Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter #146 Joshua Martin Shestak, Joe From:Joshua Martin <jjmartin1@uwalumni.com> Sent:Monday, July 27, 2020 12:06 PM To:Shestak, Joe Subject:gas station at 131st and Towne- Docket No. PZ-2020-00093-96 V Follow Up Flag:Follow up Flag Status:Completed **** This is an EXTERNAL email. Please exercise caution and Do Not open attachments or click links from unknown senders or unexpected email. **** Good morning I am writing regarding the proposal for the gas station located in West Clay Village. I own a townhome adjacent to the proposed location. I selected this neighborhood due to its peaceful quality and cleanliness. I ride my bicycle every day along that very street. I have many concerns about safety in this area with this proposal. There are pedestrians and cyclists that use that area and significantly increasing traffic clearly increases risk to their and my safety. Environmental hazard and fume exposure is also a paramount concern and one that can not be brushed off. An entire community of retirees live immediately adjacent to the proposed site. How is this acceptable for something that is not truly necessary? There is ample access to gas stations in multiple nearby locations in different directions. Please do not suggest that there has been meaningful community support for this proposal. The initial notification to West Clay residents for repurposing that area in question was laughably deceptive: "...to develop it commercially without having it tied to a business supporting seniors - think a pediatric office instead of a physical therapy rehab facility." As a physician, this comparison makes absolutely no sense and is a disgusting way to garner false support for what amounts to an environmental eye sore with added negative health and safety impacts in the middle of an otherwise beautiful residential space. I sincerely hope this matter is appropriately addressed and the concerns of residents and individuals that actually have ties to the area in question and can be significantly impacted by this unnecessary proposal are heard. Regards Joshua J. Martin, MD 1