Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNeighborhood Comments :../~ .,..; .... .: ~.~ ~ ~ ~":I /.:;:1.' ~: ..~ August 1, 2000 City of Meridian Planning & Zoning Staff: Plannin.g & Zoning Commission, and Members of City Council Dear Stat!: Commission and Members; i."! The 1993 Compre~nsive Plan's main emphasis w~ for traditional neighborhoods. The .~ point behind that concept Was for all neighborhoods to have user friendly access t9 serVices, with neighborhood comm~cial services available in all areas of town. We submit these ideas for your consideration. The first two drafts in 2000 have ignored that this City needs to recognize new corridors of deve.!opment. Although the new plan has recognized more commercial, it now has it bllll9hed int<? to~.81 ~~ercial areas mostly on the E~ End of town. There is a need for more .... cori1mer~:Wtl])ut it n~eds to ge qistributed aro\ipd the entire;J~~ity and JwP~ct area ~e t4e 1993 :::: plan att~~!ed to do. These centers can be surrounded by high-density areas and mixed - .11 planned..Use..areas in the center ofa square mile or on the comer intersections. The same is tnie of high density residential. There needs to be more of these areas as well as office and they need to be distributed in all areas. ~ concept of Mixed - Planned Use Development has been eliminated and needs to return to the plan. There is a need for several areas where a mixed-use plan could include single family, medium and high-density residential along with office and at least neighborhood commercial with all servjces in one community plan or under one development plan with effective transition areas. Meridian wants and needs more park areas. Instead of insisting that someone dedicate the land and the City not having the fuds to complete the park, the solution would be~to allow developments with bonuses that would be enhanced by the inclusion of parks and water features. The developer, purchasers, neighbors, citizens and the City all win Wider this scenario. The current plan ~ges not recognize Franklin Rd., Pine Street and Ten Mile Rd, or Cherry Lane as additional entrances to the City of Meridian from the West and will accommodate a joining of growth from Nampa with the thoUsands of homes under construction there, the new Idaho Center and the New BSU West Campus. Meridian cannot afford to over look that more multi-use projects need to be developed on the West Side of town instead of limiting it to single family as long as the services of water and sewer are available. ,~ Don't continue to approval all projects offered on the East end of town for single family, multi-fiunily, mixed use and commercial and turn down projects on the West end that are people friendly, conducive to foot traffic, offer amenities, semces and create a sense of place. -::i ll.i~: &1 ~ i!i ~ !II The 1993 Comprehensive Plan helped set values to be perceived and looked forward to by landowners. The new Comprehensive Plan appears to ~ setting a precedent for devaluation of properties by eliminating the concept of "Traditional Neighoorhoods" and by not recognizing the new corridors of erowth in Franklin Rd., Pine Street and Ten Mile Rd. or Cherry Lane. We ask the City to take another look at the planning effort in the new proposed Comprehensive Plan and review the videotape, "Subdivide and Conquer." We can make one available to you for review. Meridian has for some time promoted th~ concept that "Meridian Is The Place To Be", and that we don't want to be a bedroom community to any other City. As we look at what we would perceive to be slipping back to sin&le family sprawl on the West side of town, we ask that our City Planners implement forward thinking in the new Comprehensive Plan as well as within the thinking processes in the way we do business in The City of Meridian. Let us as a proaressive community take advantage of "New Urbanism Concepts." Respectfully submitted by the Pine Street and Ten Mile Land Owners Neighborhood, 2-9iS- tJ. p, A/IF;; Av! I' ~ . ~i) ~(-" --' T~ /1Ii...( /11 t I 760 JJ.{fIA~1lA PL. . ~ ~\t: I' e . ~" RECEIVED ~AR 1 3 2Dnn City of ~leridian City Clerk Offictit Mat-c t-: 12:1f 2(j(J(; I.~ Dn:J~ a.u. ~ ~ Planning and Zoning Commission 2(H) ~E.. Cat-l ton Meridian, ID 83642 ~ 7'-/0-// ~ De a t- 1"1 t- . B t- OtrJ n , ~e are ~Fiting to express our conCErn OV8F the Valeri Heights Subdivision. As you will recall, Valeri Heights came be~ofe Planning and Zoning back in September and be~oFe the City Council in October. It was rejected both times due to tFa~~ic and density concerns~ As ~aF as we can tell +ram Fevie~ing the plans on ~ile in the City CleFk~s o~~ice, there have been very ~ew modi~ications made to address the original concerns: I~ 1. The Tra~~ic Study was done on August p, 1999, when Meridian High School ~as not in session. There does not appear ~o have been a new tFa~~ic study done to ~eplace this one~ 2. Impatient high school drivers will cut through the apartment complex and onto the residenti~l streets (Grey Cloud and Lightning) to avoid the busy intersection o~ Pine and Ten ~ila~ We lived on the east side 0+ Meridian High School where heavy tra++ic through the Fesidential streets was a major sa~ety concern be~oFe and a~teF school as well as during the noon hour. 3. According to Ada County Highway District, there are no major changes (SLtCn as widening the road,1 placing tt-a-F-fic signals=, etc.) scheduled~fiqr this intersection until 2004. Adding the estimated 500 people and 250 cars to this overburdened intersection is not appropriate. 4. Three-story apartments are much too dense ~or and do not Tit in with this part oT Meridian. ValeFi Heights is sUrrounded on the east~ south and ~est by Fural unannexed land. We agree ~ith the vision ~Or this property pFoposed in the dra~t o~ the Comprehensive Plan ~OF the City o~ ~eFidian which would be a~ediLlm Density ft~esidential.. Ii This is not an appr-opt-i.3.te place ~~t- Hig~~~~~~ ~ SlncerelY~ lrma Calnan Atklnson David Atkinson ~ 1124 N. Lightning ~eFidian~ ID 83642 ;.e ~ 11 ex ~r ...=-'::~ .m . I .. ....... . ~\ { :::=:== ~ . March 9, 2000 Meridian City Hall 200 E. Carlton Ave. Meridian ID. 83642 Planning and zoning In regards to the proposed Valene Heights Apartments. We do not think this is the right place to put apartments. Pine and ten mile already have a lot of traffic. We get a lot of cut thru traffic from the high school as it is now. Then to add so much more will be a real mess. We had no idea this was proposed when we bought this house. We along with the rest of our neighbors thought it was going to be all single- family houses. Most of us feel very strongly that this kind of development is not compatible with the surrounding area. Please do not let this type of development go in at this spot. We will plan to attend the public hearing on March 14 to strongly oppose the Valerie heights apartments. Thank you for taking the time to hear our concerns. Sincerely Steve and Debbie Shurte 2814 w. Forecast st. Meridian ID. 83642 -March 30, 2000 !.:: . !~) o,Cop~ : ~ ;.; Mr. Dave Bivens, Vice President Ii Ada County Highway District Commission Ii 318 East 37th Street :.) Garden City, Idaho 83714-6499 : Dear Dave: :~: We are writing to bring to your attention some serious concerns: regarding the ACHD Commission's : : March 8th, 2900, approval of the preli~ary plat for the proposed Valeri Heights Project at Ten Mile ~: Road and Pine Avenue in Meridian. The Valeri Heights project includes 164 proposed dwelling units: 128 . apartments and 8 town homes, and 26,000 square feet of commercial office space on 12.73 acres. The : Valeri Heights project is on the agenda for the Meridian Planning & Zoning: Hearing on April 11th, at 7:00 p.m. We have identified some critical information which was not made available to yOU durin!! your 8Doroval oroce$s. This information also has substantial impact on the entire planning and zoning process for the Valeri Heights proiect. 1. The CommissiOn first reviewed the Valeri Heights project in September 1999. Traffic counts provided to you by ACHD staffwere: Ten Mile Road (s/o Cherry Lane) on 8-26-97 Pine Avenue (eta Ten Mile Road) on 8-28-97 6,072 1,838 The original Valeri Heights proposal was denied by Meridian P & Z. It was resubmitted after revisioo on February 1, 2000. Apparently when the new proposal went to ACHD for approval. no one bothered to check for new traffic study numbers before re-evaluating the plan. PROBLEM: Ten Mile Road and Pine Avenue are both used heavily by Meridian High School traffic, as well as the Meridian School District Curriculum Center, Drug Awareness Center and Pre-K Early Intervention Center which are located beside MHS. MHS alone has over 2,100 students this year and nearly 200 teachers and support staff. (Steve is in his 20th year as a MHS teacher and has daily involvement with this traffic scene.) These traffic studies were done while MBS was: not in session. therefore. they never did accurately reflect traffic on Ten Mile Road or Pine A venue. REAL NUMBERS: ACHD conducted the foUowin~:updated traffic surveys:: Ten Mile Road (nJo Pine Avenue) on 11-23-99 8,551 Pine Avenue (w/o Linder.:.Road which is comparable to e/o Ten Mile Road) on 1-6-00 4,678 _.J?:::: W'.;::; WOW! This shows a HUGE discrepancy in the numbers which were used for approval versus recent credible traffic counts! 2. Dobie Engineering was hired by the Valeri Heights developer to CCJlduct a separate traffic study for the project. Mr. Dobie's report was provided to your Commission for revieW. Mr. Dobie conducted his traffic study on 8-6-99. Again.. Meridian High School was not in sessionot therefore, he. did not. get counts reflective of normal traffic for Ten Mile Road or Pine Avenue. Furthermoreot Mr. Dobie cites the COMPASS Forecast done in 1985 for projected future traffic. He states the following traffic projections: Year 2005 Ten Mile Road (0/0 Pine Avenue) 8,500 Pine Avenue (elo Ten Mile Road) 7,100 Year 2015 17,700 10,700 PROBLEM: The Ten Mile Road 2005 traffic Droiection has:. alreadv been exceeded. These numbers show just how far from reality the traffic figures provided for your consideration were! Also, Mr. Dobie estimates that Valeri Heights will generate an additional 1455 trips per day! ~'~~t page 2 D=-~. I ~ ;:: \'{.. <... ;~.:-:~. ~~~0)i: ..: 3. We live at 3401 W. Pine AVEDue, on the unpaved, private road secti~ of Pine Avenue which is immediately west ofTen Mile Road. This "Private Road" is used by 8 families, and the Ten Mile Road/Pine Avenue intersection is our only access in departing; from our homes. this intersection is already very busy and dangerous. Besides serving local traffic and Meridian High School, Ten Mile Road is classified as a minor arterial and handles heavy commuter traffic, as well as feeds the primary entrance to Chaparral Elemehtary School which is at 1155 N. Deer Creek, off of Park Creek. Chaparral elementary enrollment on 3/12/2000 was at 867 students and over 50 teachers and support staff. Chaparral is a year round school with grades K through 5. We ate shocked that the inadequacy of this intersection has not been addressed in any of the traffic studies or ACHD reports concerning the Valeri Heights project. Currentlv. there are existinsr ri2ht ofwav oroblems at the intersection. In addition. because Ten Mile Road and Pine Avenue are both narrow streets with no sidewidks or bike lanes. we alreadv have HUGE a.fetv issues. The approval of the Valeri Heights project at this. time would signifie8i1tly increase hazards at this alre~"dy precarious interSection. Based on the information. we have uncovered while researching the proposed Valeri Heights development, we believe that you and the rest of the Commissim did not have enough factual infonnatioo. on which to base your recommendation. We feel that the decision you made with inadequate information will have malor safety consequences. Therefore. we url!e YOU and the rest of the Commission to withdraw your aooroval of the Dreliminarv olat for Valeri Heie:hts until the ACHD staff orovides YOU with uodated. accurate information. includinS! traffic studies: and findinl!s from an investil!ation of the Ten Mile RoadIPine A venue intersection. We know that you and the Commissioo work hard 00. behalf of all county residei1ts and want to make informed decisions. We believe that a rushed approval of the Valeri Heights project without proper factual information will have an enormous impact 00 everyOne who uses Ten Mile Road and Pine Aveliue, and will have major safety repercussions. Please withdraw your prior approval so you can take whatever time is necessary to study this project properly and fully and make an informed decision. Thank you for your consideration of our comm~ts and your prompt attention in actiQg. on this important matter. Again, Valen Hei!!hts is scheduled to come before Meridian Plannin!! & ZooiD!! on Aomit th. at 7:00 D.m. Please take action on this reauest orior to that scheduled hearin!!. Sincerely, ~ W.....~-.(.., . :. '.~ I. :: : ~I . . . ............ Laura Wilder 3401 W. Pine Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 208-888-5446 e-mail: 4wilder@Worldnet:.att.net Steve Wilder enclosures cc: Mr. Steve Am~~d, ACHD PI~g. & Development Mr. Joe Roseilliind, ACHD Traffic Engineering Supervisor Mr. Dave Szplett, ACHD Transportation Engineer Mr. Mark Clough, ACHD Traffic Safety Ms. Vicki Welker, Gold River Companies Mr. Bruce Freekletotl, Assistant to City Engineer, City of Meridian Mr. Robert Corrie, Mayor of Meridian Meridian Planning: & Zoning Commission Meridian City Clerk f. .~: ........ Y~j \. ......J:; ~.IE'*~t> .. (........... ........ < y March 13, 2000 Gary Belcher 965 N Latitude Ave Meridian 10 83642 208-288-2184 Pla'lning and Zoning MerrtJian City Hall 33 E Idaho Meridian 10 83642 Re: Valerie Heights Apartment Proposal Ithas been brought to my attention that the proposed developers of Valerie Heights Apartments are, once again, attempting to obtain approval for development at the corner of Pine St and Ten Mile. I am writing this letter as a resident and owner of a home located in the Haven Cove Subdivision, adjacent to the proposed development area. ~.! As I write this letter of objection to the proposed development, I can only wonder how many more times it will be necessary to do so. As I'm sure you are aware, this project has been previously denied. And my objection was but one among the many of homeowners in my subdivision attending the City Council meeting the last time this issue was presented. I am not pleased that the developers are continuing to press for development over the strong objections of local homeowners. It is becoming apparent that the developers feel they can sway Planning and Zoning to rule in their favor. It is equally apparent the developers hope that each time the issue is broached, the local homeowners will either tire of public hearings and stop voicing objections to the development or be unable to voice objections with the short notice given them. This area, and my subdivision in particular, simply can not withstand the increased traffic that this project would ultimately bring to Pine and Ten Mile. Additionally, there is also the real concern that approval of such an ill-placed imposing project could cause a "mass exodus" from adjacent subdivisions to the proposed project. The shear volume of homes listed for sale could devastate property values for~an extended perWcd of time. I urge you to continue to reject the Valerie Heights Apartment development proposal at Pine St and Ten Mile and give my subdivision and others the opportunity to mature into neighborhoods both homeowners and the City of Meridian are proud of. Sin~~erely ~.~..........:..~; ~. . 'l!I! .;..; : ~:~Y: .: ~j.~ IllY . .., Ga~::' Icher ~~ j<. >;0:. ~ '...:.~ ;;;~ ~~~~ _ __ _ _ . -.....-.,.... --....-, .11""'. J SCHROEDER ENTERPRISES, INC. ~ 2360 N. McCLURE LANE KUNA, ID 83634 fax "\1 ..... :. ~ . ......... :- ~um~. ; "..or:.-. ....,: '-'"'u ;;;:or" "'~'UJ ~J.)l.- I I -uu III ~.. ApI'illl, 2000 Delivered via facsimile to Shelby at 888-4218 and Mailed Original Mr. Keith Borup Meridian Planning & Zoning Commission 38 E. Idaho Street Meridian, ID 83642 RE: Valeri Heights Proposed Development on the corner ofTen Mile & Pine in Meridian Dear Mr. Borup: Let me first start out by disclosing that we have NEVER received proper notice of this proposed development. and only became aware of it throURh a third party yesterday (4110/00). OUf property is located well within the 300-foot notification requir~ment area and would Hk~ ~ know why the City of Me.ridian did not notify me in writing. 1 write thl~9 letter to you as I am unnble to make the Planning &: Zoning Commission meeting due: to other obligations 1 he ve lhie e ve.niug. Had I been properly notified of this project and date of the hearing, I would have been able to rearrange my schedule to be there. I am a General Contrat-tor in the valley and currently have a brand new home located at 1166 N. Gray Cloud Way in Thunder Creek Subdivision in Meridian for sale. 1 S1'RONGI,V OPPOSE this sort of development 8S I have been told that Gray Cloud Way will be one of the access roads ;q,' to the proposed multi-family and 1.,0 project. This development is not compatible w;th ~J"ae Thunder Creek SubdivisiOn single family homes, which range from approximatclY'~$127,OOO to $190,000. I know of no potential homeowner who would wanl to purchtl.$e my home at $147,000 when there is an apartment complexltownhouse/office complex development going right next door utilizing Gray Cloud as one of the acce~ roads to Lhe project.. The impact of this type of development on the value of the home I am currently marketing for sale will be substantial when my marketing agent and I will have to disclose the proposed project if it does get approved. With the State of Idaho being a full disclosure etate. any and ull prospective buyers would have to be made aware of this project. It could be 80 detrimental to the ~nlQ of my home that I may not be ahle to ~ell it at all. I ask the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider my following recommendations in their decision-making process for this developmenL, with the first being preferred, and the last being a compromise. 1) Completely deny the project on the basis of non-compatibility with the surrounding single-family subdivisions. tiP 2) TJOwer the density of the R-15 zoning and require the Developer of Valeri Heights to develop single-fatrifly homeeitea on the property with townhou~a:units clustered around the Office Complex. The developer will then take on the risk of marketing single family homesites to huilders and prospective homeowners abutting townhouses and an omcc building. If this project is approved, then allow no access from or through Thunder Creek Subdivision to the proposed development with extenaivc landscaping and open SptU..-e between this project and (thunder Creek Subdivision. a) Thank you for your consideration. 5n~Q rO. Margi sCh::Ler. V:~. UJ~ AFR 11 '00 17:16 208 922 4320 PAGE. 02 ~,' c....' '.:'~~_"J. '~i 0 _.:......~..,~ . III~ij,>.:.; ~. oM ;= ~. , f, !! ~~ March 9, 2000 ~ t})~,\ \~,~ \t<Y ~ ~ ~\\~ ~ Meridian City Hall 200 E. Carlton Ave. Meridian ID. 83642 Planning and zoning In regards to the proposed . . I1ts. We do not think this is the right place to put apartments. Pine and Ten mile already have a lot of traffic. We get a lot of cut thru traffic from the high school as it is now. Then to add so much more will be a real mess. We had no idea this was proposed when we bought this house. We along with the rest of our neighbors thought it was going to be all single- family houses. Most of us feel very strongly that this kind of development is not compatible with the surrounding" area. Please do not let this type of development go in at this spot. We will plan to attend the public hearing on March 14 to strongly oppose the Valerie heights apartments. Thank you for taking the time to hear our concerns. E: Sincerely Steve and Debbie Shurte 4!~ 2814 w. Forecast st. Meridian ID. 83642 ~.. ..~# ;~ &<~~ : ~~ ;;: 0.::".:....,., ,~ ~. : ..: i. .~-: ;--:.::.:.... ..~ Submitted: 1~ '0 -APR.,L ~ From: The residents surrounding the proposed Valeri Heights To: The City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission !J~ Petitioa Apinst Valeri Heigh_ We, the signed below, are opposed to the construction and development of a 3 story apartment complex and commercial buildings on the Northeast corner of Pine and Ten Mile for the following reasons... . The traffic study provided by the developer (which indicates that there would be only a minimal increase in traffic at the intersection of Pine and Ten Mile) was conducted on August 6, 1999, when Meridian High School was not in session. It is estimated that this development will add at least 250 cars to the area. . Planned access into this complex is to include Lightning and Grey Cloud, providing a cut-through around the already busy intersection of Pine and Ten Mile. This will create a very dangerous hazard for our children (and even potential residents of the apartments). . Meridian City Council denied the previous annexation and zoning request (for 158 units) on October 19, 1999, based on the traffic and density issues and concerns. . In the proposed Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian, this property is recommended to be "Mediwn Density Residential." Medium Density Residential is defined as single-family homes of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Comprehensive Plan was designed with the input of the whole community over a long period of time. Whereas the current Comprehensive Plan is outdated. . The Meridian School District anticipates that at least 103 children will reside in this complex adding to an already overcrowded school system. ,.~ ~(I ~ ~ I'. ~: Name Addr~ss ~ ._..~ PI. . . ., I:'~. !k i"f.. v~ . ~ ~ tr J ::.i.\. Address {J. 31 . 35 36 37 38 42 43 44 45 50 51 52 W ~t.V ~ C. ,"I S + <;~ +- "~'1~8 w ~\lc; c, T. \. \. ~.5-/(J ,;1/ vV~.I~ G fiX ~: ;;a; w \~i'.. ~ 'I JI t I'! Name Lu Signature ... 72 73 74 77 78 / 79 :1.;" ~~ ~ ::! '" '~ .1I l.rr~ ~ li3 I.~ ~83 't.;_, '" ..:"...~ Address 84 1-.t6\) l,J. t; ~~a L ~ r c~\OtM L<(\~ Y\J I Sku, \ ST ~ ...... 85 86 92 \ [ TI -~ ::t _ rl!, _, - - ~_~_< - __~_ - - - ~ Name ~=-<<-,,;:= ,,_ }~Qtltess .. -~" ~-= -.. -~i -' ~ignature "ID,,_ nt, Barf/eti 1&5(j /j);shetu/Sl-~/~ - naA~j~ , ,. . - .,~~,~. ~~ - - - ---,.2~:J.. ~ - L"0 s~ S/. rr ~ At}: 'L R &-- ~r-- r 11 <..:~ 'U -, · . \lllt\J(,j.... :J.------ ,. S'ltL.. v-> sk-., ~ -e ....--J. j-~ l__ u.,.~ l' II, w ~ .~ h~ \~ \ ^" ..-j I A." . 7<;.f, ?) w S~4> y I~ \ sA-( () J- \\~ l ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ f,J/ ~- /J/'I ( 1\; /W ~d -~ . u4l~' ?--fA / --HV'i~ rJ/J :2 f~2 tJ Si~vv sF- IM-ty;/:a u A4-~1Y I~ ,'7/Y;,P.AA-Cfurtj )t1GJ--.w. ~uljf1V\,-,r/rN~ '/~MDI1.e<}' ; VL Cth/ 2lJMt~a.11- ~ 5,; w Sk1"4f 5t ~-l:d;4M' l;;;rYL~~~~A~: '/Ji'WnLClUWwJAL-\ ~13 u),~od ~ 4<d_~,p~JL~_ I~~~ . trfllOI! ~~~.L~1t ll~ U1~!.. ~~T3ttJ, s/.i;.l./( ~-f 70td l~~~j~/4;~ ~ .,/~IJ1 "1 f [>>-j v '= b t/'rJ '~I V ;// il ' ! IIq ~ m ~~Jtri.ltJtJl,J ftJ1~ ~r!\b _~.5~'D L() U h-J-N?- '?& l, I /II {1AJi Jv\.IJ./j1' a: i rl/ 3~\ \ L ~Cl1; Y\; ~5 <to LU .~e.{ \J \ S~ c~ ~CtlA Q .' ~ : ra rTk c.. vl r1 ~ 1st~ 25" l W JAv~ / S~\ ;- ~'f/A~@fi^ \,- : f'ZL~. r1ell~4\et1z.,YY\tVv\ 1h4\ \AI. ~Lv~\ ~~ \~;~ ~I~ "\ t~~~I5tfj~~/JP - /769 Ai: 51.(Ac*~~ 2~f3~ .; '~i~l-l1Y'u/;/Jtklr .ilos9' 1/1/ hti.( co.~f {J,J;u;I5~~ 11-5 ~Jto~g~ ~~J1A.hIt~oJ../ ~ltScJ W. ~etts4- 83-. "1l/J/JllLi3tnAJ.t-l ,aL,lv a fJA)./lft.:~ .2G~1 rfYte(4~-r (7 /?M~-- v~ I (~~~ Wtltutt Jaii _b~._..__-<_ --'- =---"=-~ MAid.utllllit (t8C7 ~~;)~\"~~i~~fJ ~~5>g w. FO('~(cA+ .?j~rIl~~ i~ IGq .~, mY) I-II'.t<;Kp II :2 (..,~~ \At, F()fec~s+- ff&!:!~?/~hj!/)'~ 1~1H tJ Sr\I\J.,.t! ~IIO W, (:Q(L f tAC" ~ ~-~- '- ffJ1JJJlrfWl7Aj~~uk !1.? /3 tv FoLerrAt:;f-. ~ U}/hIH/ltJ.H/k. v ' .. - v ... --. ~ .11 - r r"" I (1'i2.,.J:~t.p~ B. !l1A.SlS-n 'Z.1li~ ~J ,c::O~UtS'1- s;.+ ~~w~ (33 &'1~(\ fVtGl-~on 31(pfI; fA), Fore.co.st 5+. flipfoOAl )J-'~ i f.3t.,M {} (LL 9 c1 iJtJ cSt g'Sb C{I. ;:::0 yo e. c, sf- '~~(\lli1 L Qj tM~ ~: ~~13S ~. ..If . ~ ..,~.. c 5~ _ r:: 0 D 0 iJ V (Jj, n t . ;:;-: ~ _- - __ '" I: ,,' _~ ,,_~' - - ..1 0 ]lQ W, r t11JJ..fYL-i J- ~. ~)))~~ _u v~ ~, . .- ~ ~. .2&, I t,J ~ 51-- 1-~VJ~NkOI. r Ijr~~1 Se.rnmw~ .'J.<J.//JI u) J;y~('JL~ .<)r '(J~_t~~~.~" Ilf. .~J ~ ~ ~',I! :&.i jj:ij; ~ I,id. r. ~ ~ : 155 I~r -=-- ~ ~ ~ ,- \11.~ ~ . Submitted: 11 April 2000 to Meridian Plan.nine and Zoning 16.May 2000 to Meridian City Council From: The residents surrounding the proposed Valeri Heights ~ Petition Against Valeri Heights .:. We, the signed below, are opposed to the construction and development ofa 3 story apartment complex and commercial buildings on the Northeast comer of Pine and Ten Mile for the following reasons... ;; ;:;:! · The traffic study provided by the developer (which indicates thjlt there would be only a minimal increase in traffic at the intersection of Pine and Ten Mile) was conducted on August 6, 1999, when Meridian High School was not in session. It is estimated that this development will add at least 250 cars to the area. ACHD in March 2000 were not given their own traffic count done on 11-23-99 which indicates traffic on Ten Mile Road is now at a level they predicted it would reach in the year 2005. · The current City Comprehensive Plan prefers high density housing close to shopping, schools, and employment. However, there are no employers close by, and pedestrians would have to walk without sidewalks on Ten Mile and Pine to get to shoppin8 and schools. · Planned access into this complex is to include Li~htning and Grey Cloud, providing a cut-through around the already busy intersection of Pine and Ten Mile. This will create a very dan,erous hazard for our children (and even potential residents of the apartnwnts). · Meridian City Council denied the previous annexation and zonin! request (for 158 units) on October 19, 1999, based on the traffic and density issues and concerns. =~. In the proposed Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian, this property is recommended to be "Medium Density Residential." Medium Density ~ Residential is defined as single-family ho~s of3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The projl6>se1 Comprehensive Plan was designed with the input of the whole community over a long period of time. Whereas the current C-omprehensive Plan is outdated. · The Meridian School District anticipates that at least 103 children will reside in this complex adding to an already overcrowded school system. . ;r; s ~ . ~ ~l =--J ~~~ :JO: ~ .. y ~~) ,.. . . in '.11 . . ~ ~ :.~ . i.l' .,: ~ .Ioi :0 ~ ~ '. Submitted: 11 April 2000 to Meridian Planning and Zoning 16 May 2000 to Meridian City Council From: The residents surrounding the proposed Valeri Heights ft: ~.t;j Petition Against Valeri Heights We, the signed below, are opposed to the construction and development ofa 3 story apartment complex and commercial buildings on the Northeast comer afPine and Ten Mile for the following reasons... · The traffic study provided by the developer (which indicates that there would be only a minimal increase in traffic at the intersection of Pine and Ten Mile) was conducted on Augqst 6, 1999, when Meridian High School was not in session. It is estimated that this development will add at least 250 cars to the area. ACHD in March 2000 were not given their own traffic count done on 11-23-99 which indicates traffic on Ten Mile Road is now at a level they predicted it would reach in the year 2005. ~ · The current City Comprehensive Plan prefers hiah density hous~g close to shopping, schools, and employment. However, there are no employers close by, and }'edestrians would have to walk without sidewalks on Ten Mile and Pine to get to ~hopping and schools. · Planned access into this complex is to include Lightning and Grey Cloud, providing a cut-through around the already busy intersection of Pine and Ten Mile. This will create a very dangerous hazard for our children (and even potential residents of the apartments). ~ · Meridian City Council denied the previous annexation and zonini request (for 158 units) on October 19, 1999, based on the traffic and density issues and concerns. . In the proposed Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian, this property is recommended to be "Medium Density Residential." Medium Density ~ Residential is defined as single-family homes of3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Comprehensive Plan was designed with the input of the whole community over a long period of time. Whereas the current Comprehensive Plan is outdated. · The Meridian School District anticipates that at ltast 103 children will reside in this complex adding to an already overcrowdetl school system. n: a..:.. x !:< ~ .:- I (( fi; ~~ ~ . t": ~~ ,.!: ~ ~ ,oW . t! . ft' 't,: iii: ~ . 1I,l;: Submitted: 11 April 2000 to Meridian Planni:rJ! and Zo~ 16 May 2000 to Meridian City Council From: The residents surrounding the proposed Valeri Heights IIIJI ~ Petition Against Valeri Heights :::..: We, the signed below, are opposed to the construction and development ofa 3 story apartment complex and commercial buildings on the Northeast comer of Pine and Ten Mile for the followinS reasons. .. . The traffic study provided by the developer (which indicates that there would be only a Inininl!ll increase in traffic at the intersection afPine and Ten Mile) .~ was conducted on August 6, 1999, when Meridian High School was not in session. It is estimated that this development will add at least 250 cars to the area. ACIID in March 2000 were not Aiven their own traffic count done on ~ 11-23-99 which inQicates traffic on Ten Mile Road is now at a level they predicted it would reach in the year 2005. . The current City Comprehensive Plan prefers high density housing.;~lose to shopping, schools, and employment. However, there are no employers close by, and pedestrians would have to walk without sidewalks on Ten Mile and Pine to get to shoppina and schools. . Planned access into this complex is to include Lightning and Grey Cloud, providin8 a cut-through around the already busy intersection of Pine and Ten Mile. This will create a very dangerous hazard for our children (and even potential residents of the apartments). i\~ 1 Meridian City Council denied the previous annexation and zoning request (for 158 units) on October 19, 1999, based on the traffic and density issues and concerns. . In1:he proposed Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian, this property is recommended to be "Medium Density Residential. " Medium Density 'it! ~~ Residential is defined as single-family homes of3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The prof'O$ed Comprehensive Plan was designed with the input of the whole community over a long period of time. Whereas the current Comprehensive Plan is outdated. . The Meridian School District anticipates that at least 103 children will reside in this complex adding to an already overcrowded school system. ~ ~.~ d! ~ i4i1 ~ ... ="Ii. II :="! ~ )., g !t :!) ~ N 11.'11 $ () ~ ~ . ~ - ~y Submitted: 11 April 2000 to Meridian Planning and Zoning 16 May 2000 to Meridian City Council From: The residents surrounding the proposed Valen Heights ~,i JJ Petition Against Valeri Heights (=t] We, the signed below, are opposed to the construction and development ofa 3 story apartment cothplex and commercial buildings on the Northeast comer of Pine and Ten Mile for the following reasons... :.it. ~ · The traffic study provided by the developer (which indicates that there wOuld be ocl.y a minimal increase in traffic at the intersection of Pine and Teb Mile) was conducted on August 6, 1999, when Meridian Hi!h School was not in session. It is estimated that this development will add at least 250 cars to the area. AClID in March 2000 were not given their own traffic count done on 11-23-99 which indicates traffic on Ten Mile Road is now at a level they predicted it would reach in the year 2005. · The current City Comprehensive Plan prefers high density housing close to shopping, schools, and employment. However, there are no employers close by, and pedestrians would have to walk without sidewalks on Ten Mile and Pine to get to shoppina and schools. · Planned access into this complex is to include Lightning and Grey Cloud, providing a cut-through around the already busy intersection of Pine and Ten Mile. This will create a very dangerous hazard for our children (and even potential residents of the apartments). n · Meridian City Council denied the previous annexation and zoning request (for 158 units) on October 19, 1999, based on the traffic and density issues and concerns. .._ · In the proposed Comprehensive Plan for the City of Meridian, tpis property is recommended to be "Medium Density Residential." Medium Density ffl Residential is defined as sing le- family homes of 3 to 8 dwelling units per acre. The proposed Comprehensive Plan was designed with the input of the wh9Je community over a lona period of time. Whereas the current Comprehensive Plan is outdated. I' · The Meridian School District anticipates that at least 103 children will reside in this complex adding to an already overcrowded school system. ~ ,.~ rI A ~ ~ I1f: . :...~ ~ ;:J ~ ~:.: . . ~ ~ )l II r::: ~ .~ ~...