Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />infrastructure to accommodate the water needs of that project <br />as well as the impact of water runoff by reduction of permeable <br />surfaces. The projects on this end of the city, Kenzie Terrace <br />and Stinson Parkway development, Development 65, and <br />Trident Redevelopment Bremer site are under consideration for <br />approval. We are concerned about potential impact on R-1 <br />water volume and adequate volume for fire suppression. In <br />addition, by changing the current permeable surface of the <br />vacant lot to non-permeable surfaces, we are concerned that <br />the sewer infrastructure may be inadequate to manage the <br />volume of water used by the carwash as well as the change to <br />non-permeable surface. The planning commission has not <br />addressed or resolved this concern. <br /> <br />4. Property values: As required per ordinance for a CUP <br />request, the City Must demonstrate there is no adverse <br />devaluation of the R-1 occupancies. Until all the proper <br />analysis of these key factors has been done <br />(Health/Safety/General Welfare), there is no way to make an <br />assessment of what will happen to property values. Given the <br />impacts identified above - air pollution, noise pollution, safety <br />concerns and water capacity, it is hard to imagine that the <br />value of our property will not be negatively impacted. This will <br />not only impact the homes along the 27th Ave alley, but also <br />houses even a block or two away. Certainly, the value of the <br />Kenzington condos overlooking the carwash will be negatively <br />impacted. From our perspective this proposed use will force <br />depreciation of property values. That is unacceptable to the <br />existing residents nearby who are paying considerable taxes to <br />be a part of this community. <br /> <br />The Council must find that the use is not detrimental to health, <br />safety, and general welfare of persons residing or working in <br />the vicinity or to the values of property in the vicinity. To date, <br />none of this work has been done. This is a critical oversight. <br />We believe the proposed use of the property is detrimental on <br />all fronts. <br /> <br />In consideration of the lack of due diligence by the Planning <br />Commission to analyze and protect the public by examining <br />data required by law, we believe that the Council must reject <br />the conditional use permit. <br /> <br />Additionally we are asking that this letter be put into the public <br />record. <br /> <br />Respectfully Submitted, <br /> <br />118