Thank you for your comments in your August 27th publication in which you criticized the City for an apparent, insufficient public notification about a special Planning Public Meeting on August 28th. I went to that meeting as well as the immediately following regular meeting of the Planning Commission to find out what was going on. It turned out to be an important evening for residents involving the strip of commercial property along Maumelle Blvd and across from Riverland right at the main entrance to the City.
To be as brief as possible, the Planning Commission acted in their regular meeting to approve a replat of that property which effectively allowed that property to be developed into several commercial business lots. It also essentially granted permission for the developer to begin some work on the property and allow for the property to be accessed by a new road/entrance that would connect into Maumelle Blvd at the Riverland Drive intersection. During public comments, I and 3 or 4 other residents spoke voicing our concerns in regard to possible City Code requirements for a tree buffer between the Blvd right-of-way and the developed portion of the property, appropriate landscaping, as well as safety concerns and rush hour traffic congestion that would be created by a new stop light at Maumelle Blvd and Riverland Drive.
As to how this is playing out, despite the Planning Director eventually confirming to us that there is a City Code requirement to leave a 50 foot tree buffer, it appears this City Code 90-84 was violated as the trees for the buffer were effectively bulldozed on 3 or 4 lots with only some trees in the Blvd right-of-way and perhaps along the front property line left standing. Three of us met with the developer’s engineering firm to step this off and verify. The City has since issued an order to stop grading activity on this site until further notice due to the buffer violation.
As I understand it, this issue is likely to be addressed at Thursday’s September 25th Planning Commission. At this point, it appears unclear as to what entities are responsible for this damage to the most visible and important portion of Maumelle’s tree canopy.
Letter to the Editor
Thank you for your comments in your August 27th publication in which you criticized the City for an apparent, insufficient public notification about a special Planning Public Meeting on August 28th. I went to that meeting as well as the immediately following regular meeting of the Planning Commission to find out what was going on. It turned out to be an important evening for residents involving the strip of commercial property along Maumelle Blvd and across from Riverland right at the main entrance to the City.
To be as brief as possible, the Planning Commission acted in their regular meeting to approve a replat of that property which effectively allowed that property to be developed into several commercial business lots. It also essentially granted permission for the developer to begin some work on the property and allow for the property to be accessed by a new road/entrance that would connect into Maumelle Blvd at the Riverland Drive intersection. During public comments, I and 3 or 4 other residents spoke voicing our concerns in regard to possible City Code requirements for a tree buffer between the Blvd right-of-way and the developed portion of the property, appropriate landscaping, as well as safety concerns and rush hour traffic congestion that would be created by a new stop light at Maumelle Blvd and Riverland Drive.
As to how this is playing out, despite the Planning Director eventually confirming to us that there is a City Code requirement to leave a 50 foot tree buffer, it appears this City Code 90-84 was violated as the trees for the buffer were effectively bulldozed on 3 or 4 lots with only some trees in the Blvd right-of-way and perhaps along the front property line left standing. Three of us met with the developer’s engineering firm to step this off and verify. The City has since issued an order to stop grading activity on this site until further notice due to the buffer violation.
As I understand it, this issue is likely to be addressed at Thursday’s September 25th Planning Commission. At this point, it appears unclear as to what entities are responsible for this damage to the most visible and important portion of Maumelle’s tree canopy.
Steve Mosley, Maumelle