In the recent decision by the planning commission to deny the gentleman’s club a permit there are a couple of things that stand out.

First, the community was clearly against this business. Not one stood up for the business and several came to voice their opposition. If the government’s job is to look out for the interest of the people then they did their job.

Second, the argument that the gentleman’s club could be approved without the liquor aspect, which is why it had to come before the planning commission, is an arguement without merit. The application was for both and therefore both were on the table. If they wanted just the club, they should have applied for just the club. Good job planning commission.

Third, the code states “Establish and promote neighborhoods with integrity and character … so long as the property is not incompatible with this code.” If it was compatible, then a conditional use permit would not be needed.

The city’s own code says that adult entertainment “tends to result in the blighting and deterioration of the areas of such concentration.” How does blighting and deteriorating a neighborhood “establish and promote neighborhoods with integrity and character”? Good job planning commission.

Finaly, the intersections closest to the land in question have been identified by the city as dangerous and deadly. Why would introducing alcohol to the mix be found as a “compatible use”? That makes no sense. Good job planning commission.

The planning commission made the right decision. Next time I hope the City Council will stand up and represent the public rather than squabble over a petty definition so they can skirt the response they might face over such a decision. Good job and thank you planning commission.

Mike McFarlane
Grand Junction

This entry was posted on Tuesday, December 2nd, 2008 at 5:54 pm and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.