Letter you will review
Dear Members of the Pea Ridge Planning Commission and City Council,
I respectfully request that you vote against the proposed rezoning of approximately 10 acres near Easterling Road and the Pea Ridge City Park to a Planned Zoning District for “The Village at City Park.”
I recognize that the current Future Land Use Map identifies the property as Mixed Use Neighborhood. That designation supports a mix of single-family housing, context-appropriate multi-unit housing, and neighborhood commercial uses serving nearby residents. It also expressly relies on design standards to ensure compatibility between uses. The designation therefore supports consideration of mixed use, but it does not establish that every density, building form, commercial activity, or PZD program is appropriate at this site.[1]
The relevant question is whether this particular proposal is context-appropriate, neighborhood-scaled, compatible with adjacent uses, adequately served by infrastructure, and sufficiently defined to be enforceable.
Finding 1: The requested development program appears unusually intensive for this location.
The submitted materials describe a project containing approximately 17 detached homes, 25 terraced homes, upwards of 28 apartments or live/work units, a farm-manager residence, ground-floor commercial space, commercial farming, possible agri-tourism, private streets, parking, open space, and stormwater detention on roughly 10 acres. According to the latest developer plat, this could authorize approximately 71 dwelling units in addition to commercial and agricultural activity.
The 2021 Comprehensive Land Use Plan calls for residential development accessible by an adequate street system, protection of residential areas from incompatible adjacent uses, protection of single-family neighborhood character, and efficient use of existing public utilities and services.[2] It also states that neighborhood commercial uses should be limited in size to avoid large concentrations of traffic and should be located on major streets at the fringe of residential neighborhoods.[3]
The combined intensity and operational complexity of the proposed PZD have not been shown to satisfy those principles at this location.
Finding 2: The Future Land Use designation does not establish present infrastructure readiness.
A Future Land Use Map expresses a long-range policy direction. It does not demonstrate that Easterling Road, nearby intersections, water and sewer systems, fire-flow capacity, emergency access, utility easements, or other public services are presently adequate for the maximum buildout authorized by the PZD.
The Comprehensive Plan directs the City to guide traffic through a Master Street Plan, use land efficiently in relation to existing investments in utilities and services, and provide streets and parking with adequate capacity for anticipated traffic.[2] Before rezoning, the applicant should demonstrate safe access, representative peak-hour operations, utility capacity, emergency-service access, and any required improvements.
Finding 3: Traffic analysis should reflect representative operating conditions.
The proposal should be evaluated using the combined trips associated with residents, commercial customers and employees, deliveries, farm operations, visitors, and possible events. Residents have reported school-year congestion affecting Highway 94, Hayden Road, and nearby connections. Those observations should be independently evaluated through a professional traffic study conducted under representative school-year conditions.
A study conducted only or primarily during summer would not, by itself, establish how the surrounding network functions during the school-year periods residents identify as most congested.
Finding 4: The project creates a sensitive interface with the Pea Ridge City Park.
The City’s 2025 Open Space & Parks Master Plan emphasizes accessibility, connectivity, active transportation, conservation, and a park system capable of serving future growth.[4] It also discusses limited sidewalk and bicycle connectivity and identifies traffic and population growth among community planning concerns.[5]
The Pea Ridge City Park is a public recreational and civic asset. The PZD should not rely on the park for overflow parking, recreation, gathering space, event support, or access. Any pedestrian or bicycle connection should have a defined alignment, ownership, maintenance obligation, accessibility standard, and operating rules. The City should also ensure that private construction, commercial deliveries, lighting, noise, and special events do not interfere with ordinary park use.
Finding 5: Commercial agriculture, detention, and usable open space should not be treated as interchangeable.
The proposal combines commercial farming, possible agri-tourism, stormwater detention, and open-space claims within the same general portion of the project. These functions serve different purposes. The City should require a clear calculation separating genuinely usable resident open space from commercial operations, stormwater storage, maintenance access, and other constrained land.
Title 15 of the municipal code states the opposite: detention or retention ponds and other manmade or engineered stormwater facilities may not count toward any required recreational space. The City should therefore exclude the detention area from any calculation of required recreational space and separately verify any claimed usable-open-space total.
The adjacent public park should not compensate for insufficient private open space within a high-intensity development.
Finding 6: The application is not sufficiently clear for final PZD approval.
The reviewed materials contain apparent inconsistencies concerning the number of planning areas, lot numbering or totals, acreage assigned to individual planning areas, maximum dwelling-unit count, and the extent to which the conceptual plan would be binding. For example, the executive summary states that the project includes five planning areas while listing Planning Areas A through F, whereas the scope section refers to six planning areas. Private-street ownership, maintenance, reserve funding, common-property obligations, commercial operating limits, and the process for later plan changes also require clarification.
A PZD grants flexibility beyond conventional zoning. That flexibility should only be approved when the permitted uses, maximum intensity, development standards, infrastructure responsibilities, and binding plans are precise and enforceable.
Finding 7: A more infrastructure-ready location would better accommodate this proposal.
A project containing this many residential units and several commercial or operational components would be better suited to a location with stronger roadway capacity, established commercial access, adequate intersection design, confirmed utility capacity, and less direct interaction with a major public park.
This does not require rejection of the Mixed Use Neighborhood designation. A substantially lower-intensity and better-defined mixed-use proposal might be considered for the property in the future. It does, however, support denial of the current PZD as proposed.
Requested action
For these reasons, I respectfully ask the Planning Commission and City Council to vote no on the requested PZD rezoning. Denial would not represent opposition to growth or mixed-use development. It would recognize that the applicant has not demonstrated that this specific development program is compatible with the site, supported by existing infrastructure, protective of the Pea Ridge City Park, or sufficiently defined for enforceable approval.
Respectfully,
[Your Name]
[Your Address or Neighborhood, optional]
References
[1] City of Pea Ridge, Future Land Use Categories, “Mixed Use Neighborhood,” p. 1.
[2] City of Pea Ridge, Comprehensive Land Use Plan, adopted April 20, 2021, pp. 3–4 and transportation policies.
[3] City of Pea Ridge, Comprehensive Land Use Plan, adopted April 20, 2021, p. 4, Neighborhood Commercial goals and actions.
[4] City of Pea Ridge, Open Space & Parks Master Plan, published by the City as the 2025 plan; see the plan intent, inventory, analysis, and findings sections.
[5] City of Pea Ridge, Open Space & Parks Master Plan, published by the City as the 2025 plan; see the connectivity discussion and community-engagement findings concerning traffic, population growth, roads, sidewalks, and safe access.
Additional materials reviewed: 2025 Future Master Street Plan/Future Land Use Plan; applicant PZD rationale and supporting documents; highlighted site map; citizen correspondence and submitted citizen documents.
