City Council Minutes 2020 09 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes September 1, 2020 Page 7 of 10 Kate Ripley, 1763 Sweet Clover Lane, urged Council to deny the application; she does not want a retail marijuana store in her backyard. She feels the building is not in character with the neighborhood and the wall is ugly and should be removed with the additional parking spaces. Greg Jones, 1809 Sweet Clover Lane, stated it seems the uses of this site were not rethought once residential went in so close to it. This business does not fit into this area. There should be stronger regulations for retail uses on this site. He urged denial. Scott McElroy, 1873 Sweet Clover Lane, asked Council to deny the application and make the applicant work with residents to redesign the proposal to better meet the neighborhood needs. Laura Chernikoff, 1459 Hecla Way, stated she opposes this proposal and does not feel the use should not be allowed on the site. She would like to see it redesigned. Councilmember Lipton asked if this application meets the criteria set forth in the code and what can the Council look at and what is not applicable. He noted this is not a Special Review Use where there would be criteria above normal use by right. Director Zuccaro stated for any development if the proposed use is allowed it is use by right, however site design could address some things about the building. This development must meet the CDDSG requirements and address all other requirements. Councilmember Lipton stated this is a permitted use under our regulations. It could be a marijuana shop or a convenience store or anything that falls under allowable uses. What might start as a marijuana shop may change to many other uses over time. We have to consider the design not the use. Considering design, this does meet the requirements of the code even if some community members feel it should be in a different location. It does meet the criteria in the CDDSG. Councilmember Lipton stated the proposed wall could be changed or removed but there will be no perfect solution for the neighbors; in the end it will be a commercial use. He stated he does not feel the hours should be limited; Council does not set hours for commercial uses on the other lots. Councilmember Leh asked if notice requirements were met with the error on the sign posted on the property. Brennan stated all other requirements were met and had the correct date. Director Zuccaro suggested the hearing be renoticed given the sign error to make sure all public is able to comment if they would like to. City Attorney Kelly agreed this would be a good idea to make sure anyone who wants to participate in the hearing has an opportunity to do so. Councilmember Leh moved to continue the item to September 22 and also to make that a special meeting; Councilmember Brown seconded the motion.