Laserfiche WebLink
<br />..,~ <br />'~'. <br /> <br />. , <br /> <br />Carol D. Lathrop <br />P.O. Box 715 <br />Louisville, CO 80027 <br />666-6199 or 666-0106 <br /> <br />IDrn@rnowrn ~ <br /> R919Erl <br />\ <br /> ';/ <br /> <br />- A...._ <br /> <br />Louisville Planning Commission <br />Louisville, Colorado <br /> <br />Re: The Meadows at Coal Creek Annexation, Zoning and Sketch <br />Plan <br /> <br />Dear Commission Members: <br /> <br />As owners of property adjacent to the proposed Meadows at <br />Coal Creek, we have some concerns which we feel can best be <br />addressed in the early or conceptual stage of the project <br />development. <br /> <br />, <br />f <br /> <br />Our property is located adjacent to Cherry Street and <br />immediately west of the proposed Meadows at Coal Creek (the . <br />northern parcel marked CB on your vicinity map). We <br />purchased the land in May, 1988 with the intention of <br />building our rental store at that location. At the time of <br />purchase, the land was in the county and zoned Agricultural. <br />We subsequently annexed into Louisville with a commercial <br />(CB) zoning and Special Use (SU) for a rental store. At <br />that time, it was the feeling of the Planning Commission and <br />City Council that the Public Service Co. power line easement <br />would be the natural dividing line between residential uses <br />and commercial and/or transitional use on the south side of <br />Cherry Street. <br /> <br />Rapidly changing market conditions delayed our decision to <br />start construction and eventually led us to build at our <br />present location in the northern part of Louisville. The <br />Cherry ,~. property is currently zoned Commercial Business <br />(CB) wlen-an approved PUD for a rental store or similar use. <br />The existing single family house on the property is occupied <br />by a tenant and mayor may not remain depending on final <br />property development. <br /> <br />Our primary concern with The Meadows at Coal Creek proposal <br />is that there is no provision for a transition zone or <br />transitional use between the proposed single family <br />residential lots and an established commercial lot(s). From <br />a planning or guardian of public interest standpoint, I <br />would hope that you can appreciate the inherent conflict of <br />abutting commercial uses to residential uses without some <br />form of buffer or transitional use between them. In almost <br />all cases that I am -'a~o,jare of, close proximity or adjacent <br />commercial/residential uses inevitably result in complaints, <br />conflict and in some cases code enforcement against the <br />