Planning Commission Minutes 2020 07 09

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes July 09, 2020 Page 10 of 17 gotten a response from him. There has been little consideration to the residential properties adjacent to the property. She asks that the commissioners recommend denial and ask the applicant to place the building in a way that is less disruptive to the adjacent properties. Mark Cathcart, 1763 Sweet Clover Lane Cathcart shares through his presentation photos of the property and discusses the current issues with semi-trucks and its entryway to and from the property. He then mentions issues with having more parking spaces and how it will affect the surrounding properties. Barbara Parnell, 1534 White Violet Way Parnell says she does not think this an appropriate use for this intended development. She thinks the notion of this being adjacent to a residential neighborhood is offensive. These houses have been in place since at least 2014 and those residential owners never thought when they purchased them that they could be living by marijuana retail. Although it allowed on that land technically, she asks the commissioners if they would want marijuana retail next to their neighborhood. There are many kids in this neighborhood and they should not have to live next to this type of use. She finds it insincere that the company says they are trying to be a good neighbor when their hours of operation will be until 10:00pm. The surrounding properties close at 7:00pm. The proposed wall and landscaping do not add to the property. She adds that she thinks the residential property values will be negatively affected by this, which should be a concern to the commissioners and mentions that traffic will increase. Kate Ripley, 1763 Sweet Clover Lane Ripley discusses the wall being proposed and mentions that nothing will be visible except the wall. She reached out to the applicant a long time ago asking about for more details on the development but never heard back from him. She asks how the applicant has been engaged with the community when she never received a response from him herself. This will be placed in the front of the lot and seeks additional parking spaces that seem unnecessary. This seems ill fitting of the existing character of the neighborhood. The design as submitted will cause traffic blockage for the residents and commercial customers. She asks the commissioners to recommend denial for this application. Lazar Gintchin, 1491 Hecla Way Gintchin says this will be blocking the street and semi’s will be blocking it because they will have to back up into the street, blocking the rest of the street. He discusses how in the snow season it will cause even greater trouble for the rest of the neighborhood and mentions how it will affect the traffic flow. He adds that the business requires an armed guard while the business is open and that indicates that crime could take place. All the residents that walk to King Soopers will be walking by that and it makes him uncomfortable that they will have to walk by it, especially since it operates until 10:00pm. He asks that the commissioners deny this application.