}IEESOUTHS E OF SAID LOT 1 F'LFASAAIT RIDGE SQUARE; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE 'SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 1 THE FOLLOWING. (1) s72-01'2rE. 125.29 FT., (2) 5O2'26'o7"w, 75.03 F�; (3) S6701'45"E150.fi2 FT.; (4) 552 22' 16`E, 83.46 FT.; (5) Sol -7,5,067W , 34.08 FT.; {5) S7S17'07"E, 298.29 FT.; (7) S81'59'38"E 178.30 .; ($) dNTOOF yBEGINNING, CONTAINING 25.7 THE g4 ACRE50 Q1 FT. TO THE MORE OR LESS. AREA ZONING i fEgSThi! p i Vicinity Map } Case: Z -4411-C Location: SOUTH EAST CORNER OF CANTRELL ROAD AND PLEASANT VALLEY RIDGE ROAD Ward: 4 PD: 1 CT: 42.09 TRS: T2NR13W21 0 250 500 1,000 Feet 11�AAMUSE Case: Z -4411-C Location. SOUTH EAST CORNER OF CANTRELL ROAD AND PLEASANT VALLEY RIDGE ROAD Ward: 4 PD: 1 0 250 500 1,000 Feet CT: 42.09 TRS: T2NR13W21 .. -.-. -.-:. re i Jaw a S � � ------------ J H)Oft S37MdS [l O AMm CMDNC __ MICE R R79Lrec � A �Y4 .qo. AI HEXWrS—" TRSI�NRIM21 PLEASANT RIDGE REVISED CT 42.09 LONG - FORM PCD PD I Z -4411-D SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CANTRELL ROAD AND PLEASANT RIDGE ROAD (a City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 October 15, 2004 Mr. Joe White White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 Planning Zoning and Subdivision Re: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD (Z -4411-D) — located South of Cantrell Road, East of Pleasant Ridge Road Dear Mr. White: This is to advise you that in connection with your request concerning the above referenced file number the following action was taken by the PIanning Commission at its meeting on October 7, 2404: Approved with conditions. X Recommended approval with conditions. Recommended approval as submitted. Denied your request as submitted. Deferred to Meeting. Other: Your item will be forwarded to the Board of Directors for their November 1, 2004 Public Hearing. The meeting begins at 6:00 pm and is held in the Board of Directors Chambers, 500 West Markham Street — City Hall Second Floor. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 371-6821. Respectfully, Donna James, AICP Subdivision Administrator Sne says. Lk, tuaL ...,._J -- change after all these years. My concern is for the planet, not the parties, she she uses V politics , adding another method to cast her vote, speaking out to persuade those who are registered voters. SIGN OF THE TIMES: How do you know the '60s are history? When, in further describing Louise Harrison, the Little Rock police officer responding to her car's recent break-in wrote on his incident information report ,sister of Beetle George Harrison." Forty years ago the band's name was a household word. It would've been hard to find someone who didn't know how to spell it. WITHIN ARMS' REACH: It's a small world- Sometimes too YropOSW Winto uit u&J 0%,L41.✓ for drugs BY NELL SMITH would pay g h eferre ,p.W5A5 DEMOCRAT -GAZETTE A plan to limit the number of prescription drthecover state Medicaid programwill passed its last major hurdle to- ward getting legislative approval Thursday. The pian, reviewed by a leg- islative committee, is aneffort to save the state money while paying for the most effective drugs. it calls for Medicaid to develop a list of preferred drugs the government health -insur- ance program for the poor and the disabled will pay for. The Medicaid program small. On Wednesday, there was a lack of space in the Pulaski. County courthouse because of an unusually large number of jury trials. our reporter Jim Brooks gave up his modest press room there for the day, and it became a makeshift jury room Brooks left, his desk was moved to a corner, and a long table and 12 chairs were crammed in. scattered around his office were files of coming criminal cases, including the high- profile igh profile Michael MacKool capital murder trial- Knowing the jurors using his office were potential jurors in that case, Brooks gathered all his files and stashed them away so as not to taint the jury pool. PULLING ANCHOR: Weekday anchorwoman Krista Platzer, who joined KATY Channel 7 in January from Calgary, Alberta, is no longer with the station. News director Randy Dixon didxi t return calls, but buzz is Platzer was let go.... Meanwhile, KTHV, Channel ll's weekend anchorwoman Liz Massey moves up to co- anchor the 5 and 10 p.m. weekday news beginning Monday. paper hails appears Monday, Wed- nesday and Friday. Contact Linda Caitlouet at (501) J99-3636 or at lindarcaJRouet@ad9,�rrig gmcam alo-VII L not in- cluded on r e pr d list On - C if medically necessary. According to the plan, the state would sign a $3 million an- nual contract with the Univer- sity of Arkansas for Medical Sci ences School of Pharmacy to re- view clinical studies and devel- op the preferred drug list. If the plan gains approval, YAMS could begin hiring the eight pharmacists needed for the project as soon as oct.15, said Roy Jeffus, director of the state Medicaid program. Medicaid clients could be affected by the drug list as early as February 6 ordered to P, -,y back -care fraud money .a� operators of several central Ar- kansas day-care centers. The day-care operators carried out the fraud by submitting false bills to the state Department of Human Services, where Hobbs and another contract aof etry worker, Jay Jarrett _ Lit- tle Rock, entered of the false allowing payment bills. Hobbs and Jarrett, now 30, lost their jobs after the depart- ment's Child Care and Early Childhood Education division leaned of the duplicate billings and investigated. See MONEY, Page 116 BY LINDA SATTER ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT -GAZETTE Six women were ordered to jointly repay more than a half - million dollars Thursday forda frauding a federally fun pro- gram gram that allows parents on wel- fare to return to work or schooL Five of the women also re- ceived probationary sentences, while one of them, Sharitsa Hobbs, Was sentenced to 21= years in prison. Hobbs, 25, of Little Rock is regarded as the ringleader of the scheme. The womdn charmed last among 11 people g year in the scheme involving 2005. The Medicaid pl to the Legislative Cc normally approv, ready reviewed in The Legislature ha ity to prohibit the N but the Human S partment wants to ing. Medicaid offici, bens of a legislati` Thursday that the} pian could save the lion to $35 millic they cautioned rough estimate du See MEDIC Shopping center Plan OK�a at contentious BY JILL ZEMAN ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT-G�E Despite strong neighborhood complaints of traffic congestion and environmental damage, the Little Rock Planning Commis- sion voted 7--2 Thursdaynht o ap- prove a new, ape - ppm center in West Little Rock. Lou Schickel, the developer of pleasant Ridge Town thCeen�e c�aunced Wednesday ter would feature a Parisian pallet ses%on department store. And -on Thursday, Schickel got the Plan- . Commission's approval to build his'$lifestyle center.,' The center now needs ap- proval from the Little Rock Board of Directors, which could. come as soon as Nov. 2. The land under consideration Road, a half es at we Pleasant Ridge west of Cantrell and Rodney Parha, l roads. i see PUB, Page 9B OGS • � - loo- - --- - d Swinging Keoni Griffin, visit to MacA Plan ■ Continued from Page 1 B Much was made over whether the 300,000 -square - foot shopping center should in- clude a rear entrance at Wood- land Heights Road. Planning commissioners last month rejected the plan because they opposed the rear entrance. But city staff recommended a rear entrance — the center's primary entry point will be on Cantrell Road — so commis- sioners first needed to vote to remove the rear entrance before approving the final plan. The commission approved removing the Woodland Heights entrance by a vote of 5- 4. This caused much confusion among some commissioners and many of the 100 -plus peo- ple in attendance. After the commission ap- proved the planned center, one man stood and loudly told the commissioners, "You didn't even know what you were vot- ing on. Many neighborhood resi- dents — wearing buttons that read, "Save the Hill. Say no to 27 acres. Stick to the plan" — said that building an upscale shopping center by carving in- to Pleasant Ridge simply isn't smart. Ray Rogers, who lives on Pleasant Forest Drive, slammed the proposed center because it would cause the "leveling and absolute rape of that hill." "If this was a wetlands and I was a muskrat, the govern- ment would step in and stop the destruction of my habitat," Rogers said, drawing laughter and applause from the audience. Many people showed up to support the proposed center. While 27 people filled out cards to speak in opposition, 47 peo- ple logged in as supporters. Phil Kaplan, an attorney rep- resenting Schickel Develop- ment, tried to soothe neighbors' concerns, and said developers will do their best to make the center aesthetic. "We are not going to rival na- ture's beauty," he said. "We're going to build what we think is the finest, most elegant shop- ping center in the area. But it will not rival a tree." Kaplan said Schickel Devel- opment is holding "serious dis- cussions" with many tenants who are awaiting the project's zoning approval. n If approved, the center will LR planning panel OKs parking ban ARKANSAS DEMOCRAT -GAZETTE Without any discussion, the Little Rock Planning Commission on Thursday unanimously approved an amendment that bans park- ing in front yards. Spurred by neighborhood complaints, the city's plan- ning staff proposed the park- ing ban this summer. The proposed ordinance would prohibit people from parking in the front yards and corner side yards on residential properties. Vehicles that would be banned include cars, trucks, vans, boats, campers, recre- ational vehicles, motorcycles, golf carts, all -terrain vehicles, trailers or other similar ve- hicles. According to the or- dinance, "motor vehicles" do not include motorized wheel- chairs. Vehicles must be parked in a paved driveway or an "unpaved, designated drive- way area and parking pad" not to exceed 24 feet. This area must be surfaced with gravel or a similar material. Conway is considering a similar ban, while North Lit- tle Rock has an amendment in place for its historic dis- trict. The proposed change must now be approved by the Little Rock Board of Direc- tors. open in the fall of 2006. Commissioners Norm Floyd and Gary Langlais opposed the project, while Mizan Rahman, Bill Rector, Robert Stebbins, Fred Allen Jr., Bob Lowry, Dar- rin Williams and Jerry Meyer supported it. Commissioners Pam Adcock and Chauncey Taylor were ab- sent. Rector called the vote "one of those tough ones." "You feel 51-49 about a lot of these issues, but sometimes, you've just got to stick up your hand," he said. Rector said that ultimately, the quality of the development led him to support it. Langlais said the shopping center, which will cover more acreage than Park Plaza in mid- town Little Rock, was simply too big for the area. "It's too intense for the area," he said. "The traffic situation out there is very difficult as it is. Craig Williams, president of the Pleasant Forest Neighbor- hood Association, said that he and other project opponents need to work to "get the word out" before the city board votes on it. "We've got to raise the noise level so we're heard," he said. Traffic and possible envi- ronmental damage are key is- sues, but Williams said the qual- ity of life for neighborhood res- idents is ultimately at stake. "We're not concerned for the streets. That's asphalt and con- crete," he said. "We're concerned about what this increased traffic will do to our lives." M � � r 1 ■ w , ar hea_��,ua e_ r Flags • Banners • T-shirts • Socks Water Bottles • Jewelry • Hats • Mugs,,, Pink Ribbon "Cure" Beanie car magnet $5.98 Baby $6.25 T1 INK VIVAK at �www.FlagandBannerxom Sti Get your mind out of , i =-,Nqk ltmd >:j�IOSAVE r. Gutter Pro helps keep your home safe fiotn water damage, mosquitoes and wood destroying insects; all while having clean, free flowing gutters! III and stop deanMi your gutters FOREVER! 5604 Commerce Ct. 'fllbtty erU'lil[iilS Sherwood --74 501-833-61.'74 9��OA LUBAVITCH OFARKANSAS 1-Inig P -n PIR101"a 19 WOODSTOCK COURT LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72227 RABBI PINCHUS CIMENT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR tet» r To the Planning Commission Roster PHONE (501) 221-7940 FAx (501) 221-7338 October 6, 2004 I am writing to you on behalf of the Chabad-Lubavitch Jewish Center, located at 11905 Fairview Road in Little Rock. We are located directly across the street from the proposed development by Mr. Lou Shickel/ Pleasant Ridge Development Co. (Item # Z4411 -D) Due to the major Jewish festival of Shemini Atzeret (as described in Leviticus 23:36), which is being celebrated on Thursday, Oct. 7, 2004, and our observance of Judaism in the Orthodox manner, we are prevented from attending and representing our major concerns and opposition of this project at the planning commission meeting. At the previous planning commission meeting we informed the commission that Mr. Shickel was displaying an effort to address our concerns and we asked for a deferral of the vote to allow him the chance to satisfy our concerns. As of this time he has yet to do so. He specifically asked us for a written proposal of our concerns and what we thought would help to address the issues and he has yet to even give us a courtesy reply. He refuses to allow our real estate agent to participate in our meetings and thus only continues to delay the work we must due as we attempt to understand the ramifications that this humungous project will cause to our master plans for our site. (i.e. relocating building sites, moving dirt, more security, entranceway changes, etc.) Our organization encourages its followers to practice Orthodox Jewish law. This restricts the usage of electrical devices on the Jewish Sabbath, Saturday. Many families from the immediate surrounding neighborhoods walk to the Synagogue with their children on Saturday and Jewish holidays throughout the year. The enrollment in our school is continuously climbing. More families are relocating to Little Rock and this neighborhood, from out of state, every year. Mr. Shickel's own conservative estimate of increased traffic to Fairview road is an additional 3,000 cars per day! With the steep crest on the street, and many walkers in the area on Saturday, the busiest day for the mall, we strongly feel that the scope of this project is extremely dangerous and disproportionate to the existing infrastructure. The obvious safety concern for cars and pedestrians is certainly not worth the few extra dollars that might be earned by having such a large facility. Having a 60 -foot drop, protected by some trees, across from our center is not a pleasant thought. While the mall may be pedestrian friendly, the immediate outlying streets will not. A nice, quiet office building, which the area is zoned for, would greatly enhance the neighborhood, provide the necessary street improvements on Fairview Road and not be a hazard and nuisance to so many neighbors. Mr. Schickel is proposing to remove Summit Rd. Mr. Shickel's plan does not reflect an existing curb cut that is currently being used by us, right at that intersection. I have brought this to the attention of Donna James. By eliminating Summit Rd., and with the inevitable closing of Woodlawn heights (on its southern section) to accommodate the Church, Fairview Road now becomes even a more congested street! We feel this could easily be compared to a similar proposal brought before the commission (LU- 04-19-02) where the commission recently denied permission due to the Joe Robinson School being in place before commercial activity was proposed for that area. We are opposed to having establishments that serve or sell alcoholic beverages on this proposed site that lies within 200 yards of our Synagogue. Based on the above we respectfully feel that this proposed project does not meet any of the five criteria that is used to help the commission form its opinion to permit a PUD or PD proposal, namely; 1) It is NOT compatible with the surrounding area - (there is no present commercial development on Fairview road) 2) It is certainly NOT harmonious with the character of the neighborhood — (it will become much more dangerous for the children as well as the large number of families that walk to services on Saturday) 3) It WILL have a NEGATIVE impact upon our future development — (financially to our current plans, as well as for future development). 4) There will NOT be any coordination of surrounding land — (Mr. Shickel's proposal engulfs the entire area) 5) This is NOT the desirable and stable environment that we would like to see. Due to the fact that Mr. Shickel chose not to address our concerns, we are vehemently opposed to this proposal and respectfully urge the commission to deny its approval. Sincerely, Rabbi Pinchus Ciment Executive Director (L) Rector Phillips Morse 800 Prospect Building, 1501 North University, Little Rock, Arkansas Mail Address: P.O. Box 7300, Little Rock, Arkansas 72217 (501) 664-7807 Fax (501) 664-0104 October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Members City of Little Rock Via Fax #399-3435 RE: Pleasant Ridge Town Center Ladies & Gentlemen: Arkansas Realtors Association Certified Commercial -Investment Member (Individual Member) Commercial -Investment Real Estate Institute Institute of Real Estate Management International Council of Shopping Centers Little Rock Realtors Association National Association of Realtors Realtors National Marketing Institute Society of Industrial and Office Realtors (Individual Member) Womens Council of Realtors This letter represents the position of the Board of Directors of Easter Seals Arkansas. Easter Seals has a campus adjacent on the south to the proposed Pleasant Ridge Town Center development. We oppose the south entrance/exit of the center on Woodland Heights Road. The south access will concentrate the shopping center's traffic at Easter Seals campus. When we left last month's Planning Commission meeting, we were comfortable with the site development, having been told that the south access had been withdrawn from the site plan. I personally followed this up by visiting with Planning Staff approximately one week (or less) ago. At that time, I was told that the site plan had not changed and that there was no planned access directly onto Woodland Heights Road. Late yesterday afternoon, we learned that Planning Staff was recommending that this access be added back to the site plan. We strongly oppose a Woodland Heights entrance and exit into the shopping center. Woodland Heights Road presently services an extensive residential neighborhood, several office buildings, a Montessori school, a church and a large church school in addition to the Easter Seals campus. It should not carry the additional traffic from a 300,000 square foot shopping center. Easter Seals feels the south access poses not only a traffic safety threat, but also a security problem to its campus. Easter Seals campus employs approximately 400 people ... 300 of whom are present during an average day. But more importantly, on any given day it serves 85 adults with disabilities, 86 pre- school children, 35 outpatients, 10 adult residents and 20 children in its after-school program. In addition, 40 children with disabilities actually reside at the campus while they are in various rehabilitation programs. These children and adults add up to a total of approximately 275 clients daily, and almost all of them have physical or developmental disabilities, or a combination of both. Added to the daily workforce, Easter Seals generates approximately 450 trips daily on Woodland Heights Road. Woodland Heights and its intersection with Rodney Parham and Pleasant Forest cannot handle the additional traffic of a shopping center. This three-way, offset intersection is a confusing bottleneck with its present traffic load. Additional traffic will be a monumental problem. Easter Seals picked its campus site because it was out of mainstream traffic; and because its location was convenient, but "out-of-the-way" for reasons of security for the disabled adults and children it serves. Mr. Schickle told me on several occasions that he prefers this south access, but that is not required. Just this morning he stated that his anchor store, Parisian, does not require the access and really doesn't feel it affects them one way or another. Please, if this access is not critical to this development, do not recommend or require it. Please do just the opposite... strike it from the site plan and require that it not be constructed. Sincerely, L. Burnett for Easters Seals Arkansas JLB/bd August 10, 2004 Mr. Mizan Rahman, Chair Little Rock Planning Commission Little Rock Planning and Development 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Rahman and Members of the Planning Commission: I wrote to you on July 29 regarding the proposed rezoning for the Pleasant Ridge Development Project. I feel compelled to write again to let you know of the changes since my first letter. I am urging you to vote against this rezoning. Mr. Lou Schickel has purchased the homes on Summit. This land and the attached property is currently zoned R-2. He is requesting to rezone this property to commercial so he can develop a shopping center. My first question to you is do you in your wildest imagination believe that Little Rock needs another shopping center? And one in a residential neighborhood? When I moved into my home 13 years ago, I researched the surrounding undeveloped property: I learned that it was R-2, R-3 and MF -6. I was comfortable knowing that I would be surrounded by homes and possibly condominiums. In the future land use document, city planners in their wisdom deemed this property to become suburban office should rezoning occur. Now, you are being asked to refute the wisdom of professional planners and current land use to make this land commercial. If professionals have already done their work, why re -do it? The thought of a shopping center next to my home is beyond my comprehension. Mr. Schickel is aware that there is opposition to his proposal. In his efforts to be a "good neighbor", what has he done? Instead of changing his plans to reduce this shopping center or alter his plans, he has EXPANDED his original proposal by another 30,000 square feet. What kind of neighbor is this? If he cannot listen and respond favorably to us now, what is our fate? To put things in perspective, Park Plaza encompasses approximately 22.5 acres of land. The proposed shopping center that Mr. Schickel is putting before you encompasses 27 acres of land and abuts to our residential neighborhood. I ask you again, does Little Rock really need another shopping center? Mr. Schickel says that this shopping center will be upscale with a department store better than Dillard's, a grocery store better than Kroger's and wonderful restaurants. When was the last time you went to an upscale restaurant with a drive-tlirou li window? As I mentioned before, Fairview will serve as the delivery route into this shopping center. Mr. Schickel is asking for hours of operation from 5:00 a.m. until 1:00 a.m. the next morning. I assume this is to accompany hours of the restaurants and will encompass the hours of operation for the department store and others. Since I live just off of Fairview, I see that I can comfortably V rest between 1:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. undisturbed, if I'm lucky. Of course, I still don't know that delivery trucks will not arrive during those hours. Is this what you would define as a good ` neighbor? Is this where you would want to live? Mr. Schickel says that my property values will increase because of this shopping center. Would you buy my home knowing what you know? Mr. Schickel has requested a variance without imminent construction. He plans to excavate the property creating a 60 foot drop off of Fairview at the top of the hill (where Summit currently exists). In my opinion, this is a nightmare with or without construction. I am faced with the prospect of a loading dock of a department store within 200 feet of my front door. In addition, there will also be a trash compactor next to it. Never in my wildest dreams when I purchased my house 13 years ago would I have imagined a department store next door. Why would someone want to put the biggest building, the most obtrusive structure so close to the residential neighborhood? Where is the sense in this? I am appalled that things have gone this far. Mr. Schickel has commercial property along Cantrell that he has had for years that has gone undeveloped. Why doesn't he just move forward with developing that and leave the residential neighborhood alone? I've already written to you about the traffic and how the traffic pattern studies were done during the summer and not during the school year. We have school buses that travel on Fairview. We have parents traveling to and from Christ the King school on Fairview and neither has been taken into account. This is simply not the place for a shopping center, whether it's upscale or otherwise. It simply is not the right place. Ladies and gentlemen, I am trying to protect my home and my neighborhood. These streets are where young families walk their children in strollers and walk their dogs. It is where neighbors greet each other as we mow the lawns or come home after work and pick up the mail. This is not a commercial endeavor with semis, noise, traffic and other issues that change the nature of our lives. Once again, I am counting on you to vote against changing the zoning for the property. I ask you again, if this were your home, what would you do? Sincerely, Sandy Bowen 4 Cedar Branch Drive Little Rock, AR 72223 September 25, 2004 4 Cedar Branch Drive Little Rock, AR 72223 Mr. Mizan Rahman, Chair Little Rock Planning Commission Little Rock Planning and Development 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Mr. Rahman and Members of the Planning Commission: First of all, let me say that I sincerely appreciated the opportunity to speak before you on August 26th in opposition to the Pleasant Ridge Project. I will hasten to say that the concessions that Mr. Schickel was making in the hallway in no way change my original opinion. The shopping center that he has planned does not complement my neighborhood which is a major point that your staff made. The development is too big for the land, the design does not blend well with the neighborhood, and frankly, closing the rear entrance only makes matters worse for us. While I know that you are not interested in us repeating our concerns, I must reiterate my objections: The future land use plan calls for suburban office. The current zoning is residential. If intelligent people developed these plans that were approved by the city board, how can people make informed decisions if these plans can be changed just because a developer had bought some land? Closing the rear entrance will force more traffic onto Fairview which goes right past my house. While this decision may have pleased others, it only complicates life for my neighborhood. The increase in traffic also adds a serious safety issue. The hours of operation are unreasonable to be adjacent to a neighborhood. Shopping center traffic and delivery traffic will be disruptive to our quiet lifestyle. Cantrell traffic is already at capacity or beyond during peak hours. Is this location really the best place for a shopping center? The issue to me is not whether the traffic lights can maintain flow by the timing of the green lights, but the volume of traffic which increases every day. To add a shopping center will only increase the volume. Approving the variance without immediate construction could leave us with a potential eyesore for many, many years. Since Mr. Schickel has had commercial property along Cantrell that has remained undeveloped, where is the guarantee that he will ever develop this property? Mr. Schickel is now proposing a wall on the comer of the shopping center by the residential area. This wall and the few trees that he is proposing do not nullify the impact of a two story department store less than 200 feet from my front door with its loading dock facing my neighborhood. Once again, I must ask you to deny his request to change the zoning and the future land use plan. This is simply not the best use of the land next to my neighborhood. With all of the proposed new shopping centers for Little Rock, I ask again if this is the best location for such a place? The staff already told you that the shopping center does not fit into the neighborhood. The increase in traffic, the potential milling and crime, the hours of operation and every thin, connected with this development are in opposition to a peaceful neighborhood that we have enjoyed for years. Thank you again for your consideration. Sincerely, 4Say aBc 2en City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision September 7, 2004 Ms. Angie Lamberth 11900 Pleasant Ridge Road, Apt #1 Little Rock, AR 72223 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, lo�i�iyBo tuskli SecretaryLittle oc Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision September 7, 2004 Ms. Sandy Bowen 4 Cedar Branch Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, Tony Bo ski Secretary Littl o4PIanning mission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision September 7, 2004 Mr. Jack Hett 13711 Rivercrest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, T'nyBo skiary t Littleoc Planning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Ms. Cindy Linn 12002 Shawnee Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, oily Bozyn ki Secretary to ittle R lanning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Brian Linn 12002 Shawnee Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, Tony Bo ski Secretary t Little c Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 $UbdIVISIOn September 7, 2004 Ms. Judy Madlem 7 Cedar Branch Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, TonyBozy skiary t Little ck lanning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Nathan Culp 6 Worthington Court Little Rock, AR 72223 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, Tony Boz; Secretary mmission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Ms. Linda K. Stauffer 13106 Pleasant Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72223 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, TnyBo ski ary t Little c Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Ms. Charlotte Peebles 11233 Bainbridge Drive Little Rock, AR 72223 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, TBo skiary t Little o Planning Commission (a of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Mike Montgomery 77 Eldorado Little Rock, AR 72223 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 25, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -farm PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers -- 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Si Secretary jo Little Vo+ Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 7220 1-1 334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision September 7, 2004 Mike Coulson 25 Scenic Point Little Rock, AR Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, InyjBo4skii rLittle o Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Richard Stephens 11700 Fairway Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, ToJB�ozyski SeLittle o k Planning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. John L. Burnett 5 Broadview Terrace Little Rock, AR Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, ony Bo ski Secretary to Littck Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Planning Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Zoning and Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision September 7, 2004 Mr. Kees Oudegest 12728 Pleasant View Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock PIanning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Lang -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers -- 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and PIanned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, T Bo ski ary o Littl R k Planning Commission Et of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371.4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Bill Austin 11301 Rivercrest Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock PIanning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers -- 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, any B❑ Ski Secretary Little o k Planning Commission EtCity of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Lloyd Friedman 11905 Fairview Road Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, T Bo s€ i,tary Littleo Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision September 7, 2004 Ms. Ruth Bell 7611 Briarwood Circle Little Rock, AR 72205 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, Tony Bo ski Secretary o Little o Planning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Dick Downing 11 Riding Road Little Rock, AR 72227 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, ony Bo nski Secretary o Li t tle on Planning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Ms. Julie Hancock 11819 Fairview Road Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, E T Bo ski tary to Lit Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Craig Williams 11902 Pleasant Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, TjB;oskiSeLittle oc Planning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. John Gorton 11912 Teton Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. �Sincerely, ' Tony Bo nsrr"k Secretary LittlePlanning Commission EtCity of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. James W. Ayers 12007 Pleasant Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, TBo ski Secretary t Little o Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Jim Beachboard 3224 Shenandoah Valley Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, Tony Bo ski Secretary o Lit Planning Commission Et City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development 723 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Mr. Jim Lake 9 Cimarron Valley Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: Planning Zoning and Subdivision On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, onyBo ski Secretary t Little c Planning Commission City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 Subdivision Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 September 7, 2004 Ms. Diane Robbins 4006 Sierra Forest Little Rock, AR 72212 Dear Citizen: On behalf of the Little Rock Planning Commission, I would like to thank you for your participation in the August 26, 2004 Commission meeting. It is very important to the City staff and the Planning Commission to have citizen input in the planning decision-making process. Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for deferral to the October 7, 2004 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The meeting will begin at 4:00 and be held in the Board of Directors Chambers — 500 West Markham Street. For additional information, you can contact the Planning staff at 371-4790. Staff responsibilities are as follows: Rezoning and Zoning Variance — Monte Moore Subdivision and Planned Unit Developments — Donna James Conditional and Tower Use Permits — Dana Carney Thank you again for your input. Sincerely, Tony Boz nski Secretary Littl a Planning Commission