Loading...
CC - Narrative Revised 7-19 Charlene Way From:Hoo Hash <kids@sent.com> Sent:Monday, July 19, 2021 6:01 PM To:Robert Simison; Liz Strader; Joe Borton; Brad Hoaglun; Treg Bernt; Jessica Perreault; Luke Cavener; City Clerk Cc:cheriehoeger@gmail.com; Michael Kynaston; Jonathan Hoeger Subject:Revised Narrative for the Oasis Appeal Attachments:Revised Narrative for Oasis Appeal 7.19.2021.docx External Sender - Please use caution with links or attachments. Honorable Mayor and City Council Members, Attached is our Revised Narrative for your review in advance of the public hearing tomorrow regarding the appeal of the Oasis CUP application. We appreciate the service and dedication offered our community by the members of City Council and we look forward to this opportunity to present our case before City Council for review tomorrow evening. Kind Regards, Cherilyn Kynaston 1 We, Jon and Cherie Hoeger, and Mike and Cherilyn Kynaston as affected parties and on behalf of the aggrieved Citizens and Business Owners of the City of Meridian (46 different contributors donated money to help cover the cost of this appeal, The Oasis CR-2021-0005, and signage), are seeking a City Council Review pursuant to Meridian City Code 1-5A, as outlined in B. Conclusions of Law, No. 3 in reference to The Oasis CUP Case No. H-2021-0004. We understand there has been another appeal filed, The Oasis CR-2021-0004 which may share some similar concerns, but as separately affected parties, we want to ensure that our concerns are sufficiently heard and considered. We disagree with the recommended approval of this proposal as decided by the City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission on May 6, 2021. We agree with the singular Nay vote of Commissioner Cassinelli. We feel that the commission did not uphold the parking standards cited for the initial continuance and as citizens, we feel much of our testimony was not adequately weighed in the ultimate decision of approval for the CUP for The Oasis, as we will explain below. We only have one chance to get this right and making the wrong decision will have a continuing and irreversible negative impact financially, logistically, and culturally on our city and its residents and citizens. The Oasis application, business model, and conditional use permit as a whole do not serve the best interests of the City of Meridian generally and even if it did, the physical location proposed is wholly inadequate for the proposed scale and use. We disagree with B. Conclusions of Law Item 4 stating due consideration has been given to the comments received from governmental subdivisions providing services in the City of Meridian Planning Jurisdiction. In the Planning and Zoning Commission hearings on March 18, 2021 and May 6, 2021 there were discussions by Deputy Fire Chief Bongiornio, Planning Staff and Planning and Zoning Commissioners regarding the probable fire-rated maximum capacity of 700 persons for this facility and final negotiated temporary capacity of 400 persons to get closer to parking needs for The Oasis CUP. There is a big difference between the target maximum capacity suggested by the applicant of 400 persons and the probable Fire Code acceptable capacity of 700 persons. How is the disparity between these numbers going to be enforceable by law? The building for The Oasis is closer to 10,000 SF with 7,000 SF on the ground floor and 3,000 SF in a mezzanine above, with a targeted capacity of 1,000 persons sought initially by the applicant. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=233149&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity We find any capacity in the conditions to be an untenable conflict and find the enforcement of the limits on capacities and conditions can only fall upon the businesses and residents in the area to patrol and report. Mr. Joe Dodson’s summary of the situation is that the citizens and their policing of the capacities and reporting possible overages to be a very effective way of dealing with the situation. The Citizens and Business Owners are not police, fire, or code enforcement employees and are not responsible for The Oasis limits and this is a responsibility that should rest with the business. This will burden our Citizens to be Watchdogs for capacity enforcement and nuisance patrol. The best mitigation for conflicts is to avoid incompatible and incongruent uses to nearby neighborhoods and businesses in the first place. It is apparent the applicant was planning for a larger occupancy and now the prospective Oasis applicant/tenant is settling for lesser capacities currently with plans to come forth in the future to ask for modifications to any agreement and conditions in order to be able to return to the original plan. This will burden our Citizens via Hearing Fatigue orchestration and strategy. Furthermore, without the targeted maximum capacity numbers that are held in suspense by the applicant and the “architect,” how are we to know of plans and capacity limits that will be built? Also there is a detailed drawing of the sound mitigation planned, describing the Inverse Square Law for the carriage of sound, which is nothing but a self-drafted analysis by the applicant via a diagram on paper and commentary. If you research how sound works and travels via any search engine, the theory and law have variable flaws and all the detailed and calculated plans for a quiet facility often fail and more and more retrofits need to be completed as to not intrude upon neighboring uses. Materials, volume, and construction techniques are not a proven and reliable constant. We will not cite all the references, but there are many discussions about this law and principle. There are an abundance of windows in the design that will not be able to capture the bass and noises effectively. PZ-Narrative Revised Page 11, 12, and 13 https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=223118&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity Furthermore, there is a lack of City of Meridian Police commentary about the nature of the nightclub business and there is a lack of correlating statistical information about national nightclub crime that is readily found via search of the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Justice websites for statistics relating to the nightclub business model. There are numerous references in the Public Testimony, however. In our reading of the application packet there was a submittal of testimony from retired officer Steven Williams outlining his experience (29 years of career law enforcement) and the potentials of a nightclub at Eagle and Ustick and his analysis of The Oasis with impacts that will come to pass if this application is not denied. We feel such a testimonial to be very important to the consideration for denial of The Oasis application. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=224051&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity &searchid=68295a15-8f63-4b75-9ec9-dedc3a4b4d00 There was a Good Neighbor and Comprehensive policy submitted by the applicant outlining the possibilities of crimes and possible mitigation efforts for crimes and conflicts, but this item was not made a concrete condition of approval as part of the process. While the policy is quite detailed, it is quite unnerving that these crimes might be expected at a nightclub in such close proximity to residential neighborhoods; no other business in the area asks for this much grace and tolerance of the surrounding community to our knowledge. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=228175&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity We are in disagreement with B. Conclusions of Law, Item 5 stating it is found public facilities and services required by the proposed development will not impose expense upon the public if the attached conditions of approval are imposed. We strongly disagree with item 5 stating that the development will not impose expense upon the public. On the contrary, the cost to the city and its taxpayers will be significant and will result from a variety of problems. There has not been sufficient consideration given to the nature of the nightclub business model (this is not a restaurant, there is no kitchen, there is no menu of entrees, they are not serving dinner) nor has there been police commentary. While there is statistical information about national nightclub crime that can be readily found in records of the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Justice, the increase in crime has been largely ignored and there are numerous references in the Public Testimony that were not adequately considered. The combination of this type of activity, crime, and "local vigilante policing" that is being advocated by the P&Z commission can only lead to a waste of public resources, time, and money. This will result from police, fire department, and code enforcement having to check on capacity whenever a resident reports that they think there are more than 400 people on-site, it will come from neighborhood calls reporting suspicious behavior and drunk driving, it will come from significantly increased traffic and public incidents like fights, accidents, injuries, fatalities, sexual assaults that will require the attention of first responders, law enforcement and paramedics, it will come from public works needing to clean up trash, human waste, and other paraphernalia in the mornings after events. In our reading of the application packet, there was a submittal of testimony from retired officer Steven Williams outlining his experience (29 years of career law enforcement) and the potentials of a nightclub at Eagle and Ustick and his analysis of The Oasis with impacts that will come to pass if this application is not denied. We feel such a testimonial to be very important to the consideration for denial of The Oasis application. . https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=224051&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCit y&searchid=68295a15-8f63-4b75-9ec9-dedc3a4b4d00 Law Enforcement and Code Enforcement may be repeatedly summoned by the Public due to an incompatible use for the following possible reasons: Parking is inadequate and infiltrates other properties; Noise in violation of Noise Ordinance 6-3-6, City of Meridian; Disturbing the Peace; Trespass; open container violations; lewd acts or other sex offenses; drug sales and use; drunkenness and injuries due to an impaired state requiring ambulance and emergency services; driving while under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs; assault and battery; crimes with a weapon (gun, knife, brass knuckles); unwanted sexual attention via groping, lewd commentary, or exposure; robbery; stalking; kidnapping (removal of a person for transport to another location); public urination and vomiting; vandalism; littering (condoms, articles of clothing, alcoholic drinks, trash from Food trucks); and rape, among others not listed here. The Call Data as outlined in the Staff report between 2/1/2019 – 1/31/2021 Meridian Police Department responded to 2,967 calls for service within a mile of the proposed development. The crime count on the calls of service was 251, nearly ten percent. This number would be expected to escalate from the nature of this business. Between the same time parameters, there were 198 crashes within a mile of The Oasis site, and will likely climb from that count, as will other crimes. Example: Rape in the City of Meridian is higher than the US average, and it is thought only 1 in 5 rapes are reported--this is a terrifying and unacceptable statistic. https://www.city- data.com/crime/crime-Meridian-Idaho.html Do we want a business that is incentivized by profit to violate an unenforceable and false "voluntary occupancy cap" while the citizens of Meridian pick up the bill for maintaining the peace, cleaning up, and trying to enforce the unenforceable? Do we not believe that the City of Meridian is attractive enough to other businesses that will bring equal, if not better, value without all of the additional costs and negative ramifications of this nightclub? Why are we trying to force a square peg into a round hole when there are so many better alternatives? We are in disagreement with B. Conclusions of Law, Item 7, stating that this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of March 18, 2021, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. We do not find the conditions concluded in the Staff report to be strong enough and found those conditions to be minimally modified by Planning and Zoning Commission. We also have concerns about the parking that we do not feel were adequately addressed by the so-called voluntary cap. There is the ignoring of the other businesses and their needs in the Wadsworth subdivision that will be open concurrently with The Oasis, with a recognition by staff that the Oasis, a single business in the Wadsworth complex, will likely take up all available parking. Jamba in other locations close at 11 PM. The AFC Urgent Care is an 8 AM to 8 PM business. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=232704&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity One daytime hours wedding or cheerleading camp will dominate and take all available and nearby parking. The nightclub as a tenant may dictate the nature of the businesses in the future, such as karate center, bank, or a family counselor may not want to have a business near a nightclub and any future businesses may lack parking. The applicant is building for a 1000 person capacity, and had hoped for 700 persons as a concession, and settled for 400 persons to meet the Staff Pre- Application meeting directive that the applicant should have enough parking of its own as if all the other businesses in Wadsworth were open concurrently. We find the basic needs for parking have not been adequately met, even at the lower 400 max person capacity number, which as written, is also completely unenforceable. Staff indicated an understanding that this single business will likely use up all available parking spaces for the complex. The stricken condition of approval regarding a cross-parking agreement with Sadie Creek (VillaSport) that was never obtained will result into a possible never-ending turf conflict due to the incompatibility of a night club next to a family-oriented upscale fitness and wellness center with children in attendance. It is in the public testimony that any discussion to gain cross-access parking between the projects failed and talks were rescinded by VillaSport/Sadie Creek. With inadequate parking for the entire subdivision, overflow parking is going to end up in adjacent businesses and neighborhoods. We are concerned about the poor access and shared residential drive areas which will be filled with intoxicated drivers leaving the drinking establishment; there's no chance of there not being intoxicated drivers because the whole purpose of the business is to sell alcohol to its patrons. Denial of this project would be in the best interests of the Citizens of Meridian at this particular location. While this did not occur at the Planning and Zoning Commission decision level, we felt at the very least there should have been stronger conditions and requests for further scientific study of the site, set forth by the Commission as to the hours for the business (bare minimum 11 PM Weekdays, perhaps a conditional 12 AM Friday and Saturday, dependent upon complaints from neighbors and businesses); a concrete crime and nuisance mitigation plan that is tied into the CUP; an independent noise impact analysis study, as one was ordered for WinCo at Chinden and Linder; a total traffic impact study of the sum of the components of both Sadie Creek development, existing Bienville Square (Jackson Square), and Wadsworth Subdivision. There will be unforeseen impacts upon privately-owned and maintained streets of Jackson Square that were not considered holistically in the course of approving VillaSport/Sadie Creek and Wadsworth subdivision as separate applications over the years. Primarily the impacts to Private Cajun Ln to the roundabout to Eagle, and Cajun Lane, Picard, Centrepoint to Ustick traffic paths. There are many private deeded streets (lanes) owned and maintained by the Jackson Square HOA funds. See more info on roundabout conflicts here: https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=232696&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity Another condition that should have been considered regards the Time Extension policy on CUPs. The Director may extend a CUP for two years without a Public Hearing. We feel due to the notoriety of The Oasis that any considerations for CUP extension or modifications should be heard by City of Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission with a future hearing slated thereafter with City of Meridian City Council based on the recommendations of the Commission, in perpetuity. Any conditions regarding The Oasis should ultimately land before our elected representatives, and that is our City Council. Please refer to the request for additional CUP restrictions in our presentation at Tuesday's appeal hearings to City Council on July 20,2021. Conflicts Created with the Comprehensive Plan Much of the neighborhood protections that are outlined in the Comprehensive Plan are not referenced in the Staff Report and they were not adequately considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission, in our opinion. Oftentimes in applications most of the Comprehensive Plan notations made by Staff planners do not reference any preservation of neighborhoods and compatible uses for residents and businesses; just because it may fit zoning doesn’t mean this business model is congruent and compatible to surrounding uses. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=224608&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity. We find this proposal to be in untenable conflict with the following most important points of the Meridian City Comprehensive Plan. 3.05.01C Preserve private property rights and values by enforcing regulations that will prevent and mitigate against incompatible and detrimental neighboring use. 3.05.00 Ensure that all planning, zoning and land use decisions balance the interests of the community by protecting private property rights for current citizens and future generations. 5.01.00 Sustain, enhance, promote, and protect elements that contribute to the livability and a high quality of life for all Meridian residents. 5.01.01 Encourage the safety, health, and well-being of the community. 5.01.01F Minimize noise, lighting, and odor disturbances from commercial developments to residential dwellings by enforcing city code. 5.01.02E Support and protect the identity of existing residential neighborhoods. 5.01.03 Strengthen community pride and identity. 6.01.01G Develop criteria for plan review in determining whether a development proposal is safe, accessible, and comfortable for pedestrians and cyclists. Please see the information from this public comment, on the drug culture associated with EDM nightclubs: https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=233321&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity We find that an EDM nightclub is not necessary to fill this part of the Comprehensive Plan, that it is an outlier and in fact, violates the many points listed above, ignoring the most important needs of a community, that of the safety, health, and well-being of the community. It fails to balance the interests of the community, who overwhelmingly decried it placement in our community by a margin of over 80%. For now and for future generations, it fails to preserve property values due to the lack of livability or high quality of life for those who live in the vicinity of this nightclub due to the many nuisances it is projected to bring. It will not protect the character of the existing residential neighborhoods, but, in our opinion, will instead change the very nature of how these neighborhoods are viewed by those living here and by real estate agents informing buyers. As a representative of the 80%+ who are against this project, we hope it is obvious that this project does not strengthen our community pride and identity. In our opinion, the Oasis Nightclub fails all of these items enumerated in the Comprehensive Plan. We understand that the City Comprehensive Plan calls for the support of the arts, and we wholeheartedly agree with the need for this, and there are a myriad of ways to fulfill this point that don’t also come with all the negative ramifications of this nightclub. “Enhance crime prevention awareness through the education of neighborhood watch groups, multi- family property management companies, homeowners’ associations, and other organizations.” It is quoted by Staff: “The Police cannot give “approval” of the proposed project but they are working with the Applicants and have had conversations with the Applicant. MPD has shown an interest in educating the Applicant on any and all crime prevention techniques here in Meridian.” We find this statement and Comprehensive Plan snippet to be a clash and a burden upon our Citizens. We are being directed to be crime prevention specialists and watchdogs for this incompatible business model and incompatible “neighbor” to businesses and homes. The expectation that the citizens bear this burden is also in conflict with the 8 points referenced above regarding the Meridian City Comprehensive Plan. Most large cities in the United States have zoning ordinances prohibiting nightclubs from being built within certain distances to residential areas, and well as churches, schools, day cares, city parks, hospitals, etc. These ordinances help protect residents from the harmful effects of excessive noise, traffic congestion, vandalism, increased crime, and other adverse environmental effects caused by a nightclub in the area. As our community grows, city planning for the future becomes even more critical to the livability of our city and the surrounding areas. Nightclubs and other venues of this nature will best serve our city by being placed in entertainment districts and commercial areas, where the impact on residential communities will be minimized. “Support efforts to evaluate and plan for future transportation services such as public transit, on- demand services, autonomous and shared vehicles.” (6.01.04A) The applicant has repeatedly submitted ride-share numbers of 40-60% that cannot be quantified by any supportive documentation and has suggested that most vehicle would carry “five” passengers and therefore meet the restrictive approval on the parking requirements. We find the five passengers per vehicle to be unrealistic. Also there is the incidence of people driving vehicles, drinking ensues, then the patron calls an Uber/Lyft, leaving their car behind on the premises, as they should. What about all the cars left, taking up limited Wadsworth parking space? In addition, there will always be employees of the Wadsworth parcel and they are typically one per car and will take quite a bit of the allotments of the available parking. Staff recognized that we are a city of personal car use, not public transportation, and that expected use of a ride share or carpooling is negligible. In reference to B. Conclusions of Law, item 7. That this approval is subject to the conditions of approval in the attached staff report for the hearing date of March 18, 2021, incorporated by reference. The conditions are concluded to be reasonable and the applicant shall meet such requirements as a condition of approval of the application. We disagree with the conditions of approval and feel they are not strong enough conditions for this business model and feel a nightclub is incompatible and incongruent to surrounding existing businesses, future businesses, and residents of the City of Meridian in the nearby neighborhoods. The nature and stigma of this business will dictate the businesses and tenants of the future. It may displace owners of homes in Jackson Square. Children at VillaSport will be on the premises when the nightclub is open. We would propose a comprehensive, detailed and enforceable list of conditions that, if not met, would result in revoking the CUP. We also disagree with the following findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7 of the Planning and Zoning Commission, in IX. Findings, A. Conditional Use Permit Findings, UDC 11-5B-6E1: Finding 1. That the site is large enough to accommodate the proposed use and meet all the dimensional and development regulations in the district in which the use is located. If all conditions of approval are met, Commission finds the submitted site plan shows compliance with all dimensional and development regulations in the C-G zoning district in which it resides and compliance with the required specific use standards (UDC 11-4-3-2 & 11-4-3-10) We disagree with Finding 1. This is a very unique situation that will require higher parking needs than 1 space per 250 square feet of space and cannot be accurately predicted via current C-G models. The upper mezzanine added to the floor space, stairs, and offices, will result in a space closer to 10,000+ SF in total. Even if none of the other businesses in the development have any parking, the parking needs are still not adequate for this unique business model and will force their patrons and employees, not to mention tour buses, large truck deliveries upon other businesses spaces and parking lots. Finding 2. That the proposed use will be harmonious with the Meridian comprehensive plan and in accord with the requirements of this title. Commission finds the proposed uses are, with Commission and Staffs conditions of approval, is harmonious with the comprehensive plan designation of Mixed-Use Regional and the requirements of this title. We disagree with Finding 2. The Comprehensive Plan is a living document, much like the Master Street Map of ACHD. Unique uses that present themselves must be viewed and scrutinized. Since there is not much written for nightclubs in City Code or policy, we find this nightclub is not harmonious, especially in close proximity to homes, kids at VillaSport, and is a clash to existing businesses in the area and their marketability, reputations, comfort in place, and their address is now going to be judged by the proximity to a nightclub. We find the nightclub to be a detriment and not a compliment to this area. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=224001&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity Moreover, all of the Comprehensive Plan protections of neighborhoods and character, and incompatible uses were not cited as factors to those neighbors and businesses near the SW corner of Ustick and Eagle. We disagree with the directive for the approval from Planning Staff, in reference to the Mixed-Use Regional may have anchors by uses that have a regional draw. We feel that was already achieved by the 100,000 SF regional draw anchor known as VillaSport. Not every business in the MU-R designation is required to be the Regional Draw to meet MU-R Comprehensive Plan. It is abnormal for mixed use Regional designation to provide a nightclub establishment to fulfill that criteria. It is common among major cities for there to be a distinctive designation for nightclubs because of the noise, their proximity to schools, public spaces, congested traffic and drunken behavior. Finding 3. That the design, construction, operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general neighborhood and with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and that such use will not adversely change the essential character of the same area. Despite the proposed use being different than the residential uses nearby to the southwest, Commission finds the design, construction, and proposed operation and maintenance will be compatible with other uses in the general vicinity and should not adversely change the essential character of the same area, so long as the Applicant complies with the conditions of approval and maintains all required landscape buffers. We disagree with Finding 3. This is the exception and not the rule for the area. The late-night business model is a clash to surrounding businesses and homes. It is not compatible with other uses in the general vicinity. It could very well adversely change the essential character of the same area, as the testimony of hundreds against this project attest. Finding 4. That the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of the approval imposed, will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. Commission finds the proposed use, if it complies with all conditions of approval imposed will not adversely affect other property in the vicinity. We disagree with Finding 4. With the late-night hours, noise from patrons and the business itself, how could it not adversely affect other property in the vicinity? Does the public opinion agree that it will not adversely affect the vicinity in which they live? This area will be defined by the location of a nightclub by those selling homes and properties in the area. This has been testified of by many public comments. Finding 6. That the proposed use will not create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services and will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community. All public facilities and services are readily available for the subject site so Commission finds that the proposed use will not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community or create excessive additional costs for public facilities and services. We vehemently disagree with Finding 6. With the significant opposition to this business by the public, there is literally zero chance that the public will not be reporting complaints for noise violations, trespassing, crime, parking on private lanes in neighborhoods. We have already had citizens write and complain of trespassing for opposition signage being removed off their private property. This use and business model is going to be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community with the need for constant policing and incident response. Every complaint, every code violation, every phone call made costs the city and the tax payers time and money. Finding 7. That the proposed use will not involve activities or processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noises, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. Although traffic is sure to increase in the vicinity with the addition of the proposed business, all major roadways adjacent to the site are already at their full width and the peak operating hours should be later than peak traffic hours. In addition, if the Applicant complies with all conditions of approval, Commission finds the proposed use will not be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare. We disagree with Finding 7. It has been shown that the roundabout is not improved adequately for the increase of traffic and the large trucks that will use the roundabout. There is not sufficient space for stacking more than 8-10 cars on Centerpoint lane which will be required for any traffic attempting to travel west or north from the location. Traffic will have to stack and increase on the private deeded lanes of Jackson Square (Bienville Square) which are not built to commercial collector capacities or functionality. The functional widths of Cajun Lane/Picard Ln/etc. are not to ACHD technical standards because these are private deeded street being repurposed to be a Commercial Collectors via a cross-access instrument. We have a self-drafted diagram for the travel of noise by the applicant and have no reassurance that the noise levels inside or outside the facility will be acceptable to nearby businesses and neighborhoods. Events will create variable traffic patterns and intensities that have not been documented via a complete and holistic traffic study. https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=223337&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity As far as we can tell from the research, the traffic study was determined to not be necessary BEFORE it was shown to governing bodies that it would be The Oasis Nightclub, with their inadequate parking and high customer count at this location. This was also prior to the other tenants of the Wadsworth site being made known, who now show their operating hours to be congruent and overlapping with The Oasis Nightclub hours. According to the latest Colliers ad the Jamba Juice is a tenant, with the recent addition of a typically heavily-trafficked and popular Dutch Bros., and finally a Wienerschnitzel restaurant with drive-thru’s will be open concurrently with The Oasis, all businesses having expected closing times of 10 PM to Midnight; there is also a newly constructed AFC Urgent Care with operating hours of 8 AM to 8 PM. The Roundabout on Cajun Ln to Eagle and the Picard Lane to Centrepoint will become de facto Commercial Collectors where there is no right to do so, since they are deeded private lanes and not designed to be Collectors. Detailed description of roundabout conflicts: https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=232696&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity There are many citizens in the community that have offered testimony and have contacted our City Council against this proposal in this location for a myriad of reasons. We are placing our trust in our elected officials to deny this application. The purported arts benefits promoted by one applicant/investor group against your many invested and vetted Meridian Citizens should not stand; many of your citizens are against this proposal. We can read and assay the narrative, The Conclusions of Law and the Findings of the Planning and Zoning Commission and we can see the conflicts that are to come if The Oasis is approved. We feel the candid testimony of the local Business Owners and area Citizens was not adequately weighed against The Oasis in the Planning and Zoning Commission decision to approve The Oasis. This is not a business model for all, but rather it is a niche business with primary revenue based on an EDM nightclub model that will be open into the late hours, approximately 300-plus feet from homes. Please consider how close 330 feet is to adjoining properties: https://weblink.meridiancity.org/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=232695&dbid=0&repo=MeridianCity Its purported artistic benefits do not cancel out the noise, burdens, cost, crime and violence, and nuisance of being in close proximity to neighborhoods and other businesses. It cannot stand on its own with its inadequate parking and it bears the potential to be far too big for its environment. The applicant/investor group is building for more and settling for less at this moment. This business model does not fit this location. Due to the long history and contentious nature of this CUP Application for The Oasis, we have done our best to outline the findings of our in-depth document research, yet we continue to reserve our rights as citizens and stakeholders in the community and as voting constituents to provide additional testimony and presentations of new research and findings not yet listed or outlined in this narrative.