Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Z-4411-D Application 11
PETITION RECD AUG 212004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. PETITION RECD AUG 21 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. U ■ W12 PrintedSignature A In I M WIOA . FRO �,_ !I__/_ 11. .1 _s .�RION=•� i U ■ W12 PETITION RECD A UG 21 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. Rri in r_TS 10 • ■ ■ • ■ WINE-! ' ■ i PETITION RECD AUG 22 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. Signature Printed Name Address Zip Phone 2 e• (,l��sTlrrW( S� 1� . �: �•Z2i ;Z,Z7-�Fps-d 1 Qa.S (Z, 4 (9� /A Te Q_ ?J/ /.3 0_1 54MAJis 6 Cif 4- ��44 p7azl Z. 7 `�C1/tw� 1�P►5�r��`i i� 4 v /' C �Z212 ry 8 1I �cet lt4vr�x..a `� 2ti 9AA,�t Le 1 N� Wos- 72 1k3 7,94-q7;19 o b� f- L zz -vr 12 `t nnti - d- Calk 1 j t0 1 elor OOMIAe foA 7M- °-q7f 16V LOWMAd D Z P -7-zns qfZ-o( zl 1 , "k 120 (f -r� 07 r66 ( 1 l e i a l -S/ 19 I"? Co>^ O'J A a-�,I I �03� i 18 Nk, PETITION RECD AUG 2 2 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. Signature ^Printed Name Address Zip Phone rGGc / rYr__Pd IIIkC.-IPIIO,AII rT._2'_III- kv�_I) VnI -?2,2> > I '�4-Z - M J r! Aor 5 ` , tc.� vl� t,� I,t. ,�Q • !�, rGL 1 `f .�/Q 4 7 Z 13i ebJ - 7-- AAAI&Ep 8 ,eA� T((• r �7/ E �Q� A-5 7 7-7-73 zzA- 8 64 10 -57 2cL�.-,•( 721. W - (, V 4 11./<<11 -- 61 -RA -J 5'S - 3 12'1 137 t2 7- 1 _+qJ L EU PM JZ20 1 . � E/ Cie, sA,i ;C 7J- ai_Q. 16 I IrAO I -7 i 2- ��I 17 77,22-; 7,Z,+ -U3 Q3 kv�_I) VnI -?2,2> > I '�4-Z - M J PETITION RECD AUG �3 2004 The undersigned su�port the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. S' nature Printed Name Address Phone 3�1? o4 JI�►�� `7Z(53 73o -3s)3 3 e. — 13z)23 IX-04RI&wVRA 72 501 rh 2 I %1 • C �L�G� 7��� . 8 LIO tI I 44LS-+ P22b 9 )� �00R_ d, 72-2-2-)8�6�1 10 /yCe u m, r'tc Mo'_"A� zozLl (3)ocic lug l"K f�_ � zZ, 11 13 14 H._, Sheik- L. Faair 15 � kwin 16 w� �S L'arIck 17 + �7r0 kA ► 7�p3 �' 3`��y L35 elf Yle.,733 PETITION RECD AUG 2'3 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z-4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. naftire Printed Name Address Zip Phone 6 �24 _ (� fOMSb)Q, 5W X2.120 935-0243 4 - 5 6 A z MY � 1; "J 8w' rr LJ• �55, U �T /S S• 14w, -k--r k.,?.Dl 7�� 87o 93s7sw 9 �e F d 851-1( � 10 J 3D r 7 `97 11 . a� Fl_ ag Ci�-I � � 72223 g3o s- y'v 12 Aff (Wl/cry 17)-//,/ 13 14 L�� s. � 7 i W• w�� Si' .-, 1 15 1 ��Tia- w- LOJ - f4 . � 16 k 1 18, f� qal 4 3i e (-K 19 i� �r i . A. Z Z--y goI ' ]zz�) PETITION RECD AUG 2 3 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. PETITION RECD AUG 2.3 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. RECD AUG 2 4 2004 PETITION The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. _Printed N Address MIN '0 KIIJ m _ m m i m IN 11 RECD AUG 2 4 2004 PETITION The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. PETITION RECD AUG 2 4 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. A PETITION CT)The undersigned support the Planned Commercial RE2004 District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,00 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Dr,_ 1 2 3 4 - 5 �f 6' 2kf� 7 U 8� 91 10 11� 12_ 14'/ 15 16 17 18 19 Name Address Zip Phone 7-1 M15 1141 Fote.-kr 72,2 -1?, -- 13 70 1 2,2 -1?, --13701 I .e-4 7 2 Ziz Z z S t;Y Z IA,j , z z ZZ? V ►- �` °� 't 6-V5, 7 PETITION RECD AUG 2 6 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. t s' ature Printed Name Address �.I�Q l r• n � �I Ax - met Zip Phone 1�ZZ 0 aaa 1- 3� PETITION RECD AUG 2 6 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my'neighbors in support of the following petition. 5i nature Printed Name Address Phone a ud �� �n 3�1� alfe Yiei�JJ 1221 22q'- l 3 i/1iOv A 4 .I.� 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 RECD AUG 2 6 2004 PETITION The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. Signature Printed Name Address Zip Phone 1 S - - 2i CiAHat 1222 Va I r 3 v 7- S 7 R«tea �� ���� y1pa-AG 7-S 44p -7z- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 PETITION RECD AUG 2 6 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. Signature Printed Name Address Zip Phone 1 7 2212 22 V -,7?4 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 PETITION REED AUG 2 6 2004 The undersigned support the Planned Commercial District zoning application #Z -4411-D, also known as Pleasant Ridge Town Center. Pleasant Ridge Town Center is a 300,000 sq. ft. open-air retail center on 27 acres located at Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. Highway 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road. The upscale shopping and dining at Pleasant Ridge Town Center will be a perfect compliment and a welcomed addition to the area. I join my neighbors in support of the following petition. Signature Printed Name Address Zip Phone 1 ' ,�-� ,�� ! ('✓ I�f4 � cls �-��^� i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Li 9 - 08124/2004 13:03 501-372-7808 COMMERCIAL MAIL SERVICE August 24, 2004 To whom it may concern: COMMERCIAL MAIL SERV PAGE 01101 200 Nor ch crooe LWe Rodc..LLyccvnaae 72201 •SO 1 -378,-1344 Commercial Mail service mailed out approximately 2769 flyers on August 13, 2004 to the following'lacations: Pleasant Forest Pleasant Valley Pleasant Ridge Longley Walter Heights Cedar Branch If you have any 'further questions please feel free to contact me. Thank you, y Kimberley Hendrickson Commercial Mail Service .(501)'376-2344 Ext 44 (501) 3724'808 Fax ODen House Invitation PLEASANT RIDGE Pleasant Ridge Development Company Invites you to an informational open house to find out more about the proposed: Pleasant Ridge Towne Center (located at Hwy 10 and Pleasant Ridge Road) Thursday, August 1.9 5:00-7:00 p.m. Tuesday, August 24 5:00-7:00 p.m. The meetings will be held at: Pleasant Ridge west Shopping Center 11610 Pleasant Ridge Road, Suite 109 (LaFleur Space next to Movie Gallery) For more information call (501) 225-7807 Refreshments will be served. 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) Cl Central Arkansas Water ❑ Little Rock Wastewater ❑ Pulaski County Planning ❑ Little Rock Fire Department Planning Zoning and Subdivision NAME: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD TYPE OF ISSUE: Shopping Center FILE NUMBER: Z -4411-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 continents and/or recommendations will be appreciated. Sincerely, Dorsa amen 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: C..,P Enclosure Building HeightsC -'- Building Set -back: (Proposed) Side Front Rear. Lot Size Building Area (Sq. Ft.), -Z'70, 6 Allowed Height (Allowed) Side Front _ Minimum Required Building Coverage _ Rear Signage with Details: Proposed Allowed Height rea Height Area Number of Employees Hours of Operation days per week a.m. to mo' Ppm - I ¢¢ '' Site Lighting Location ` 0 J"-- Dumpster location and screening 2�,� e--tw 3' Landscaping (Plan submitted?) `Phasing Plan (indicated when lots will be developed) Storage Number of Parking Spaces: / 1 -; � � Minimum Required I Number Shown Fencing Type Height Parking Orientation to surrounding area and to the Site Use Mix: Specific Uses Proposed Uses 4,1"'ct LQ }- QY�'`�ty Central Arkansas Transit Authority 901 Maple Street • North Little Rock, Arkansas 72114 • Ph 501-375-6717 Fax 501-375-6812 ■ www.cat.org June 21, 2004 Mr. Steve Beck Acting Director of Planning Department of Planning and Development 732 Markham St. Little Rock, AR 72201-1334 Re: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD File Number Z-441 1-C Dear Mr. Beck: CATA has reviewed the site plan for the proposed Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center on Cantrell Rd. in West Little Rock. Currently there is no bus service in the area. If bus service to this area were deemed necessary, the cost of extending service to Pleasant Ridge would be approximately $ 200,000 annually. Funds for service expansion are not in CATA's current budget. CATA would not be able to provide service to the new shopping complex without an increase in the City of Little Rock's local contribution. In the event that transit service to Pleasant Ridge is requested and funded, CATA requests that as part of the project, a location be selected for a bus stop and layover. This location would have to be suitable to allow the bus to park for a few minutes until the time of its scheduled return trip. Further, the bus must be able to access the stop safely and efficiently in both travel directions. For example, the bus would have to exit and enter Cantrell Rd. at signalized intersections. Please let me know if CATA may be of any assistance in developing a transportation plan for the Pleasant Ridge area. Sincerely, Eric Meyerson Planning Manager cc: Keith Jones, Executive Director CAMMACK VILLAGE 0 LITTLE ROCK ■ MAUMELLE e NORTH LITTLE ROCK • PULASKI COUNTY * SHERWOOD << coo cam, ACL sa-u-, a �v Is- James, Donna From: Henry, Bill Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 4:30 PM To: James, Donna; Bozynski, Tony; Lowes, Guy; Hood, Mike; Haralson, Steve; Banihatti, Nat Subject: 2004-08-16 Pleasant Ridge Trip Gen. pdf �d e: 2004-08-16 leasant Ridge Trip.. Attached is the trip generation data based on the type of stores which can be expected in the proposed development. The results of the generation analysis show 1,356 trips in the PM rush hour. When the trips are reduced by 20% due to internal trip capture, the total increase in trips on the street system is 1084 trips, which is represented in the study submitted by Peters and Associates. There have been questions brought up about Saturday trip generations, this information is included in the information, which is attached. Total 24 -Hr Saturday traffic generated by the site is estimated at 10,650 trips. Total Sunday volume can be expected to be approximately 5800 trips. William L. Henry, P.E. Traffic Engineering Manager City of Little Rock Public Works Traffic Engineering 621 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone (501) 379-1816 Fax (501) 340-4853 2004-08-16 Pleasant Ridge Trip Gen.pdf Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Average Weekday Driveway Volumes August 16, 2004 24 Hour AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour Two -Way Land Use Size Volume Enter Exit Enter Exit Specialty Retail Center 260 T.G.L.A. 11523 0 0 309 395 Book Superstore 25 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 0 0 0 254 234 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 15 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 1907 90 83 100 64 Total 13430 90 83 663 693 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Saturday and Sunday Driveway Volumes August 16, 2004 Saturday Sunday 24 Hr Peak Hour 24 Hr Peak Hour 2 -Way 2 -Way Land Use Size Vol. Enter Exit Vol. Enter Exit Specialty Retail Center 260 T.G.L.A. 10930 0 0 5312 0 0 Book Superstore 25 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 0 282 250 0 0 0 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 15 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 2376 189 111 1978 152 125 Total 13306 471 361 7290 152 125 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS James, Donna From: Henry, Bill Sent: Monday, August 16, 2004 12:12 PM To: Haralson, Steve; Hood, Mike; James, Donna; Bozynski, Tony; Banihatti, Nat; Lowes, Guy Subject: 2004-08-16 Pleasant Ridge Shopping Weekday Trip Gen.pdf To all it may concern: I just ran the trip generation numbers based on the usage provided to Donna James by Lou Schickel. The analysis shows that the trips generated by this development are twice as much as shown in the Report submitted to Public Works. This really changes things. I haven't had the chance to add these new numbers into our model. Based on the numbers, the AM rush hour should be included in the analysis as well. The opinion of Peters and Associates that says the affects will be negligible is incorrect due to the additional 528 additional trips being added to Cantrell Road in the AM rush hour. This represents a 220 growth in traffic due to the center as proposed. The amount of traffic being routed to the neighborhood, which is 150 of the traffic from the development amounts to 299 trips, which is higher than the total amount of trips currently on Pleasant Forest. We will keep you informed as we continue with our review. William L. Henry, P.E. Traffic Engineering Manager City of Little Rock Public Works Traffic Engineering 621 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone (501) 379-1816 Fax (501) 340-4853 x a� 2004-08-16 easant Ridge Shop.. 2004-08-16 leasant Ridge Shopping Weekday Trip Gen.pdf 1 Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center - CLR Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Average Weekday Driveway Volumes August 16, 2004 24 Hour AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour Land Use Size Two -Way Volume Enter Exit Enter Exit Specialty Retail Center 70 T.G.L.A. 3102 0 0 83 106 Free -Standing Discount Superstore 120 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 5905 113 108 228 236 Supermarket 50 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 5112 99 64 267 256 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 15 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 1907 90 83 100 64 Book Superstore 25 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 0 0 0 254 234 Pharmacy / Drugstore without Drive-Thru 20 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 1801 38 26 84 84 Total 17827 340 281 1016 980 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center - CLR Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Saturday and Sunday Driveway Volumes August 16, 2004 Saturday Sunday 24 Hr Peak Hour 24 Hr Peak Hour 2 -Way 2 -Way Land Use Size Vol. Enter Exit Vol. Enter Exit Specialty Retail Center 70 T.G.L.A. 2943 0 0 1430 0 0 Free -Standing Discount Superstore 120 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 6900 307 294 5638 266 246 Supermarket 50 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 8880 275 264 8322 0 0 High Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 15 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 2376 189 111 1978 152 125 Book Superstore 25 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 0 282 250 0 0 0 Pharmacy / Drugstore without Drive-Thru 20 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 0 105 109 0 0 0 Total 21099 1158 1028 17368 418 371 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Lei MtOd SJ31VC 311HM :A "r 3% City of Little Rock Department of Planning and DevelopmentPlanning Zoning and 723 West Markham Subdivision Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 (501) 371-4790 4 FAX OVER SHEET DATE: ta rO 111113 CK�70 11A.10104 FAX NUMBER: pS off. q- 3 51 PHONE NUMBER: FROM: {A ] i2w'n c�- DIVISION: FAX NUMBER: (501)399-3435 PHONE NUMBER: (501) (7') TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET: COMMENTS: pa v Rd AREA ZONING 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: T2NR13 W21 LAND USE Case: Z -4411-C Location: SOUTH EAST CORNER OF CANTRELL ROAD AND PLEASANT VALLEY RIDGE ROAD Ward: 4 PD: 1 0 250 300 1.000 Feet CT: 42.09 TRS: T2NR13W21 TR T2 N RR13W21 CT 42.09 PD 1 CT• 42.09 PLEASANT RIDGE REVISED LONG -FORM PCD Z -4411-C SOUTH EAST CORNER OF CANTRELL ROAD AND PLEASANT RIDGE ROAD 7 2 Schickel Approved 1994 PCD Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Average Weekday Driveway Volumes August 23, 2004 24 Hour AM Pk Hour PM Pk Hour Two -Way Land Use Size Volume Enter Exit Enter Exit Shopping Center 97.68 T.G.L.A. 4194 62 39 176 190 General Office Building 10 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 110 14 2 3 12 Total 4304 76 41 179 202 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Schickel Approved 1994 PCD Summary of Multi -Use Trip Generation Saturday and Sunday Driveway Volumes August 23, 2004 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Saturday Sunday 24 Hr Peak Hour 24 Hr Peak Hour 2 -Way 2 -Way Land Use Size Vol. Enter Exit Vol. Enter Exit Shopping Center 97.68 T.G.L.A. 4881 252 233 2465 149 155 General Office Building 10 Th.Gr.Sq.Ft. 24 2 2 10 1 1 Total 4905 254 235 2475 150 156 Note: A zero indicates no data available. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS Page 1 of 1 James, Donna From: Banihatti, Nat Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 2:12 PM To: Lowes, Guy Cc: Hood, Mike; Henry, Bill; James, Donna; Haralson, Steve Subject: Lou Schickel 1994 Approved PCD Guy, The original approved usage for this property consisted of: 97.68 thousand sq. ft. of Shopping Center and, 10 thousand sq. ft. of Office Space. I did a trip generation for these parameters and you can see the numbers in the attached file. Page 1 is for weekdays and page 2 is for weekends. Thanks -Nat Banihatti 8/24/2004 �....e �. our �� Iia,-� } a'•~.^� �i a• � -�D _. ,-2, u,� OL,5 OL- Pte. ® WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Q 24 Rahling Circle 13 Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 July 9, 2004 Ms. Donna James, Subdivision Administrator City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: Pleasant Ridge PCD Ms. James, The developer of the above referenced project would like to defer this application until the next available Planning Commission meeting. This will allow the developer to amend the application to include the recently acquired property to the southeast. Please do not hesitate to call should you have any questions or require additional information Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING 0/10/2004 09:35 821166B WHITE DATERS PAGE 01/01 ® WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Q 24 Rahling circle Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 July 4; 2004 Ms. Donna James, Subdivision Administrator City of Little Rock 723 W. M rkbant St. L-+.tle Rock; Arkansas 72201 RE: Pleasant Ridge PCD Ms. James, The developer of the above referenced prajectwould like to defer this application until the next uvailable Ptanaing Cammiasiort meet4, Iliis will a]low the developer to amend the application to include the recently acquired prope+-W to tl.e southeast. Please do not hesitate to call should you have any questions or t equite additional irtforrnatton Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. $in ly, Joe ite, Jr, CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING $ DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING City of Little Rock Department of Planning and Development Planning 723 West Markham Street Zoning and Little Rock, Arkansas 72201-1334 g Phone: (501) 371-4790 Fax: (501) 399-3435 or 371-6863 Subdivision July 19, 2004 Mr. Joe White White-Daters and Associates #24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, AR 72223 Re: Pleasant Ridge Revised Long -form PCD (Z -441 1-D), located South of Cantrell Road, East of Pleasant Ridge Road Dear Mr. White: This is to advise you that in connection with your application referenced above the following action was taken by the Planning Commission at its meeting on July 15, 2004: Approved with conditions. Recommended approval with conditions. Recommended approval as submitted. Denied your request as submitted. X Deferred to August 26, 2004 Meeting. Other: If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 371-6821. Respectfully, Donna James, AICP Subdivision Administrator 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 3, 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 -441 1-D), located South of Cantrell Road, East of Pleasant Ridge Road Dear Mr. White: This is to advise you that in connection with your application referenced above the following action was taken by the Planning Commission at its meeting on August 26, 2004: Approved with conditions. Recommended approval with conditions. Recommended approval as submitted. Denied your request as submitted. X Deferred to October 7 2004 Meeting. Other: If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 371-6821. Respectfully, Donna James, AICP Subdivision Administrator R TO City of Little Rock Department of Public Works Planning 621 S. Broadway Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 379-1800 Fax (501) 379-1850 MEMORANDUM FROM: Nat Banihatti, Traffic Systems Manager SUBJECT: Pleasant Ridge Shopping Center DATE: August 31, 2004 Traffic Engineering Traffic Engineering has completed its review of the traffic study prepared by Peters and Associates. Preliminary findings indicated that the proposed main entrance to the shopping center across Southridge Dr. would result in severe congestion on Cantrell Rd. Traffic models show that moving the main entrance to what is now Drive B, and signalizing it, would alleviate this problem. Specific requirements are as follows: ➢ Make what is now Drive A right -in -right -out only with an island. ➢ Move the main entrance to what is now Drive B and signalize it. ➢ This signal will serve traffic on Cantrell and shopping center traffic. Any driveway across the entrance on the other side of Cantrell will not be served by the signal ➢ Build two left -turn lanes (200ft. bay length) and one right -turn lane out of Drive B ➢ Stripe west -bound left turn lane on Cantrell at the main entrance. ➢ Dedicate r -o -w for an EB right -turn lane for the length of the property. All grading work for the construction of right turn lane must be taken care of as part of this development. ➢ Other street improvements for Fairview Rd., Summit Rd. and Woodland Heights Rd. as required by Civil Engineering Traffic Engineering has notified Peters and Associates of the above requirements. The developer has notified our office that the rear entrance (Drive C) will no longer be constructed.. However, this would not reduce traffic going through the Pleasant Forest neighborhood. Even though this entrance is not built, people can still use the other drives on Fairview and Woodland Heights. Actually, in the absence of rear entrance, residents along Fairview will see a significant increase in traffic. There is a speeding problem on Pleasant Forest Rd. Residents have long been complaining about this. Since Pleasant Forest has no traffic signals and links Hinson and Rodney Parham, any congestion on Cantrell Rd. is likely to force more traffic onto Pleasant Forest thus worsening the speeding problem. In order to address this and preserve the character of the neighborhood, traffic calming devices such as traffic circles, chicanes, partial diverters, etc. are recommended to be constructed on Pleasant Forest. Latest traffic data shows the average daily traffic on Pleasant Forest (@ Sierra Forest) to be 4743 vehicles per day with an 85th percentile speed of 44 mph. As many as 60 vehicles were found to be traveling at 55 mph or above. Any increase in traffic on Pleasant Forest Dr. will also increase the number of speeders. If you have questions or require further information, please call. "We're Proud Of Our Work(s)!" Bozynski, Tony From: Henry, Bill Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 12:09 PM To: Bozynski, Tony; James, Donna; Hood, Mike; Haralson, Steve; Lowes, Guy; Banihatti, Nat; Herbner, Travis Subject: Pleasant Ridge Development Here it is right off of the press. We recounted the intersections on Cantrell per the neighborhood's request. Traffic volumes are higher, however we are able to maintain the same levels of service with or without the development. As traffic increases in this corridor, additional capacity improvements will be needed for the intersection of Cantrell and Rodney Parham to maintain acceptable levels of service. Attached are printouts from Synchro depicting the traffic counts and levels of service for the different intersections along the route. Four models are represented: 1. Existing Cantrell with summer traffic (5/04/04) 2. Existing Traffic with Development -Summer Traffic (5/04/04) 3. Existing Cantrell with School Traffic (9/15/04) 4. Existing Cantrell with Development with school traffic (9/15/04) Cantrell w --antrell Ex Summer Cantrell Existing Cantrell Existing •velopment Summer Traffic.pdf... 9-15-04 Traf... traffic 9-15... William L. Henry, P.E. Traffic Engineering Manager City of Little Rock Public Works Traffic Engineering 621 S. Broadway Little Rock, AR 72201 Phone (501) 379-1816 Fax (501) 340-4853 Cantrell Existing Traffic w/ Development Traffic w Development - Summer Traffic Levels of Service T Road 4—r 576�j 1 Counted: 5/04/04 9/24/2004 Rodney Parham Rd. X23 X1614 Cantrell Road X436 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; PEb#avd&IK4022HdftHbPM-Final-Revised CLR Improve.sy7 %user name% Cantrell Ex - Summer Traffic Levels of Service Counted: 514104 9/24/2004 Pa<hO -kd T atm r—� Cantrell Road C, ' CanlrelR& ;-� �l ,ad y i 4G Oa7 7 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; Proposed Geometrii3.4cantreli\2004-08-11_ExCantrell.sy7 %user name% Cantrell Existing Traffic w/ Development Traffic No RParham Improvments Levels of Service Counted:9/15/04 9/24/2004 �m Q' Rodney Parham Rd. X205 ._ •1960 �t25 a� w i rie0a f°dq cantreIl Road Cantrell Road f713"1 X 53^q 4 x- 1,1 D —�I n g I X- CO m OD e a a n , I P1022 Pleasant RidjbcSgbaH 2 &#fi%d6 71dkffloF§bMFRToWevibe@eOb:Mddsprove(without RP Improvement).sy7 %,user name% Cantrell Existing Traffic Levels of Service I !� T 1 NqqC'] i'i99[ Raad 21 ro I � m i y c0 N a Counted:9/15104 912412004 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; Proposed GeometrMcantrelik2004-09-15_ExCantrell.sy7 %user name% P Lr �0J Pafi Rodne`1 r �r I N sIl 1° X142 'Crrtrell ;3%1 t'1996 „n c �`�9G0 r dr VSs �17fi9 8 1 Cantre]] Road .O. CantrelCgod 160+ IT� 1638 524�I gag ��r. ifi83 h I O 159—, ti m •' S Oil z �G N 77 P1022 Pleasant Ridge Square Projected Traffic Traffic; Proposed GeometrMcantrelik2004-09-15_ExCantrell.sy7 %user name% • Additional letters of opposition • Additional information from Traffic Engineering • Color site plan indicating shopping center layout • Small conceptual elevation • Four color photo's of developers existing developments indicating typical landscaping installed ■ Overall Site Plan ■ Overall Grading Plan • Elevation for various locations through the site ■ Aerial photograph of the west Little Rock area • Large conceptual elevation Linda K. Stauffer 13106 Pleasant Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 501/224-7009 August 9, 2004 Little Rock Planning Commission c/o Little Rock Planning & Development 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Planning Commission: The Pleasant Forest Property Owners Association has brought to my attention the planned rezoning and commercial development planned on Cantrell Road across from Walton Heights. I have been a resident at the above address for the past 12 years and have been a daily witness to the development in the area. T have some strong concerns about the planned rezoning and urge you to vote against re -zoning this area. This is my fust time to ever approach the Planning Commission, further evidence of my concerns. When I moved to the area 12 years ago, it was with the clear understanding that there would be some commercial development along Cantrell. With Pleasant Forest being a collector street, I stood at the curb a long time and contemplated residential traffic before buying my house. At that time, having two son, I was concerned back then about my future teenagers entering and exiting my driveway onto Pleasant Forest Drive. Today, with the rapid growth along the Cantrell corridor, the traffic during rush hour has become unbearable, and many folks cut through Pleasant Forest Drive because of the stop lights affording access to Rodney Parham with easy access to I-630 without having to sit in light -to -light stopped traffic on Cantrell. With the opening of Walmart and the addition of new apartments near Kroger, the traffic on Cantrell will only increase. Currently, I find it almost impossible to safely exit my driveway during the morning rush hour, and I almost get rear-ended daily pulling in after work. A new major commercial rezoning effort will only exacerbate this and other problems. The land along Cantrell was raped several years ago and left undeveloped. It would be a good thing to develop this land which is now an eyesore according to the current zoning codes. My understanding is that the developer wants to rezone the transitional office -zoned buffer between Cantrell and the neighborhood to become commercial property, larger than Park Plaza mall area, all the way to the back of the office complex on Woodland Heights, and without any street improvements on Woodland Heights or Fairway. Additionally the plans call for removal of the hillside all the way back and placement of a large store against the perimeter nearest the neighborhood. I strongly oppose the rezoning and this particular development for the following reasons: a) the current zoning promises the neighborhood a transitional office zoned buffer which is preferred to direct commercial development. Rezoning negates that understanding with the neighborhood. L. Stauffer, August 9, 2004 Page 2 b) the traffic generated by having a shopping center with entrance/exit onto Woodland Heights will ensure that the traffic will fan out to Pleasant Forest going west when Cantrell is overcrowded and when traffic backs up on Woodland Heights and at the Woodland Heights/Pleasant Forest/Rodney Parham intersection. This will bring more commercial traffic to a residential area in which busses stop, kids walk and ride bikes, and pedestrians walk and jog daily. C) removing the hill and the vegetation will increase heat in the area by increasing paved surfaces, decrease wildlife (go out and listen to the birds in that area now!), increase noise and pollution when both the hill and trees are removed which will decrease quality of living and property values in the area. d) Traffic will be increased during evenings and weekends which is something I do not want in my neighborhood. e) It increases the likelihood- that more property in the future will be rezoned, further decreasing the scenic value, the property value, and the quality of life in the area. This needs to stop now. I am a single mother who works two jobs and am proud of having bought into my neighborhood 12 .years ago. With lower interest rates, I refinanced and plan to stay there for many years to come. I do not want nor welcome "upscale" shopping which will not be something that I will likely be able to afford. I urge you to recognize that the current land already zoned for commercial is sufficient for the area, that overdevelopment of this land, and destruction of the land contour, will benefit no one. I urge you to vote "no" to the rezoning request. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Linda K. Stauffer cc: Mayor Jim Dailey Brad Cazort, Ward 4 Craig Williams, President PFPGA Tony Bozynski, Planning & Development Guy Lowes, Public Works 08124/01 TUEU} _20 FU' 2268406 SCHICREL DEV. IM 002 Walton Heights Candlewood Homeowners Association PO Box 17043 Little Rock, AR 72222 August 20, 2004 Mr. Craig Williams Pleasant Forest Property Owners Association 11902 Pleasant Forest Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Re: Proposed Develepwent Dear Mr. Williamson, Thank you for your presentation to the W14CHA board regarding the proposed development on Cantrell. The board had previously discussed a neutral position in regards to the proposed development. The members in general are not opposed to an "up scale development' for the land across from the Walton Heights entrance. The facts you presented on the most recent commercial proposal did raise concerns in four ones. The fust concern is the waiver request to the Land Alteration Act. The board does not support a waiver for this area. The second concern is related to the traffic studies conducted. Since the initial proposal the scale of the development has increased in size. It is important that the traffic studies conducted accurately reflect the current scale of the development. The traffic studies should also be conducted during the time schools are in session, secondary to the normal increased volume. The third concern is the broad range of businesses that could be placed in the area under the requested commercial designation. Tire WHCHA board would like assurance that the area is maintained as an "up scale development", by listing exclusions of businesses that would not be allowed to occupy the new development. The fourth concern is the southwest comer of the development. This area will be closest to existing homes in the erea. The board would like to see some "green space" to separate existing homes form the proposed buildings. The WHCHA board has voted to support the Pleasant Valley Property Owners Association and the Pleasant Forest Property Owners Association in their opposition to the development based out the above listed concerns, if we can be of further assistance please feel free to contact one of the WHCHA board members. Sincerely, Becky Pryor Secretary Walton Heights Candlewood Homeowners Association 08/25/2004 12:11 8211668 WHITE DATERS PAGE 01/02 ED WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. El 24 Rahling Circle [3 Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 August 25, 2004 Ms. Donna James Subdivision Administrator Planning and Development. 723 W. Markbaal Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Re: Pleasant Ridge Town Center, PCD Application. Z -441 1-D Ms, James: As per your request, we are providing the following information regardiiig the above referenced project: 1. Pleasant Ridge Development Company (PRDC) would like to measure the setback along Highway 10 at 47 feet from the old rigbt-o F way line. 2. The two front hardscape development signs will be in walls that will be 6 feet in height. The signs will be 20 feet in length and the lettering will be a maximum height of 24 inches. 3. The front development sign will be 100 square feet in area and 10 feet high. 4, The two restaurant signs along Highway 10 will be 72 square feet in area and 6 feet high. 5. The development sign on Fairview Road will be 64 square feet in area and 6 feet bigh. 6. The development sign at the rear entrance will also be a hardscape sign as described in item 2. 7. PRDC will leave an undisturbed buffer along the southwest comer of the development, which is the section closest to Cedar Branch as shown on the attached sketch. At this time we'd also life to request release of the Grading Permit when PRDC has a signed lease with the anchor tenant. Please let us know in writing if there is any other information you would like to request. Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, oe D. ite, Jr. CIVIL ENGINEERING, LANE) PLANNING 8 DEVELOPMENT, 5URVEYING Jt—`L r / Page 1 of 1 James, Donna From: Carney, Dana Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 7:51 AM To: James, Donna Subject: FW: proposed rezoning -----Original Message ----- From: Gambels[mailto:ricknkaren@aristotle.net] Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2004 9:29 PM To: Carney, Dana Subject: proposed rezoning I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed rezoning of the Summit Street area and development on Hwy 10 across from Walton Heights. I would like to urge the planning commission and the board to maintain the current commercial boundaries for that area. Just because Walmart now exists, we do not have the give up on Hwy 10 being something more than miles of mega -commercial establishments. Thank you. Karen Gambel 11073 Bainbridge Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 8/23/2004 LR Planning Commisssion 723 W. Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Planning Commission, Please, please do not allow the re -zoning of the property on Hwy 10 which backs up to the Pleasant Forest Subdivision. We live in Pleasant Forest and are raising our children there. They have learned to ride their bikes, to roller blade, and ride their scooters, to play pick up basketball on our neighborhood streets. Please do not destroy our neighborhood by taking it away from us and giving it to another developer. If you allow this re -zoning we will have cut through traffic making it impossible for our children to do the things children do. Where will my children be able to safely play now? We (the adult tax payers) will have problems just backing out of our driveways or exiting the neighborhood. Our streets will no longer be quiet and our entire neighborhood will be less desirable. Our property values will decrease. With just the thought of this encroachment my home is less desirable to me so what would it be to a potential buyer? This plan has a back entrance in our neighborhood, so the wear and tear on our streets will be major as well as hazardous. I was recently in downtown Little Rock during the week and was totally amazed at the vacant buildings. I see all these vacant buildings where the occupants have re -located out West. (We moved to West LR to get away from the commercial areas that keep encroaching upon the neighborhoods.) Before you allow a developer to destroy another neighborhood, why doesn't the planning commission make the developers responsible for the vacant buildings and eyesores? Why don't we have a set rate or percentage of if this many buildings are vacant, then we don't even consider destroying more of the environment and neighborhoods? Give major incentives for occupying a current existing vacant building. Please say no. We don't need the traffic nor do we need another place to shop. .One commercial building in this same area has sat vacant for over a year. Why do we need more? Sincerely, h'Pharis 29 Rio Grande Forest Little Rock, AR 72212 LAW OFFICES HANCOCK & LANAE 300 SPRING STREET SUITE 220 LITYLEROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 JONATHAN T. LANE C. DANIEL HANCOCK Attorneys atLaw August 20, 2004 Mayor Jim Dailey Little Rock City Hall, Rm. #203 500 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Re: Rezoning Issue (Between Fairview Road and Woodland Heights) Dear Mayor: ." 27y / TELEPHONE (501) 3 72- 6400 FACSIMILE (501) 372-6401 Email: jtlane@j'ustice.com Email: hancock@justice.com It has been brought to my attention that there is a proposal to rezone the above -referenced from suburban office to commercial. As a Property owner at 11819 Fairview Road my family and I will be directly affected. First, I am concerned about the amount of traffic the proposed development will produce. Since I live on what would be an access road to the shopping center, I anticipate traffic to increase substantially and be present at all times of the day. The presence of the amount of traffic I anticipate if the rezoning is approved creates a potential safety risk as well as a nuisance to not only my family, but to all property owners in the Cedar Branch Subdivision. Secondly, since a perimeter of the proposed shopping center would be within one hundred feet of my house, I anticipate my property value and the other surrounding property values to depreciate. Under the current proposal my front yard would face the loading docks of the proposed stores. Additionally, the construction would create noise, dirt, and heavy equipment use in the Cedar Branch Subdivision for an extended amount of time. After attending two meetings specifically had to discuss this proposal, I am of the opinion that the developer (Lou Schiekel) lacks the knowledge, commitment, financing and wherewithal to complete this development so it would be beneficial to the City of Little Rock. As such, the request to have the property rezoned to commercial should be denied. I appreciate your attention to this matter and anticipate addressing this issue in more detail at the August 26, 2004, hearing. Sincerely, Daniel Hancock cc: Bruce Moore, City Manager Little Rock City Hall, Rm. #203 500 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 ;Vony Bozynski, Director Little Rock Dept. of Planning & Development 723 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Brad Cazort, Db. Of Dir. -Ward 4 Little Rock City Hall, Rm. #203 500 West Markham Little Rock., Arkansas 72201 Bob Turner, Asst. City Mgr. Little Rock City Hall, Rm. #203 500 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Guy Lowes, P.E., Director LR Public Works 701 West Markham Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY 500 West Markham, Ste. 310 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Thomas M. Carpenter City Attorney Sender's Email: tcscnersterCR�Litilerflck sta[e.ar.us Sender's Direct Dial: 371-6875 December 3, 2004 John T. Hoeeman, IV H/eRock, & Associates, P.A. 1r Street S0 LArkansas 72201 Telephone (501) 371-4527 Telecopier (501) 371-4675 Chabad Lubavitch ofArkansas "The Jewish Center" vs City of Little Rock, et al. Pulaski County Circuit Court No. CV 04-12234 Dear Mr. Holleman: I am writing in connection with the above -referenced case and more specifically the Complaint which you filed on November 12, 2004. This Complaint contains misstatements of fact which reasonable investigation would have revealed as such, and which, if not corrected, will harm the City and the individual defendants listed in your Complaint. These statements constitute a violation of Rule 11(a) of the Arkansas Rules of Civil Procedure. If you do not take steps to correct these statements the defendants will be forced to proceed with a motion for sanctions pursuant to subsection (b) of Rule 11. The first set of statements in question are contained in Paragraph 38 ofyour Complaint which states in its entirety: The Jewish Center has invested over $1 Million in its facility, architectural plans, and infrastructure and the Center's property directly abuts the development. Due to a major Biblical Jewish Festival of Shemini Atzeret (Lev. 24:36) and the observance of Judaism in the Orthodox manner the membership was prevented from attending the public hearing. This fact was made known to the Planning Commission members and the request of the Jewish Center to reschedule the hearing was blatantly ignored. No members of the Jewish Center were able to physically address the Planning Commission in direct violation of their constitutional rights and due process rights in derogation of state statute and city code. The mischaracterizations in this paragraph are manifold. Initially, the members ofthe Jewish Center were not prevented from attending the public hearing. They chose not to do so. While there may be John T. Holleman, N Holleman & Associates, P.A. December 3, 2004 Page -2- legitimate reasons for their choice, the fact remains that it was their choice. Neither the City, nor anyone connected with the City did anything to prevent attendance by anyone at this meeting. Further, what this paragraph, and the Complaint, omit is that the October 7, 2004, meeting was preceded by a Planning Commission meeting on August 26, 2004, at which the Jewish Center was represented by Lloyd Friedman who spoke on its behalf. Mr. Friedman concluded his comments by requesting that any decision be deferred so that the Jewish Center could continue to meet with Mr. Schickel. A decision was not made at this meeting and the matter was deferred to the next meeting on October 7, 2004. I have reviewed the Planning Commission's file in this matter and did not find any request by the Jewish Center to reschedule the October 7, 2004, meeting. There is no evidence whatsoever that the Center's request to reschedule, if there indeed was one, was "blatantly ignored." What I do find in the file is a letter written by Rabbi Ciment dated October 6, 2004. This letter was read to the Planning Commission at the October 7 meeting by Stacy Fletcher, the Center's attorney. It should also be noted that when Ms. Fletcher spoke to the Commission she never stated that a request to reschedule the hearing had been ignored. In fact, she explained why there were no members of the Center present and went on to note that a Center representative had attended the previous meeting. She also noted that the Center had spoken with the Planning Staff about its concerns. All of these facts are noticeably absent from your Complaint and leave the false impression that the City and the Commission did something wrong or improper. Since the failure of the Center's counsel to object binds the client, there is no reason for this innuendo and statements to the contrary must be corrected. In sum, while no Center members were physically at the October 7 meeting, the Center was certainly represented and the Center's views were made known to the Commission. These facts are inexplicably absent from the statements in your Complaint and leave the false impression that the Commission was unaware of the Center's concerns. There are other misstatements and mischaracterizations in paragraphs 41, 42 and 43 of your Complaint. You complain in paragraph 41 that no Board member or City staff member offered a chair to the women or children ofthe Center. The complete irrelevance ofthis claim notwithstanding, you fail to note that there were numerous City staff members who also stood throughout the meeting. You also fail to note that seating was provided on the first floor of City Hall for this meeting and do not address whether the Center members attempted to find seating there. Finally, there is very simply no requirement that a Board member give up his or her seat to anyone, and in fact such a thing would be both untenable and improper since the seats are where the Clerk focuses when addressing Board members and recording a vote. The statements in paragraph 41 are improper and inflammatory. You complain in paragraphs 42 and 43 about the allocation of the time to speak at the meeting and falsely allege that the Mayor went "alphabetically, which used up all of the time and wholly denied members of the Jewish Center their allotted time pursuant to the Board's own rules!" The John T. Holleman, N Holleman & Associates, P.A. December 3, 2004 Page -3- Mayor did not go alphabetically. The names of the individuals who spoke and the order in which they spoke are as follows: Craig Williams Gert Clark Kate Althoff Sandy Bowen Jan Barker Nathan Culp Charles Prewitt Jun Lake Julie Hancock The Board amended its rules to allow both sides additional time to speak on this issue. There were many individuals who filled out cards both in favor of, and in opposition to, this project who did not have the opportunity to speak due to simple time constraints. You leave the impression that the Jewish Center members were singled out to be silenced and they were not. Further, Rabbi Ciment complained to the Mayor during a break in the proceedings, and you also note that the Mayor and the Board gave the Center one minute to speak which is correct, as far as it goes. The Mayor also gave another individual one additional minute to speak as well. The City was under no obligation to do this, but did so in an attempt to allow all of those who wanted to speak the opportunity to do so. It is also a fact that Rabbi Ciment, while allotted one minute, spoke for longer than that and was at the dais for over five minutes in order to answer questions. None of these facts are set out in your Complaint. Rule 11 states in pertinent part: The signature of an attorney or party constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the pleading, motion or other paper; that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry it is well grounded in fact and is warranted by existing law or a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law, and that it is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as to harass.... The matters raised by you in paragraphs 38, 41, 42 and 43 are not well grounded in fact, with reasonable investigation the truth would have been revealed, and appear to have been interposed by you for improper purposes. The City is formally demanding that you correct the statements made in these paragraphs and, to the extent required, that you amend the Complaint. If you refuse to make the required corrections the City will proceed in the manner outlined in the Rule 11. John T. Holleman, IV Holleman & Associates, P.A. December 3, 2004 Page -4- While the two sides to a zoning action typically disagree about the outcome of a legislative body's vote, the legal issue is straightforward — i.e., did the governing body act arbitrarily and capriciously. As you are well aware, this issue focuses upon whether the governing body considered the information presented to it for decision. The City welcomes the exercise of proper legal challenges. Just recently, for example, the City approved a developer's challenge to standing because the City believes that affected residents should be given the chance to employ proper legal processes to question a decision. However, there is no place for intentional misrepresentation. I feel confident that upon review and investigation you will make an appropriate amendment to the Complaint. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Thomas M. Carpenter City Attorney TMC:dab cc: Mayor Dailey and. Members of the Board of Directors Bruce T. Moore, City Manager Charles R. Turner, Assistant City Manager Tony Bozynski, Director of Planning & Development 11/1112004 16:49 3763612 - r.ov 0n1-;$I5bb43 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSOC iN TRE C11ZCUTT COURT OF PULASIU COUNTS,, ARKANSAS DMSXON CIIAB110 L11BAVaCH O,P ARKANSAS "THE Tvnw CENTER V, CASE NO. CITY OF LI"!i`LE P om � �W, and ITS MAYOR AND 130APW OF DEUCTOR,S, JW DAILBY, J01 -R TM PUG11, WZ L]M IM.TON, STAGY MRS T, NUCH,AEL KECK, GENEVIEVE STEWART, DB.AN KUAVL]Ri,S, BARBARA GRAVES, TOAN ADCOCIc, BRENDA. WTMCK, and BR4D CAZORT APPEAL TO CIRCUIT COURT PtMSU-kW TO ARI_ COD -E ANN. §X4-56,425 CO L T IlY C.L TONT PAGE 03 PAGE 02120 PL UN -.Up DEF'ENDA' T,,3 COlucs thO Plaintiff, Chavad Lubavitch of, Arkansas (hereinafter "T1ie Center") by and tbTaugh its attonaeys, Holleman & Assoeistes, P.A., and for its Corrtpl,aint against the above juamed bcfendauts states: 1NiTZ2umoN, 7.. PIaintiff brings t1lis cause of act'" agsfnA tt" City of Little Rock and tIte rzsmed Defe�r.dants (colaeot�ively, "the City") ehWjeugjDg the November 9, 2004, City Board of Director's ("Board") approving Ordinance No. ("tbe Proposed Pleasant Ridge Towra Ccitur Ordinance"). plaantiff seeks an appeal of the Deftdants' deazsion to appro'Ye this Ordizzatxce and a declaratory judgment prohibiting Defendants from issuiu g buildi, t1$Ferm.ste orotb.etvisc talcirtg ;kny actzr,,tz cor,.sxstent with the adoption of'tbe Proposed -Pleasant Ridge Town Center Ordinance. ;Pl;RiRtiir 'The actual ordinmce will not be available ur_tti,l Friday, Novemt7�x IZ, 2004, snd will be .fzled via a Notice Of. Filing, 11/11/04 TAU 05:51 [T%/RX NO 59061 1111112004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 04 r,e�lyr5bb43 HaLLEMAN & ASsoo PAGE 04/20 also seckS a declaration that th.e November 9, 2004, decision, to establish a " �'bitraty, capriotous u "Revised FCD was uMsOnablc and an, abuse of'dis=tion, rUrthei;r tho ,Som, g approval of the Pleasant Ridge 'fow,u Cnfer conati,tutcs "Spot zaaiug_ " and is otherwise not fn coAf arinaty wi. ht the applicable ozdinacces of the City, Arkansas case 3avv and both Federal and stage c4 $ttasantaes. .ustjlutaonaa 2. Plaintiff Chabad Lubavztch of Arkartsas is located at 1194511Qir,cwrr Road, L,iitle Rockkansas 72212. Following its inception 2,50 t'eat's ago, fhp Chabad-Lubavltch, moUexn,cnt a brattclx of Hasidisna -- swept through Russia and spread in surrounding countries as we n 1t provided scl'olgrs 'with answers that eluded tlaem and sizaplc r'am.ers with a ,Tove that had beat.). denied of thein, Eventually 41-0 Philcsophy of Chabad-Lubavitalz axad its �vlhercnts reached almost every corner of the world and affected almost every facet of Jewish life, The origins of today's Chabad-Lubavitell organizatio;a. eau be traced to the early 1940's wheia the eixih LubavitchetRebba. Rabbi, Yosef Y-it?cltak Schneerachn oft ghteous rtmetxmory(18 80-1 .950), a pointed, his son u�law and latex Successor, Rabbi 1'vlezxaollerxt lVlendex, to head the newly -founded educatioual and sovial senice azzns of the movement. Motivated by Ws profound love for every Jew wad spurred by his botmdless optimism and se,lff saczfiice, the Rebbe set into oration a dazzling array ofprogram$, services m1d i»stitutions to serve every Jew. Today 4,000 full-time etxtissary farttilies apply 250 Year-old principlcs and philosophy to direct more than. 3,300 institutions (and a workfoxce. that .numbers in tbu tens of thousands) dedicated to the welfare of the 11�wish people Worldwide. exe S of 900 ofthe Cather°s members live witl>in two (2) miles of d7a Pleasant Ridge Toym Center in the Fjc:asattt Valley and Fleasant Forrest neighborhoods, K 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 05 HaLLEMAN &Assoc PAGE 05/20 3• Tile -Defendant CiofLzttlE Rock, , Arkansas is a city oi'the first class orghnized wader the Taws of the State of Arkarzsas, aszd ]vcaYed. is Pulaski Cot=Y, Arkansas. The Ci znodi�.ed ca city lass a tymauagerfozr�a, ofgaver=M'.twith an electedmayor. Br eeMaorc is the CilYNTanager wha is azatlaorized by saw to accept service on behalf of the City. 4. Defe3ad ntBTn. Dailey was atQItimOspertinentthe dulyelectedthe A,%-oroftlacct, 5. Dcfendaraa Johtaaie puEh, Willie Sinton,, Stacy 1 4urst, ]Michael .T�®oir, Craevisve Stewart, Dean Kuuapuids, Barbara Crra ves, Joan Adcock, Brenda Wyrzcic and Brad Cazort were thti duly elected wem,bers of the City's Board on No veMber 9, 2044. The Iloatd is the legislative body oi'thc City, 6. This court leas subject ,matter and personal jurisdiction over the carie of action and the parties. Veoue is proper in tW.s court. 7. Under the laws of lbe state, the Ci ty is author zed to "adopt and 0n forco plans ft -the coordinated, adjusted, and harmonious dcvelogment of'themun cipaUtyatdits enviro-Izg." Arlt. Code Ain. § 44-56-402, Pursuant to tins statutory authority, the City created a planning con=issiazz to "prepare and administer" a comprehensive land UseplAn for the City and to prepare and trMsmit to the legislative body [of'tiae City] recommended ordinances imPlementing Mand use] plans!' Ark. Cade Ants, §§I4-56-404, 14-56-411, 14--56-4T2. S. PursuaAt to state law, the City's Planning Conurnission, following the adoptio,, and fling Of a land use plan, sub.m'tted to "the legislative body a recommcad,ed zoning ordinance forthc entire area of'the municipality." Ark. Codc,Anta_ §14-56-4X6. Prior to Ncenlber 1, 1987, the City adUpted by ordhuance variou4 rules roguiat g 3 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 06 NOLLEMAN a ASSOC PAGE 06/20 =d controlling the developMent and uses of the prope'tywitbiu the City and its cc,viro fixe property tivhicli .is tLCP subject of the P`xopased, Pleasant Ridge Tomm C n.s, inchiding ter flrd�.rtance. 10• T1,�e City has adopted var.1�,us plans £or the corztpxehcusive and ha=o ' deveI�rnox�t of y lass cz�acted the City and the Cit ti�vua a zoning ordiztannc wit�l� a .uzep �uzd test thftt With t$c des�.ralyle uses. Tl�e City fiart regulated the uses of land, buildi,7;Rg and stnicttres and designated districts or acnes izl. aocord�ce ber enacted ordinances to adopt, enforce, adt ib.lister and these r^e ��e xxd gulatiotis, ptoaedures and. controls in accordance *ith state later, 11. The Cf,ty may regulate ar►d enforce restdrltions on 011 POnni$sible usos and developr"Vt of tb,e property 10eatcd Witbbl the municipality and its en'V'rons ordy if it does so it, a mmler consistent v jtb. the compreheT3zive larrd use plan and so that the overall impact leads to a coordinated, adjusted and hart nortivus cTevelapmertt of the municipality and its environs. Ark. Code A tin. §14-56-402. 12. After the adoption of plans, ordinances aad regtIlatious, the City may not r, eviac or emend those plaw, Ordinances or regulations unless it acts in con. oTmatice with tlao procedure sat out in state law o r b y a m ajority v ote o f .i is l egislative body. Ark. C fide A tux, § § 14-56-422, 22, 14-56-423. 13, On December 20, 1994, tbrougb- Ordinance No. 1.6,808, the City%ard ofviractors approved a PCA that would allow the development of a mixed use "Neiighbor'hovd Cornmorcia]`� dropping center ,and an aceorapany ng M., dcvelopmant. TTIF site was a 12.83 sere -tract atad. of area, 11 .48 sexes vasa proposed to be developed as tJ�o slopping ce.�nter. 1'$o proposed. structure was 97,680 square feet, and 463 parkb),g spaces IV0re pxovxded. Th,e remaining 1.35-80re tract was to J,1ave 101 Goo square feet Of'office building space with RA addfdouai 50 parking ��Panes. 1'he uses 4 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 07 ' "" '•�� � . JJ V } ,7 HOL-LEMAN & ASSOC • PAGE 07%20 propascd for the sljopging centcrvvere alz by ight C-2 atd C-3 zoning dis'Ct1ct uses Bxoc was to be no service stations, auto glass or �� Pt that there ufiiler slops, °pnveziiance styes, or . car washes witl�J,zi the scOPe of the PCD. The uses proposed far the office buiiding were all dl5tTlCtuses by-l� t , 0,3 Zoning � in tb.e 0-2 w1d Zoning , 14. Qxx January 9, 1997' th-e iCommssion reviewed a request for a change in t Wight-car way dedication and street im he Pfovem t reelturemeat to k'airview Road T,he dove?aper, P1cas�nt R1dgeDcvcloptlent Coanpany, Inc. (hercin.Efter the "Developer"}, requested all zagl�t-flf= dedication and street zrVrovemelxts be takml from The ro ert located to tlae east of F y P P y �tzr, vi cw .Read. The Board ofAirectr�xs adopted Ordi.raanceNo. 17,331 on Dece�rabor 3, 1996, wllfah allowed the foe year deferral Of street irnpzoveMeuts (or until developxne�ot on flee Pleasa�rt Ridge Square PCD) to paixview Road, 7, 5, The -Little Rock Plam,ing Commission granted a three year time extonsio,n. fdr the proposed s'1bmy.ssaon of the ftal dcvelapment plan at their December 22, 1997, Public Hearing. Pleasant Ridge Acvclaprnteaat CoznpmyI Inc., began the development of a Final Development Istat, for the site a -ad Submitted the Final Development Plan far the Pleasant 1Zii(lgE square r ong'ttrrxzx PM which was approved on February 11, 2002. 16, Tlse ori&4 site contained 25.7 acres and is located south of Cas),trell Road and east Of Pleasant Ridge Road. The proposed site plan origbIally included the development df 270,000 square, feet of retail and restaurant space. The request included C�3, Gen-eral CazxamoMial Di.st6ct uses as allowable uses for O-Ae proposed development, 17. Pleasfint R%dge Devel.vpMcnt Corcpany, line,, leas 10,dicatedpar-ging o f 1,25$ paW.,g Vaces origital..ly. Access to the site was accomplished from six drivewRy los axone. The shopping 5 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 08 • 11• �'" «u4 � f: s� bU19755043 1. HOLLEMAN a Assoc PAGE 08/20 cetttsr was to have main driveways from Cantrel,T Read and o�,dlaztd Ilei is Road. access o' ad. Secondary P wits were tlrom Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road, Z S. A portion, of the site i5 currently ,coned PCD. T11 portion. along Suxamit zoned R-2, Single-family. The developer is requesting Road is q g two out lxor�tiug on Cautr. Road for Possible restaurant locatiojjs. 19. A deferral. was requested .for aor ion of the P Master Street Plant i�mprovo�xteats to FaizviEw Road. The ,cequ.est was dne to t'he uncertaimtY of the property west ogFair. view Road and ktzc poteutlal for redevclopt�ent of a non..,residential use. Land alteration vanances for height o;E d1e out along Fairview Road. (60 foot) and to P the satire site with Please I were also rcgTxested. lc'leasar�t Ridge Ueveloprnent Coxnpatay, Inc., also rdquested th,e closure of Summit q#Cect as a part Of tete applioati,a�a and a .request to change t'he C.itY's Future Laxed Use Plan (Item Na, 12 Fi,a 11'0. T U04 -d1 -OA g change f om Suburbax, aff'eo to Coxza crcial, and Public Institutiotz,l.). 20. The site is vacant adjacent to Cantrell Road, and was previously clearcd and g�,dcd. Along Stiuxxtt�it Street rl?,exe are siatgle-family boxnes with tree coveted lots. Ti.Jexc is also a sizgle-fhruily home located along F'ahrview Toad to the south of the Seto. There is a mixture ofusEs in the imnraediate area intoluding siu le•£arrm.Uy resideatti al, xuulti-family reside tial, a Private school a olaurch, office and retail. The area, to the south and cast are predominately office uses with a clauxoh and selloo.l located to the southwest and crest. There is a m..aagle- snaily home located on a large tract to th® v�rest of the site abutting Fairview Road at Summit Street, 7b= are sin gle-far�zly homes located to the southwest of tb.e site on. R-3, zoned. property. G 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/1112004 16:49 3763612 1 A f 111 .4UCl4 1 r: 91d 50197555043 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & Assoc I'VENTS LEAD1iNC; ijp -f0 TRE I`LA-N-NTiYG CG�ISSIG1�j'S 21, AP -PRO VAL OF O CTGBtR 7, 2004. - lieDeveloper h'Om the initiation of flits pz-oeess dexx�ra ndod a var�iancm $ th PAGE 09 PAGE 09/20 om o Laud Alteration Ordinance toallow anirzareased out along #b,e w csterrtprope.rty I,ij.1e Tair Viaw Road)au s deferral of master stmet Pica nq*ements for Foir►iew Road. 22, Throvglaout the process, the Little Rock V�-asteivatex Utility has not or will not comment ori the impact of the already overloaded and over burdened sewer Systemin thearea of. the devaloptx�arat. Although city etzginects indicated amain extension, would be regiiked. with easements for the service inquired .for the project, yet this .-has not been addressod. 23. The Proposed Imidscape area on the woutlteast perimeter does not meet the mirirJ.Wjr lftndscaping -required for tb a development size. The site plan, incilldes a mini mil width of top. feet, adequate to wcet th,c-Minimurn ordiiaence requirement but when averaged, file site is approxiz. Lely five hundred square feet short of ordinance requirements. 24, The Developer Ixas b.i.dicated the maxirriiam building height of 45 -fent and architectural fcatjaxes su*h as clock towers. The tower elements axe proposed to Dot exceed hvica the total building height. 2S. ne Developer, lhas indicated inAe-hai'fstreet hnprovements MJ1 be added to T'airview Road per ti.e Master Street Plan, despite the fact that the road is now projected to handle over 5,000 vehicles per da,y. The Developer has also indicated the hill on, F'ahview carrot be lowered due to the 10catl0 a of am exislang fiber optic line owned by Southwestom Bell. In. ,fact, the fiber optyc lino can. easily be moved, but wilt cost eiEc Developer nearly $1 Million, according to leis claims, to rxtvvc the lilac. 7 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 5906] 11/11/2604 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 10 r . �o 0171 Jfb5[d43' HOLLEMAN & ASSOC • PAGE 18/20 26 ]wring tIae process, ire Deve]apeor revised the site plan to remove the e,!0az entrance" fz'orn Fairview Road aad added a traffIc signal on Cantrell .Road, The closing of the r, ear. entrance will fu=el all traffic up Fairvfcw Road, 27. 7be Developer also ruqueotedim. II ances from the Land Alteration OrOaemrc to aitow advanced grading of'the site azd to allow U. increased cut along Fairview Road. The Developer requested to grade the entire site with, tb.e first .phases of construction. The Developer also requested to grade offsite fox the property located on the southeast comer ovmed by the Catholic Church. 28. The Developer indicated the landscaping adjacent to Cantrell Read as 32.0 feet in width[, The. Fighway 10 Design[ Ovarlay District requires a mb�.tunumof -feet of landscaping to include a be= or plandxigs to semen the ' parlrixig arca. The Developer did lot ijudioate its Intention for the landscape treatmeat. 29. The Developer indicated A Southern bufferr at approx.=ately 500 sq.we .feet less that the typical MXx,[irmum ordin,attce requiremou,t. The southwester,,a, buffer is indieated at ten feet, just wirer, the rrdrdxrzum regtdred width of nine feet. The southeastern buffer is indicated at tweatity foci. 30. The Developer indicated a total of 1,200 m, -sitepaxlang spaces with the total. square feotage of t& proposed center at 300,000 square feet, City eng�ueers indicated that the xninizttutu Parking requirad for a slioppm' cantos of this size would be 2,333 parking spaces. 31. When the attomeY for the Developer addressed the Co=ission members at the hearin} , be statcd the developer had agreed to remove the rear autnmcc liOm tlxe proposed d.evel,pmont but if Staff felt the rear etttxauce necessary the Developer was willing to install the t roup er,[traucc. He stated the deveYape.r was also agreeable to the requirement ef'a building pertit prior to any grading activities on the site, 11/11/04 TAU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/1112004 16:49 3763612 1J�r11rYb194 1/:30 5019755043 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSoc PAGE 11 PAGE 11/20 32. During the public hearlxxg, it was made clear to the platazxirI8 COMIWssion Inenab . crs that the site originally cants,ined Ft�rtllexr the develop10 acres but the proposal xzow i,�,cTttded anaddrtioala,l 14 acres. er "cut the bill" for the origital development but mevcr conettu,ted. the pro jeat and the hill, and tb a Cutremained as is for scvell or more }roars causing severe envixonmontal ft -nage in additio".. to being ai) eye sore. 33, The COMMissianerq understood that Sema Forest was a. ,residential street with no sidewalk in. placc wid, sevAral. school bus stops on the street serving area cl+irdrexl. Moreover, Berrie Forest is also the eyltrazxce to the nei'allborhood park at I,d swimrnixlg pool. 34. recording to the City Trak Engl;xaeer, the development would pnerate 13,000 to 141000 cars per day. 'die traffic count 0x1 Cantrell Road was 34,000 cars per day iu 2002. Traff„7.e atu.dies indicate the c=ent traffic cet nts are 4.100 ears per day on the neighber1lood streets. Tile traffic counts do tot talto unto consideration future growth an propextiea oumntly zoned far office and cors 0rciaT development. 35, The Ccmmission me -tubers recognize that Easter Seals empl,0yees are cutrent7.y parking on both sides Of Woodland Heights atxd parking for special events mild acll.gol aetiviti©a are taking place on.. Woodland Heights behind tho school. 36. The +Cormttissic'n members recognize that Fairview tvad is a marrow Madway with 111Tdted sight distw-1'00, The beveloper 17vas Dot required to improve the sigl7t ,line as a part of the develozameut due to the fiber optic cable li.71e previously rtiezxti.oxaed. The Cornmi,ssirzn rcaogni ed that one-half of f1l.e street impraverxlent9'W0uld be installed but the other side oftllc raadway would not be improved until development to the west ooeurred. City en&esrrs reoaglllzed the safety Qf nlotonistg if the view i,s xzot improved oaa tl�o .marrow roadway. E 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 5906] 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 11, Zwurj 1 r; �� bb19755643 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSoc PAGE 12 PAGE 12/20 37. The development is in direct conflict wxth several, vityplans. It is Uncolitested that the developmentdoes nofadhcxetothe Rivei M0Untain,NethborhoodAction Plan,tile City'sFuture, La1ld Use Plan, the Highway 10 Design Overlay Diet dct, the Laud Alteration Ordinance, 610 ,PUD Ordinance. 38- The Centerhas invested over. S I Million it its faoility, architectural lrl,atas, sucl klfra9trUr-tare and. the 0"tex's pmperty directly abuts the dcvelofirnent. Due to a major .Tmis is.h Festival of Shernini itrere! =d the observmce of Judaism ix. the () t*vdox manner the member.ship wa5 prevented frena attending the public healing. This fact was .rbade Imown to the platning Co=issiOn.. members and the request of the Jewish, Center to reschedulc the heating w2s blatantly i91lvzad, No members of the Jewish Center were able to address the Planning C01�YTaissian 1n direct ldOlatiOn of their constitutional and due process rights in derogation ofspate statute t�zd city code. 39. Furthcmore, the Devel,opeT's plan did not refleei; an existiag curb cut that was cum—u ly being used by the Jewish CBizter at the intersection of Fabvie-�V aud. SLwniifi Roads. It is undxsputcd that by eliminating Summit Road and with the inevitable closing of Woodland i1eights on the soutlleria section to accommodate Christ the Ding Chureb, Fairview Roast will l,�ndlo die bruXit oft1le traffic coming f'roa_n t11e South of the Development, 40. TIn spite Of all of the above problems, the PjanWng CM=ssjoij. approved the Developmcnt by a vote of 7 to 2 with 2 roemben5 absent, THE CITYBOARD OF DIRECTORS, A-PPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 9, 2004. 4,1, In excess of 30 members of the ,Iewisla Cente;r. attended the public lteaiittg including t11e spiritual leader ofthe Center, Rabbi Pincus Cisnent, an.d the undersigned counsel, Interestingly 10 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2604 16:49 yam' ' i, Luy4 1 !:.i0 3763612 !3el'd /b5043 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSoQ PAGE 13 PAGE 13/2] e11OU t, this public meeting opened by aprayer stated in Jesus' name. Despite the vvoz vw crowd, net a single Boardmmtberar City staffmomber offered a chair to the WGIU31 and chi.ldreo. that stood thmlughout the meeting and are the taxpayers that pay the Mayor, the oth-ex City e'nplayoes, and the Board tn=bers' salary. 42. Both sides were given 3d minutes to speak regarding tlae Ordinances, i'rizsuat,.t to the CityBaard's own regulations, the tirnEwas to be allocated as Follows; 4. Citize t or visitors wishing to address the Board. on an iter7�, that is Scliedu,led for cdnsideratiar_ shall be afi'orded a,) opportunity at the s,P;Topriate item. E2Lc13 person wf )l be allowed a maxi mum of five minutes to address the Board, with a 30 minute time limit sobeduled fo.r each agenda item; 15 minutes for each side. TWs will bold true unless a majority ofthe Board mends the time lzmit anftr thera are fewer than three speaker's For each respective side of the issue. AU persOAs wishing to address the Board on a specific issue skull fit] Out. the appropriate request prior to Pais rnceting. 5. Presetitations by citizens or City staff drat have been scheduled to appear on the agenda tbrough the City Clerk's Office Shall be limited to 30 minutes. The presiding officer ill divide the time evenly used on the number of Presentations Scheduled. 43. Pursuant to Pamagraph 5, the time to spoak for all Speaking jz oppos tion to 1 1 1is Ordinance here to have their "time [divided] evenly based an the nwnber of presentations scheduled." Instead, the ilIayozsimp,lyweat alpkrabciically, which used up all ofthe time and wholly denied m, embers of the Jewish Centertlaeir allotted time pursuant to the Board's own ..tulesl r the under. signed counsel and the Tewi.sh Center =ember, -Harry Ehrenberg, told the Mayor that; we Were going to file a fo=al obrection to how we ,lad been treated on the record, the Mayor gave one rninuto for. a ,repreSentati.ve of the jeWiSb Center to speak. 44, The C zty B oard approved the 0 xdinan,ces b y a v ote o f t to 4 despite t.h, e c ]car X1 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 14 11/11/2004 17:30 5019755943 HOL.I_EMAN & ASSOC PAGtZ 14/20 indications that the pxojcct ShOUId, be denied including: A represePtati.on by the Developer's enginecr that there were no variatxces being requested from, the Board when in twt, n==118 variances as mentioned. is the previous paragraphs had already been allowed by the planning Commi,sai.on, including, but not limited to, avonanee to increase the out of the hill to almost double the City's standard No oommcm from the ,Little Rock Wastewater Utility regarding sewer; • Lartdseapixag vari,at�a05 adjacent to CantreJl Road as 32.0 -foot zn width ttZstaaxi. Of the required MiniMum of 40 --.feet of landscaping; • The southatn buffer of the property being approximately 500 squgrp feat ,less than tho tyP.ical minim= ordinance requiremeat, and The development having a wh011Y inadOquate Ilumbur of on site parking spaces. 45, MOreovcr, meeting participen, is disoovered fox the fust time at the final mecting that the DeveI0PMCnt will require 111E xeMQVHI o f over 500,00o cubic feet of dixt to make the 60 foot hillside cut. This will result in 25,000 to 5 0, 000 dump --track loads of dirt being removed from the site onto UmtrelJ. Road, both to the East and West! Nowhere in atyy of the doculneat submitted as a, part of the public record by the :Developer is this trat%c load onto Ceztrell discussed. fib. Furthermore, it was disclosed at the meeting that no future ptojectivz�,5 were added into the Developer 9,11d/or City's traffic PTOjecti.or)s regarding the additional 10,000 to 15,00Q vebi.cles On Cantrall Road. Amazingly, in other words, the traffic projections make no room for growth down Highway X0, 12 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/1112004 16:49 3763612 ice, i_. Ludy 1 F:.3YJ -�01�4/bb@4Z KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSDO PAGE 15 FIAGE 15/20 47. F#tnally, tb,e Developer souglat and was granted the rniglat to 010sc Fairview Road in complete violatiat vl''.Ark. Cade Ann, §14-301•-101 et. sect, 48, The Board's approval oi't110 PIeasaAt Ridge Towrt Center was arbitraryand capricious, and eort'0r to the Board's own establis.hedprocedures andregvladtions. The approval is atuTlity pIld should be Overiurzed. 49. As a result of the Citys actions, the PlailtX brinL i ng this suit will be adverscly a- ected And irreparably harmed. If the Board's approval is not oveart�amcd, and the Pl.easat Ricigc Town Centesis allowed to pzaaeed, the adverse ixapacts on the Plaiutifffrom this d�clopmonr; w il) include but are Tot limited to; a. The IosS of the gzeert space aa_d natural SwToundings caused by t1le excavation of 0"t five 11IM red tho-usa.nd cubic yards of es�x at�.d the destruction of ti-jousands of gowi�g trees at the site-, b• 'hE noise and aix poEuti.on created by the overwhvIming influx of Shoppets, employees and suppliers to the mall; C. The daily coragestio".. to the traf$a flow around:he JewishCefitat caused by the intlttx oFvebiGi.es; and d.. The ).ass of tl,e qurict ezjoYMent of their current bones lira their cWaatt location in the neighborhood. WMRE ORE, PIaintiff'praya that the Coram det$rM.Ine that the action of the City Boal n en'106111,9 Ordinance No. � On November 9, 2004v was not in conformity wi.'da, the Citys prior or, dirances and must be set a«stde as null mId void; that the subject props* .bas ,everted to and is currently zoned PCD and. R-2 Single Family DiatHet; that a dsclatatozy judgment be .issued to 13 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 11/11120dq, 1 /; 30 5019755043 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSOC PAGE 16 PAGE 16/20 Pxallibit the Defc�.adauts Or their agents or employees fro%.D. issuing any building permit; or taking any other actions called fax by Ordinance leo. _; that the Plaiiatiff receive its costs and reasonable at 0,Meys fees and all other relief to w1lich it May be entitled. COW _tu Failure Te Adhere To Established Z09ing Criteria, 50. The City's Municipal Cad0 ,provides that the "legislative purposea, ititellt and application, of. PCAs include but are not limited to: a To encauxage $e clustel-i_ng Of commercial a-a.d office activities %�tltill areas specifi.aall.y desigaated to aor4Qr=odato such uses and to discourage the prollfera*n of 00mmerciz] uses along major t'h0rau9bfares and tlODOOT,Li.tI1ercial areas. b. To provide for orderly davelopitert is order, to rc.ininlize adverse ixupact ori sutra�xr�ding areas and on the general flow of'tra�c, C. To encourage orderly and systematic commercial, office or inroad use develaPMMt d esign or a combinatiorl ti-,creof, pzoviding for the rational Placement of activities, veh,iculax and pedestrian cxxcu]atiotx, access and egress, loading, landscaping and buffer sires. d. To encourage cormercial doveJopxneut which is consistent with t.h@ long- range cOnTrehmsive plan of elle cit3l, e. To acc0n=odate larger soale suburban develaprmnts of mixed ttses itt a boxmorious relationship. Stec, 36-452(3)(a)(1-5), 51. Scction 36-452,(3)(a)(1) establislxes as the City's legislative intent atld purpose encouraging "rhe clustering of corrimerexal gird office activities within areas specifl,cavy designated to accommodate such uses and to discourage the pxalifcration of contnercial uses along major thoraughfams and .noncoinmercial areas." The approval of the Pleasant Ridge Toum Ceztter as a 14 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 5906] 11111/2004 16:49 3763612 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY PAGE 17 • I1�,,L1:eOU4 1r:30 501975543 HOLLEMAN $ ASSDC PA5E 27/20 -PCD is w,h.olly incompatible with this stated goal The Board's action, ou November -9, 2004 was ibenef'are arbitrary, capreious, and an abuso of discretion, 52. Section 36-452(3)(a)(2) establishes as the City's legislative hItmt and purpose pnavxding for the "orderly develagxzzvnt ... to azirdmuize adverse fiaapack oil surrounding areas anal on trio to clow oftra�i.c." The approval of the Pleasant ,Ridge Trnvia Center as a P CD is wlio ily 111compatible wit11 Us statod, goal. The Board's action en NovenaTjes 9, 2004 was therei'ore arUzixary, capzlciaus, uzuressanable and an abuse of discretion. 53, Si�cdozi 36.452(3)($)(3) establishes as the City's logi&LIve i,ratent and purpose encouraging the "Orderly and systematic commercial, office ormixed we deyelvpment design or a oombination. fbemof, providing for the rational placement of activities, velucular and pedestrian ci.r,cula tion access and egrsas, loading, landscaping and buffer strips." The approval of t13e pleasant Ridge Town, Center as a PCU is wholly incompatible with thds stated goal. The Board's action on. Noveo; mor 9, 2004 was therefore arbitrary, cap"cious, unt'easanablo and an abuse of discmti,oa. 54. Section 36-452(3)(,)(4) establishes as the City's legislative frxtent mad purpose encouraging "00mme pial development Which, is consistOnt with the long-range compreher�sivc plan Of'tbe city." The appxaval, a f the Pleasant Midge Tovm. Centex as a PCD is wvbo,ily ittcompatiblc wi,til this stated goal. 7,'11e -Board's action on November 9, 2004 was therefore arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of disczetion. 55. Section 36-452(3)(a)(5) establishes as the CiVs legislative intent and purpose the goal of "larger scale suburban developments of mixed uses in a harm,ontious relationship." The approval Ofthe Pleasant Ridge Town Center as a -pCD is wholly incompatible with this stated goal. The ,Board's action On November 9, 2004 was therefore arbitrary, capricious, and an abase of 15 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 11l1j,/:dbb'l 17:30 5019755043 discretion, KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLEMAN & ASSOC PAGE 18 PAGE jbfz� 56• The City's code'& PIazined Zoning Distd.cts Provisions oontain re�luirert�ents that are intended to "assure tb,at apOr-ations for ?Un aid PI) ate not gr,mi.ted for rile sale beneAt off tb.e Det'elaper, but are used to establish, developments tktaft a. are compatible with the surroundijag area, b. are harmonious with the character of the neighborhood; c. do Uot have a 32egative effect upon the fat -are developmezjt of the area; d. and t coordination of the planning of the land surrounding tho pT or PD; e. Create a desirable and stable environment. Sec. 36-451(c)(,1-5). 57, .A.pPrvVltagthe PleasatatRiidge Town Cemter=quired a zoning change ora the PxaPc�}' to allQvr a developnimt that %ill be O fa scale and use v.�tterlyiracompatible with the suxx�0uxtdirIg area. 5$. ApPraving the Plea.Sant Ridge Town Cetterreguired azoning change un the pr, operty to allow a development that wz11 be of a scale and use that it will stat be hgxmo�,{ojt5 witb. the character o�'tlie neighborhood. 59. Approving the P.1easant Ridge Town Center required a zoning cb amge on the properly to allow a development that will be of a scale and ttse t" t't wi" auxely hAve a negative effort oa the Firiwe clevelapfient of tTae atea. 60. ,A,pprvving the PIeassu tRidge Town Center req uirad a zoning change an iia a property to allow a development that will be of a scale and use to preclude cooxdi-WiOn Of the use o£the Ind suiroimding the area. 61. Approving the Pleasant Ridge T'owu Cenfsr, required a zoning rh=gc on the property 16 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/R% NO 59061 11/11/2004 16:49 3763612 -LI/:U/21J04 17-.30 5019755643 KAPLAN BREWER MAXEY HOLT-EMAN & ASSOC PAGE 19 PAGE : 19/20 to allow a devclopzrIemt that wilt be of P. scale ElRd uae to Make it impossible to create a desirable =d stable environment. 62. By enacting Ordinance, No. the Board has acted contxsry to its astablished, ar;dinances, regalations andrules daa),aug with [arid usepla,,ining decfsio-ns. Such actiol, is, ultra, vires and void 63. By enacting Ordinance No. on November 9, 2004, the Board has mga,ged in "Spot Mn,ing„ of f to )and iden.. i;,ed in O,ti,gina] Pleasant Ridgs Tow,tt, Cn,ter, Ordinance. 64. Byes-Igaging in "spot 201ARS" oftho land Menti,fied in Or#gialaa Pleasant Ridge Town Center Ordinance, the Board has violated its overt ordinances, state law, the Constl.iutivn, oftbis state 2nd. the Constitution of the Urritcd, States. 65, As a xesult of the City's acti.oxzs4 Ite Plain,tif7f' btinging t,%s suit vvi„i,1, he adversely affected aMd zrrepaMbly ha=0& If the Board's approval is not n> Mfied and the ,Pleasant Ridge Tows, Cewer is allowed to proceed, the adverse impact to the Plaintifffrorn this dcvelopmeut will include but are not limited toy a� The loss of the green space and natural surroundings oau.sed by the excavation of 0var five hundred thowand cubic yards of earth and the dostruction Ofthausands of growing trees at the site; b. The noise .xnd airpailutinn Cxcstcd by the overwheltTling influx of shappets, employ, --es and ;uppliurs to the mall; o. The daily ccngestion to the 1xaFfic flow Umd its 83megogue orad sohool caused by the in: fux ofvaWjffs; and d, The loss of -the quiet enjoyment ofthcir C=ent Synagogue an.d school i.,� the -neighborhood, M-IP-REFORE, ]'IaintiffP rays that the Court determine that the action of the city.Board in. 17 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 uSU19755043 KAF'LAN BREWER MAXEY HOLLeMAN $ ASSOC PAGE 20 PAGE 20/20 enacting O.rdinaace No. I, viz Novernlier 9, 2004, was not in, 00:lfexm tiy"Ui7Ztla the City,' lJX{bx ozdzman.ces an,d #nust he set aside as null and void; that the aubjec#l�•°pe*zeuezi's and is eua.7•cr�t] Toned use; �' that a dec1=toryJmdPnent be issued to probibit ibe Defendants or their agents or employc" from isming any buildingPemazt or ta.WZ19 any other actions called ft by Ordinance No. ;'that theplaintiffreceive its costs and reasonable attomey& gees and au otl7or t�l3.e� to which +t may be, entitled. Respectfully Submitted, I'OLL8MAN & ASSOCIATES, P.A. 1 l 1 CcntOT Street, Suite 1240 Little Back, Arkansas 72201 Telephone: (501) 975-5040 :'acsirAffe: (501 ) 975-5043 By: Tolui T,allear:an, lii,j{ Bar Na. 91455 Stacy D. Fletcbm, AR Bar No. 96204 19 11/11/04 THU 05:51 [TX/RX NO 59061 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 October 8, 2004 Brook Rogers Lot 13, Cedar Branch Court 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 October 7, 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 Shopping Center Revised Long -form PCD was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission and will now be forwarded to the Board of Directors for final action. The meeting will be on November 2, 2004 and begin at 6:00. The meeting will 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 ynski Secretary to Little _0 1: Planning Commission ti Ir O S O m m 0 0 0 M 0 0 m M ' 0 r� U.S. Postal Servicer. CERTIFIED MAILT. RECEIPT (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage? Provided) FOl dBIiVCry �nfnrmef: :_ . ED WHITE - DATERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Q 24 Rahling Circle Little Rock, Arkansas 72223 June 7, 2004 Ms. Donna James, Subdivision Administrator City of Little Rock 723 W. Markham St. Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 RE: Pleasant Ridge PCD Ms. James, Attached please find eighteen copies of the PCD for the above referenced project. The property contains 25.7 acres and is located south of Cantrell Road and east of Pleasant Ridge Road. The plan calls for 270,000 sq. ft. of retail and restaurant. Requested uses will be those allowed in C-3 zoning. Parking is adequate at 1,258 spaces. Required parking based on one space for 225 sq. ft. is 1,200 spaces. Access will be accomplished from six driveway locations. The center will have main driveways from Cantrell Road and Woodland Heights Road. Secondary access points will be from Fairview Road and Woodland Heights Road. A portion of this site is currently zoned PCD. The portion along Summit Road is zoned R-2. The developer is requesting two outlots fronting on Cantrell Road for possible restaurant locations. A deferral is being requested for a portion of the MSP improvements along Fairview Road. This request is due to the uncertainty of the property west of Fairview Road. Land alteration variances for height of cut along Fairview Road and grading the entire site with phase one will be necessary. Please place this item on the next available Planning Commission agenda. Let me know if you have any questions or require additional information. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated. CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, SURVEYING