Petition~ ~ . ~ . ~_
J L ~t.
PETITION BY NEIGHBORHOOD OWNERS OPPOSING COMPREHENSIV~,(J~ 0 ~ Z008
PLAN CHANGE, ANNEXATION, AND ZONING CHANGE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST VICTORY AND SOUTH EAGLE ~3S ,
We, the undersigned, as owners of residences in the neighborhoods adjoining the intersection of
East Victory Road and South Eagle Road, oppose the "Comprehensive Plan Amendment to modify
the Future Land Use Map° (CPA-08-002) and AZ 08-010 to annex and rezone, proposed by the
Rose Law Group for approximately 15 acres on the Northwest corner of East Victory and South
Eagle Roads. The annexation and rezone is of about 3.75 acres and the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment is for 15.5 acres, including the 3.75 acres.
We request that the City of Meridian deny both sets of applications, for the reasons set forth in the
Staff Report, and which include:
1. There have already been Comprehensive Plan amendments on the East side of Eagle Road,
north and south of the East Victory intersection, which provide for commercial usage and which
total over twenty acres. One project, on the Southeast corner of the intersection, has already been
approved by Planning and Zoning and will be heard at City Council on August 26. The uses on that
project would provide services sufficient to the neighborhood for the type of service proposed in
the new application by the Rose Law Group. There is no need to duplicate those services.
Additionally, nearly seventeen acres to the north of the intersection, on the East side of South
Eagle Road has been amended in the Comprehensive Plan for neighborhood commercial
purposes. Additionally, there are commercial uses to the north along the East side of South Eagle
Road up to the canal. Adding-another15.5 acres of commercial usage would greatly overload the
area.
2. All the property surrounding the proposed project is residential (Wood Haven subdivision and
Thousand Springs subdivision) as is the property across East Victory to the south of the proposed.
project. The proposed project is totally incompatible with those residential areas.
3. The proposed access into and out of the project is not compatible with the intersection and
would create large traffic problems. The project also does not have an overall development plan
for the whole 15.5 acres, which creates the potential of spot development within the 15.5 acres
without proper cross connections and without proper access to East Victory and adjoining
subdivisions. Any project in this area should be a unified project for the whole area, not a portion
of the whole area being changed in the Comprehensive Plan.
Name:
Address: 07 d o~~~b, ~Y~C ~~
email:
Phone No.: ~~~'~~~ ~"
Date: ~''~ ~-- o~
Signature:
~~ ~°e~
Name: I~~ ~ ~ ~j raga Address: 3 S ~ . ~11.co,.~ ~'.
on ol.i ~ ,~ g31/~1~
Phone No.: $rJ~v D $t7Tv email: ~f i ~ ~_W1s-n ~ Gtswl
Date: a
Name:~p1'U~~ v- Address: C • ~a ~G
~_
Phone No.: 5 ~ ~ ~~ email: 0~
Date: (0 0
Signature:
Name:~.~l~-~~~e, hi ~G S~~SK~~ Address: _ ~ 5 ~.! ~
n'12r~ ~~n, ~ B~Na
Phone No.: SST 5 3~4 email: t" hILU'~I~m~r o~ CQ.blc.c~rrc ~nt~
Date: 08 1 b1a y ~S
u
Signature: ~ r1 ~-'
Name:~{~,~~•c(~6)~S~ Address: ~ ~
~,
Phone No.: ,53~ email:
Date:
Name: OPr f~L. /~, ~ Address: 3 3GD a ~Go
~rti r` 1~ X36 Z
Phone No.: 33 ~ ' l ~ ~° email: 30 ~v ~ rla ~ ~ ~ aw • ~N--
Date: ~ G - 0 8'
Signature: \._
Name: K, rn ~'. /~lc~r.. ~Q ~.. Address: 3 360 ~ ~co ti
Phone No.: 3 3 ~ -~~~6 email: r ~ Q c
Date: S~ -- ~ -G S"
Name: Address:
Phone No.:
Date:
Signature:
Name:
Phone No.:
Date:
email:
Address:
email:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.:
Date:
email:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.:
Date:
email:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.:
Date:
email
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.: email:
Date:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.: email:
Date:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.:
Date:
email:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.: email:
Date:
Signature:
Name: Address:
Phone No.:
Date:
email:
Signature: