HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-05-18 City Council Special Meeting MinutesPage 1 of 51
MINUTES
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
Monday, May 18, 2026
The meeting was held in a hybrid format, with Councilmembers, City staff,
and members of the public participating either in person at the Municipal
Building (7500 W. 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado) in Council
Chambers, or virtually.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Stites called the special City Council meeting to order on May 18, 2026, at 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Those present stood, if able, and recited the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL OF MEMBERS
Councilmembers Present: Rachel Hultin; Dan Larson; Kathleen Martell; Scott Ohm; Mike
Okada; Patrick Quinn; Jenny Snell; and Susan Wood.
Absent: None
A quorum was established.
STAFF IN ATTENDANCE
City Manager Patrick Goff; City Attorney Thad Renaud; Director of Community
Development Lauren Mikulak; Planning Manager Jana Easley; and Senior Deputy City
Clerk Onorina Maloney. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
None
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda stood as presented.
PROCLAMATIONS AND CEREMONIES
Page 2 of 51
None
PUBLIC’S RIGHT TO SPEAK
In person
Montana Stevenson, Wheat Ridge resident, commented on noise from the Silver Bullet Shooting Range on 38th Avenue, stating it is audible from her property and nearby
areas. She expressed concern about compatibility with future development and asked Council to pursue a solution that supports residents and businesses.
Nikki Larsen, Wheat Ridge resident, commented on the City-funded noise-mitigation project at the Silver Bullet Shooting Range. She stated the study area did not include
homes south of the range and that the 4–6 decibel reduction was limited in effectiveness. She noted a petition with 70 signatures was not provided to Council. She
asked Council to acknowledge the project’s limitations, improve oversight of
noise-mitigation efforts, and engage with the property owner on the site’s long-term future.
Via Zoom:
No participants signed up for Public’s Right to Speak
Recusal of Mayor Pro Tem Hultin
Prior to the opening of the public hearing, Mayor Pro Tem Rachel Hultin addressed the
Council on a point of order. She stated that outside counsel for Autowash had
submitted a records request for correspondence of several staff members and elected
officials, including herself, and had subsequently requested her recusal, citing
communications she had with Gray Street neighbors over the preceding 18 months.
Mayor Pro Tem Hultin stated she had done nothing wrong, as her communications were
not subject to quasi-judicial restrictions and were conducted in good faith as constituent engagement. However, she stated that to avoid casting doubt on the
proceedings, she was voluntarily recusing herself.
City Attorney Renaud cited Charter Section 5.9, which provides that a Council member may be excused from voting by unanimous consent of the remaining members present.
Mayor Stites requested unanimous consent to excuse Mayor Pro Tem Hultin from the hearing. Unanimous consent was granted.
Mayor Pro Tem Hultin departed the dais for the remainder of the hearing.
1. CONSENT AGENDA
None
Page 3 of 51
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING
Item Number 1
MOTION
Title: Review of a previously issued special use permit (SUP-23-01) and associated
conditions related to Lakeside Autowash.
Issue:
The purpose of this public hearing is for City Council to review the Special Use Permit
(SUP) for Lakeside Autowash, located at 5900 W. 44th Avenue. Pursuant to Section 26-
114.F of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws, City Council shall determine whether
modification, additional conditions, or revocation is warranted based on operational
impacts.
Councilmember Ohm read the title and issue into the record.
Mayor Stites opened the Public Hearing at 6:42 p.m.
Mayor Stites read a procedural statement outlining the order of testimony, timing rules,
quasi-judicial standards, and conduct expectations. Staff were allotted approximately 30 minutes; Autowash was allotted approximately 45 minutes. Public testimony was
limited to four minutes per speaker, with no donation of time permitted. For the record,
Mayor Stites noted that all testimony given constitutes an affirmation the speaker will
tell the truth as they understand it.
Attorney Renaud addressed a letter submitted by Autowash’s outside counsel, John
Peckler, requesting the recusal of Councilmember Ohm based on alleged bias. The City
Attorney stated that the recitations supporting the allegation were relatively few and
proceeded to question Councilmember Ohm on the record. Councilmember Ohm
confirmed that he had reviewed the letter, held no ill will toward Autowash or any of its
employees or representatives, did not regard Autowash as having been a bad actor,
understood that Autowash had an absolute right to an impartial decision-maker, and
believed he could serve as a fair, impartial, and unbiased decision-maker in the
proceeding. No recusal was granted.
Attorney Renaud addressed the matter of ex parte communications, noting that the
issue had evolved from citizen complaints and an administrative investigation over a
12–18-month period before becoming a formal quasi-judicial proceeding. He
acknowledged that communications had occurred during that period through multiple
channels, including public meetings, letters, and electronic correspondence. He asked
all Council members present to raise their hands if they understood from prior legal
training that, in a quasi-judicial proceeding, they were to consider only the evidence
presented at that night’s hearing or included in the written record, and to disregard all
prior communications. All members raised their hands. He then asked members to raise
Page 4 of 51
their hands if they believed they could do so in making their decision. All members
again raised their hands.
Staff Presentation
Director Mikulak presented the staff report and entered into the record the case file, the
municipal code, the comprehensive plan, and the digital presentation. She confirmed that all appropriate notification and posting requirements had been met and that City
Council had jurisdiction to hear the case.
Overview of Special Use Permits
Director Mikulak explained that a special use permit is a discretionary land use that may
or may not be permitted depending on operations, characteristics, and location, governed by Section 26-114 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws. Special uses may
include conditions of approval to mitigate potential impacts and require that the use be properly designed, developed, operated, and maintained. The code provides nine criteria
for review focused on appropriate design, operation, and compatibility.
Site and Case History
The property at 5900 West 44th Avenue and Harlan Street had operated as a car wash
since 1997, initially as a self-serve facility with one automatic bay added in 2015.
Autowash held a pre-application meeting in 2022 and submitted a formal application in
February 2023 to demolish the existing facility and construct four enclosed automatic
bays with relocated vacuum stations. The application included a site plan, narrative, and
responses to the Special Use Permit criteria, stating that the proposal would not have a
detrimental effect on the surrounding area.
Director Mikulak reported that the application and review process did not focus heavily
on operational noise, as the enclosed bays and relocated vacuums were expected to
reduce impacts compared to the prior configuration. Based on the submitted materials,
she administratively approved the Special Use Permit in January 2024. The conditions
of approval required consistency with the application materials, the issuance of a
building permit, and non-transferability of the permit; no specific operational noise
conditions were included.
Post-Opening Compliance History
Autowash opened in February 2025. Neighbor concerns emerged within weeks,
focusing on dryer noise, bay doors being left open, 24-hour operations, and general
neighborhood impacts. Code enforcement, police, and planning staff became involved.
Staff initially sought to open a dialogue and identify voluntary measures to address the
concerns.
Page 5 of 51
Over the following year, Autowash voluntarily adjusted its hours and modified its
vacuum equipment, but impacts continued. Director Mikulak issued a Notice of Special
Use Violation in June 2025. In response, Autowash proposed a voluntary 90-day closure,
during which it engaged a sound consultant, closed one of the four bays, adopted
modified hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m., and constructed a six-foot fence with a faux-stone
treatment. A follow-up sound study was completed, and Autowash reopened three bays
in November 2025.
Director Mikulak stated that operational variability and continued neighborhood impacts
persisted, leading to the current proceeding. She noted that professional mediation had
been offered to both Autowash and neighborhood representatives but was not accepted
by either party.
Staff Finding and Recommendation
Director Mikulak stated that, based on staff observations, noise readings, neighborhood
statements, and the history of compliance efforts, she had determined that the car wash operations have resulted in adverse impacts and have materially altered in scope,
application, and design from the original SUP application. She noted that the code does
not authorize her as director to modify the SUP conditions; that authority rests with City
Council.
Mikulak presented three options for Council consideration: (1) modify the SUP with additional conditions, (2) leave the SUP as is, or (3) revoke the SUP. She recommended
Option 1—modification of the SUP with six proposed conditions:
• (a) Bay doors shall remain fully closed on the north and south sides during all
wash and dry cycles.
• (b) Hours of operation limited to 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
• (c) On-site signage requesting customers limit noise.
• (d) Trash receptacles sized and maintained appropriately at vacuum stations.
• (e) Compliance with all applicable noise standards.
• (f) Sound measurements to be conducted and submitted upon request by the city
if Autowash makes operational changes, such as equipment changes or
returning the fourth bay to service.
Director Mikulak stated that 83 comments were received through Wheat Ridge Speaks,
and one letter was received outside that platform; all were incorporated into the public
record and provided to both Council and Autowash.
Autowash Presentation
Dennis Dreeszen, Co-Founder, Autowash, stated that the company was founded
approximately 14 years prior and had grown to 26 locations in the Denver area. He
Page 6 of 51
described the previous car wash on the site as having deteriorated and stated that
Autowash’s intent in redeveloping the property was to improve the corner. He noted that
the prior facility included an automatic bay with open doors and that Autowash
relocated the vacuum stations farther from adjacent residential properties as an
intentional improvement. He stated that the company completed the full city review
process, received no noise-related comments during the two years of permitting, and
constructed the facility as proposed and approved. He also stated that ambient traffic
noise from 44th Avenue often exceeded noise from the car wash and expressed
concern about what types of businesses could viably operate in the corridor if existing
traffic noise was comparable to or greater than operational noise from the facility.
Troy Kirschman, Architect, Hubber Architecture, stated that he had worked on
hundreds of car washes over approximately 25 years in Colorado and more than 40
other states. He confirmed that his firm submitted the application, held a neighborhood
meeting as required, and received no feedback related to noise during the process. He
explained that architectural elevation drawings customarily depict overhead doors in the
down position to show design elements such as finishes, materials, and colors, and that
such depictions are not representations of operational commitments but standard
industry and architectural practice. He stated that he found no provision in the Wheat
Ridge code prohibiting overhead doors from remaining open during car wash
operations. He further stated that he found no documented discussion of noise—
whether in review comments, emails, or meeting notes—throughout the design and
permitting process. He noted that when noise or operational issues are raised during
design, they are documented in writing and addressed, and that no such issues were
raised in this case.
He added that car wash equipment varies significantly by operator and location, and
that noise levels at one facility are not directly comparable to those at another. He
stated that, as a matter of professional reputation, his firm would not knowingly submit
deceptive drawings and that depicting the doors in the down position was not intended
as a misrepresentation of how the facility would operate.
Evan Singleton, Attorney, Spencer Fane, LLP (Outside Land Use Counsel for Autowash)
addressed the legal posture of the proceeding. He stated that while the initial approval
of a special use is discretionary, once a permit is issued it is governed by its written conditions and stipulations—not by ongoing discretionary review. He argued that City
Council's authority under Section 26-114(f) is limited to evaluating compliance with the
approved written conditions, and that the SUP approval—containing five conditions—is
the relevant standard. He stated that Autowash built exactly what was approved and
that there is no written condition in the permit specifically addressing door operation or a site-specific noise standard, which the city had the opportunity to impose during the
original review.
Page 7 of 51
He described the difficulty of operating under a shifting noise standard. When
Autowash was initially cited, the City of Wheat Ridge noise ordinance was applied—
setting limits of 65 dBA during daytime hours. In early discussions with the planning department, staff indicated the standard was "inherently subjective" due to the special
use context. When Autowash retained a sound engineer to model mitigation, the state
statute standard was used in consultation with city staff. Follow-up measurements
following installation of the sound fence showed levels in the 47–53 dBA range, which
Autowash understood to be compliant. City code enforcement staff indicated in December 2025 that they had no concerns with the results. However, when the city's
subsequent sound study was received, the commercial standard had shifted from the
city ordinance's 65 dBA daytime to the state statute's 60 dBA daytime, which Singleton
characterized as another movement of the goalposts.
He stated that the next essential step—before permit action—was for the city to clearly define the applicable standard, which would benefit all parties and provide a path to a
workable resolution. He stated that the city's final sound study was only provided to Autowash after an open records request, which he found troubling.
Dennis Dreeszen described the financial impact of the voluntary closure—approximately
$40,000 per month for four months—and the cost of the sound fence, approximately
$70,000, built to the density specifications recommended by the sound engineer. He
stated both the Wave Engineering follow-up study and the city's EDI study showed measurable sound reduction on the other side of the fence. He described additional
voluntary measures, including sound-dampening foam installed on the interior of bay
doors, reduction of dryer motor speed by 25% through variable frequency drives (VFDs),
and dampening added to the vacuum equipment. He stated that removing one bay
reduced the site's revenue capacity by 25%, placing the location in an ongoing loss position. He noted that Autowash's other 26 locations—including locations directly
across from residential housing—do not receive noise complaints, and that none of
them include the sound mitigation measures installed at the Wheat Ridge location.
Attorney Singleton presented a data table from Wave Engineering's post-fence sound
study, showing levels in the 47–53 dBA range under typical operating conditions, and noted that city sound study measurements were taken at the property line and north of
44th Avenue, not at the residential properties to the south where many complainants
reside.
John Peckler, Attorney, Spencer Fane LLP, summarized Autowash's legal position. He
framed the core issue as fairness, stating that the process for reaching a solution must follow the city's own code, provide due process to the holder of a protected property
interest, and be based on the written conditions of the issued permit. He stated this is
an enforcement hearing for an approved SUP, not a fresh discretionary review, and that the five written conditions—none of which explicitly address door operation or site-
specific noise limits—are the applicable standard.
Page 8 of 51
He argued that the architectural drawings depicting closed doors were prepared to
show design elements, not to constitute an operational commitment, and that
converting an assumption drawn from drawings intended for a different purpose into an enforceable condition is unfair. He stated Autowash had no notice that operating with
bay doors open would be considered non-compliant until the Notice of Violation was
issued in July 2025—after the SUP was issued, the site plan and building permit
approved, and a certificate of occupancy obtained.
On the proposed conditions, Peckler offered Autowash's perspective on each:
Condition (a) – Bay doors closed: Autowash opposed this condition as written, stating
that operating with all doors closed in warm weather creates excessive humidity that damages equipment and is not sustainable long-term. He noted Autowash voluntarily
closes the south-side bay doors during wash cycles and would continue to do so. He
stated that industry practice is to keep doors open in warmer temperatures to protect
equipment, and that closing them in winter is to prevent freezing.
Condition (b) – Hours 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.: Autowash opposed the 8 p.m. cutoff, noting it
does not align with the city noise ordinance or state statute (both of which use 7 p.m. or
10 p.m. thresholds). Autowash recommended continuing its current voluntary hours of
7 a.m. to 10 p.m.
Condition (c) – On-site signage: Autowash requested discretion to determine
appropriate messaging, noting from experience that prohibitive signage can be counterproductive. Autowash stated there has not been a documented issue with
customer behavior generating noise.
Condition (d) – Trash receptacles: Autowash stated it was unaware of trash concerns
prior to this proceeding and takes pride in site cleanliness. It requested a contact-based
remedy rather than a codified condition.
Condition (e) – Noise compliance: Autowash stated compliance with city code and
state law is always required and need not be a separate SUP condition.
Condition (f) – Sound monitoring: Autowash opposed the condition as written due to its open-ended nature, the cost and logistical difficulty of sound studies, and concern that
the requirement could be used to compel frequent studies without clear methodology or standard. He also noted that police expressed reluctance to rely on third-party sound
data for prosecution purposes.
Attorney Peckler recommended that if Council wished to take any action, it should defer
imposing conditions until a clear noise standard is established, additional mitigation
options are evaluated, and all parties have had the opportunity to review the city's sound study and discuss it collaboratively. He stated that imposing conditions at this hearing
would lock them in permanently and foreclose the collaborative process that had been
Page 9 of 51
underway. Autowash's preferred outcome was for the Council to take no action and
allow the ongoing compliance process to continue.
Public Testimony
Cat Tarnoff (via Zoom) stated she had previously worked at the veterinary clinic at 4355
Gray Street. She expressed concern that the special use permit was granted with a
condition requiring no detrimental effect and argued that the ongoing noise from the car
wash constitutes a detrimental effect that places the facility out of compliance. She
stated that the neighbors and nearby businesses could not have been expected to anticipate and object to noise during the approval process when they were told there
would be no issue. She expressed the view that, given Autowash's experience operating 26 locations, it likely knew noise would be a concern. She noted that the attorney's
argument—that without a specific written condition there is no violation—appeared to
represent a loophole and emphasized that the neighboring veterinary clinic and
residential neighbors are losing quality of life and property value. She acknowledged
improvements but said they had not resolved the problem.
In Person:
Lisa Hamilton Fieldman (Wheat Ridge resident, also appearing as a consultant to a
group of concerned residents) stated that she had provided the group with legal
guidance but was not entering a formal appearance on their behalf. She noted that her
cat had developed a seizure disorder triggered by loud noises and that she no longer
brought him to the neighboring veterinary clinic due to concerns about potential noise
exposure.
Regarding the legal framework, she cited the Colorado Noise Abatement Act, including
CRS 25-12-103, which establishes statewide noise limits and defines noise exceeding
those limits as a public nuisance. She noted that the statute sets limits of 55 dBA for
residential properties during daytime hours and 50 dBA at night, and 60 dBA for
commercial properties during daytime hours and 55 dBA at night. She highlighted
subsection (3), which treats periodic, impulsive, or shrill noises as a public nuisance
when they are 5 dBA below the standard limits and argued that car wash noise could fall
within that category.
She also referenced CRS 25-12-108, which prohibits municipalities from adopting noise
standards less restrictive than state law, and cited the Colorado Supreme Court’s 2025
decision in Hobbs v. City of Salida, which she stated clarified that a municipality cannot
exempt a facility from state noise standards through a special use permit.
Leslie Baca (Denver resident, client of the neighboring veterinary practice for 26 years)
stated she brings animals to the clinic regularly and that the car wash noise disrupts veterinary examinations and distresses her animals, resulting in failed specimen
Page 10 of 51
collection and additional costs. She stated she could not recall seeing the conditions
described at the prior car wash site. She urged the Council to require mitigation and, if it
cannot be achieved, to revoke the permit.
Scott Galloway (Wheat Ridge resident) stated that he can hear the car wash dryers from
his property and that the prior car wash never produced such noise. He quoted from the July 16, 2024 city memorandum, noting that the SUP was approved in part because the
special use would not create or contribute to blight by virtue of physical or operational
characteristics. He stated the current noise represents the first negative impact on the neighborhood in his 33 years of residence. He did not ask for closure but supported
closing the doors, limiting hours to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. or 8 p.m., and affirmed the neighborhood's right to protect its quality of life.
Brett Lilly (Wheat Ridge resident) stated that sound study data notwithstanding, the
noise is disruptive in practice, producing peaks and variations that create a different
quality of nuisance than constant background noise. He argued that there are many car
washes in the area but only one neighboring veterinary practice and one neighborhood. He questioned the proportion of pro-car wash comments submitted online that came
from actual Wheat Ridge residents. He argued that the nine findings of fact in the SUP—
not just the five written conditions—are relevant to the compliance question and that the
car wash has violated the spirit of those findings. He stated that no business has a
vested right to be a nuisance to the surrounding community and recommended revocation, or failing that, specific and enforceable conditions with a clear compliance
timeline.
Cassandra Cooper stated she is a client of the neighboring veterinary practice. She spoke in support of requiring significantly increased and independently verifiable sound
mitigation measures as a condition for continued operation. She stated the noise is
disruptive for people and animals in the veterinary office and that the city has an
obligation to uphold the standards tied to special use permits. She supported enhanced
mitigation with ongoing monitoring and demonstrated compliance over a sustained
period. She stated that if the issues persist, the permit should be suspended or revoked.
Dr. Jan Facinelli (veterinarian, 4355 Gray Street) addressed Autowash's owners directly, expressing regret that the situation had reached this point and suggesting that an early
in-person visit might have led to a different outcome. She spoke to two of the nine SUP
approval criteria: (1) that the use will not have a detrimental effect on the general health, welfare, safety, or convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood; and
(2) that the use will not create or contribute to blight. She stated the car wash has had a detrimental effect on her health, welfare, quality of life, and business operations. She
described the noise as shrill, continuous, periodic, sudden, and impulsive, and
acknowledged that conditions have improved, particularly in winter when the doors were down. She stated the noise still enters her facility through windows during
examinations. She requested a more substantial sound fence constructed of proper acoustic materials, and noted that if doors cannot be kept down, acoustic solutions
Page 11 of 51
exist and specialists are available. She stated her intent was not to close the business
but to find a workable solution and suggested the Council might benefit from continuing
the matter to allow additional time and site visits. She noted that the neighborhood was there first and that the prior car wash did not disturb the peace.
Mike Josten (Wheat Ridge resident) stated the prior car wash never caused noise issues. He acknowledged that Autowash has made improvements and that conditions
have gotten better, but stated the problem is not fully resolved. He noted that sound
reflects off the bank building across the street and the pawnshop next door and returns to the neighborhood. He expressed hope for a solution acceptable to both parties.
Sandra Sands (Wheat Ridge resident) stated the car wash noise prevents her from enjoying her front porch in the evenings. She spoke to the traffic and safety concerns at
the intersection of 44th Avenue and Gray Street, stating that the curb extension
constructed with the car wash project has narrowed the turning radius and created
unsafe conditions for motorists. She noted that Randall Park is directly adjacent and
expressed concern about increased traffic speeds and stop sign violations in proximity to the park. She stated the neighborhood does not want to close the business but
wishes to be able to sit on their porches without disruption.
Greg Primavera (Wheat Ridge resident) stated that with three operating bays instead of one, the noise is significantly worse than under the prior car wash. He noted that during
the neighborhood meeting he was told traffic would go north and not through Gray
Street, but that the do-not-enter signs shown on the approved plans have since been
removed. He asked that the Council address both the noise and traffic issues and
expressed frustration that neighbors were told there would be no problem and are now bearing the consequences.
Gretchen Josten (Wheat Ridge resident) submitted documents to the record from the owner of Gleam Car Wash regarding that facility's noise mitigation experience, including
a good neighbor agreement and the approach of engaging an acoustical expert prior to
construction. She also submitted materials from an acoustical consultant retained at no charge by Gleam's owner, which identified multiple potential mitigation options
estimated at under $40,000, including: filling gaps in the existing fence, applying acoustic felt woven through the fence structure, mounting acoustic block on walls and
ceilings and doors, reducing door opening size, applying sound paint or stucco to the
adjacent pawnshop wall facing the facility, installing blower inlet silencers on the dryers, and installing sound baffles similar to those used in pools and large gymnasiums. She
presented photographs of sound walls at other facilities—Gleam Car Wash, Colorado Autowash on Sheridan Boulevard, and Whistle Car Wash—as examples of proper sound
enclosures. She stated neighbors should not be responsible for identifying mitigation
solutions, as this is Autowash's 26th location.
Chris Nietzold (Wheat Ridge resident) addressed several of Autowash's legal
arguments. He argued that the SUP's first condition—requiring operations to be
Page 12 of 51
consistent with the representations in the application materials—encompasses the nine
findings of fact, not merely the five written conditions, and that the car wash has failed
the broader criteria. He stated that vested rights under Wheat Ridge Code Section 26-121 require lawful conduct and justifiable reliance, and that a business that opens in
violation of noise standards cannot claim constitutional protection by remaining open.
He argued that the architectural drawings depicting closed doors were shown to the
neighborhood and that neighbors relied on them in good faith—a form of detrimental
reliance that Condition 1 exists to protect. He cited the Colorado Supreme Court's decision in Hobbs v. City of Salida as establishing that CRS 25-12-103 sets binding
statewide noise limits that no local process can waive or permit around. He noted
police-recorded readings of 85.4 dBA at the facility. He closed by stating that
Autowash's owners chose to live in a residential neighborhood insulated from industrial
noise, and that the Council should modify the SUP with enforceable conditions and hold Autowash accountable.
Wheat Ridge Speaks:
Eighty-three public comments were submitted through the Wheat Ridge Speaks
platform regarding Item 1 – Review of the Lakeside Autowash Special Use Permit. The names of commenters, along with their submission times, and the full text of their
remarks, are included in the official record of this meeting.
Nikki S
May 18, 2026 ∙ 11:27am As an employee of Autowash for the past six years, I’ve only ever known this company
to be deeply community-focused. Our motto, “because you love your car,” reflects the pride we take in serving all kinds of customers and communities across Colorado. Since
the beginning of construction at the Lakeside location, Autowash has worked closely
with the City of Wheat Ridge to ensure all permits, operational requirements, and city expectations were met. As concerns from nearby residents and businesses were raised,
the company also invested significant time, money, and effort into additional mitigation measures because being a good neighbor matters to us. I absolutely understand and
respect the importance of peace and quiet for nearby residents and businesses. At the
same time, I also see firsthand how much this location means to the thousands of members and customers who rely on it, as well as the employees whose livelihoods
depend on it. What stands out to me is that Autowash has continued trying to find solutions rather than ignoring concerns. Hours were adjusted, operational changes were
made, and additional sound mitigation efforts were implemented even beyond what
was originally required. That willingness to listen and adapt should matter. If the goal is truly to find a workable solution rather than shut the location down entirely, I hope the
efforts already made by a local Colorado company are recognized as part of that conversation. I believe there is still a path forward that supports both the surrounding
neighborhood and a business that has worked hard to serve the community responsibly.
Maryann Kirkhoff
Page 13 of 51
May 18, 2026 ∙ 11:06am
Hi there, My name is Annie and I just moved into Gray St, and live two houses down. I do
hear insanely loud noises, almost like a jet engine. I had no idea what it was until a neighbor told me it was the car wash. I do own a Reiki business that I operate part time
from my home, and it requires a calm and quiet environment, and the noises will be
business disrupting.
Mike Josten May 18, 2026 ∙ 10:46am
My name is Mike Josten and my wife and I have lived at our home on Gray Street for 11
years. We bought the home knowing there was a self serve car wash across the street.
We never had any issues with that business and there are no noise complaints on
record for that business that Autowash has lied about being a space for homelessness, drug use and police activity. Those lies are the actions of a company not acting out of
integrity and instead relying on emotional responses from their customers who read
their lies on their website and react assuming they are telling the truth. We trusted that
they were telling the truth as well during the neighborhood zoom meeting where
Autowash owners said there would not be any noise impacts upon our neighborhood or additional traffic concerns. Autowash operates only two of their 25 locations with four
automatic wash bays with dryers. One location sits on an 86,000 sq ft lot near TopGolf
and one sits on a 19,000 sq ft lot 100 feet from a residential neighborhood. I invite you
to guess which location has incurred endless complaints about noise and traffic
concerns. Their own sound study found the dryers to hit 94 db from the north point exit doors along the Gray Street sidewalk. These are the doors the city is requesting to be
closed during operation. Yet their follow up study conveniently failed to get readings
from that point again to truly see how the installation of a decorative fence along just
one of four property lines helped. One Autowash owner admitted in front of a city
council member, city staff and two Gray Street neighbors that blower motors originally
installed from the car wash manufacturer weren’t to the OEM specifications. They knew
this to be true, yet they continued to tell their customers and the city that they were operating in compliance and that a small, vocal group of locals were just trying to shut
them down. According to the July 14, 2022 pre-application meeting summary
document, the city of Wheat Ridge planning staff met with the Autowash owner and the
Hover Architecture team and in their notes it reads “The applicant should maintain or
replace any existing fences on property lines to the west and south to provide a buffer and screening from the carwash for adjacent properties.” This never happened, and
instead was used as a tool after complaints came rolling in to look like they were doing
the right thing and investing in mitigation methods after the fact. The site plan also
requires two do not enter signs on the Gray Street exit for patrons, however on October
31st we witnessed the Autowash owner removing the do not enter signs just prior to reopening without notifying the city. Autowash is not just a little mom and pop shop
trying to figure out how to run one car wash. They know this industry and had they held
the intention of upholding their nine Special Use Permit criteria from the start in 2024
upon approval, they would have operated differently and with the intention of doing right
Page 14 of 51
by their word to the city of Wheat Ridge and their neighbors. Right now it seems easier
to play the victim, lie to the public to evoke emotional reactions and ignore the truth,
which is that their actions are having a detrimental effect upon the general health, welfare, safety and convenience of persons residing or working in the neighborhood.
The opportunity to operate a business aligned with the SUP was always been in
Autowash's hands, instead they chose to deny those agreements and act as though this
location was just like their other by TopGolf and thusly would be fine to operate 24/7,
with the doors wide open. There are at least five Autowash customer reviews on the Lakeside google page reflecting negative safety issues that they've experienced at this
property. So they have not improved the property that previously had no noise
complaints or safety issues, but have instead made the property less efficient, more
disruptive and a true safety concern. We simply want a resolution to the noise concern.
That too is in their hands.
Attachment
Stephen Van Es
May 18, 2026 ∙ 10:43am
I am writing in support of Lakeside Autowash and the continued operation of the car
wash at 5900 W. 44th Avenue. Autowash has made a substantial investment to replace a dilapidated car wash with a cleaner, more efficient, and more environmentally
responsible facility. This investment also included sound mitigation and operational
improvements intended to address neighborhood concerns in good faith. I recognize
that nearby residents’ concerns should be taken seriously. At the same time, the
reported noise levels should be evaluated in proper context. The sound readings, particularly if they are short-duration exterior readings, appear comparable to common
urban traffic conditions, including busy arterial roads, heavy trucks, and motorcycles.
These measurements should be reviewed objectively and in context before being
characterized as evidence of harm to residents, pets, or the neighborhood. Autowash
also provides a public benefit. Professional car washes are designed to capture and manage wash water, helping prevent soap, oil, brake dust, road grime, and other
pollutants from entering the stormwater drainage system. Without access to a modern
local car wash, more residents may wash vehicles in driveways or on streets, where
runoff is much harder to control. The appropriate path forward is continued cooperation
among the City, Autowash, and nearby residents. Autowash has already demonstrated a willingness to mitigate its impact and operate responsibly, and I believe a fair resolution
can be reached through continued dialogue and objective evaluation. For these reasons,
I respectfully support Lakeside Autowash and encourage the City to work with
Autowash and its neighbors toward a fair and balanced resolution.
Mike Trujillo
May 18, 2026 ∙ 10:20am
I have lived in Wheatridge for the last 42 years My home is located the area northwest
on 45th and Ingalls St. just west of the Lakeside Walmart, It is in close proximity to the
Lakeside autowash. When the loud disturbing noises started in 2025 I had no idea
Page 15 of 51
where it was coming from I later discovered it was the new autowash that had opened. I
was then told by the Gray St. residents the Autowash had closed the south doors to help
with the noise problem to the south. I believe that created a new problem to the northwest in my area, immensely amplifying the sound waves towards my
neighborhood. I noticed one time they closed the north doors and the sound was almost
non existent in my area. I did not know what to do about the noise and spoke with
Autowash. They asked me which location it was making the loud noise, and the location
of where I lived, I told the representative how I could still hear the disturbing noise in my house on a regular basis, even when the windows and doors are closed They said it will
be monitored and if it continues to let them know. After speaking again with Autowash
They said they are within noise compliance according to the codes and told me to
contact the city regarding the noise problem. I had a friend come over to visit who use
to reside nearby in Wheatridge and he asked me what that noise was, almost as soon as he got out of his car in the driveway and was surprised it was the carwash. This has
always been a very quiet area until now. When its hot outside, We cant enjoy the breeze
when we open our windows to come through to cool our home because the noise is
much louder then. We have enjoyed our peace and enjoyment of our home for the last
28 years we have lived here. Now we were unable to. This has become a very stressful situation for my wife and myself. I am retired now, and my wife is on the verge of
retirement, this type of regular noise nuisance is unacceptable that will be here to stay
on a daily basis. We have lived in Wheatridge since 1984 and lived nearby other
carwashes and businesses and never had a complaint. I describe the sound as being
near an airport with loud turbines and fluctuating sounds that change like machinery, and towards the end when the turbine dryers turn off it sounds a like an air raid siren
shutting down its very alarming and startling because its so random, The noise is
unpredictable, startling and the siren noise makes is a reminder of the time I spent
during my military service in Germany. It is totally obnoxious and terribly disturbing to
hear it. Also especially in our bedroom when we are trying to go to sleep usually around
9pm Is it really necessary to be that loud to dry a car ? This carwash is a whole different
animal considering the circumstances of being near peaceful residential areas it is now in and will be there long term, I also read in the comments section of the barths app.
someone asking if anyone knows what that random unknown sounds of helicopters
landing are coming from. Other carwashes in the area, have enclosures built at the bay
where their dryers operate, and it dampens the noise very well. They are also
surrounded by residential homes and are being a good neighbor. They have a high respect for their neighbors' well-being for doing that. I am also really concerned about
the possible residential property devaluations that have this type of noise problem
nearby.
Bettina Kimball-Cholewinski May 18, 2026 ∙ 10:06am
Hello, I have worked for Dr Facinelli for 11 years, at Holistic Care For Animals. 4355 Gray
St Wheat Ridge CO 80212. The new car wash with the blow dryers are so loud even with
the windows closed is very disruptive. Thank you Bettina Kimball-Cholewinski
Page 16 of 51
Paula Cox
May 18, 2026 ∙ 9:10am Good morning! I would love to leave feedback concerning the noise level of the car
wash right next to my sister's vet clinic. JAN, has been treating animals in that location
for 29 years and has wonderful clientele!!! The noise level from the carwash has been so
detrimental to Jan and her neighbors that they feel their peace and quiet will never
return! I have watched my sweet, quiet-natured sister struggle with this fixable situation for months now. She's not asking that the carwash shut down and cause the owners to
lose money......she just wants the unbearable noise level to be remedied. She and her
neighbors deserve that much! Granted, the car wash will have to invest money to reduce
the noise but that seems fair since the car wash is causing the distress. Can a noise-
blocking wall like they use on the freeways bordering housing developments be installed ? That sounds like a win win situation. I am assuming the carwash owners can
afford it!? Please, please help this neighborhood regain its peaceful quality again!!
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Samantha Metzger May 18, 2026 ∙ 5:20am
My name is Sam Metzger, and Jan Facinelli’s clinic has been a part of my life from the
start. My mother was employed at Holistic Care For Animals from the time I was three
months old, and she would take me to work with her. The clinic was quiet, peaceful, and
homey. I could nap, and my mom could continue working to provide for us without worrying about the additional cost of childcare. Some of my earliest memories are
being out in the garden behind the clinic, where I used to play and where my mother and
I would pick vegetables to help us get by when money was tight. It was my home away
from home, and it still means a great deal to me. I was privileged enough to grow up
witnessing Dr. Facinelli’s compassion and expertise, and there’s no shortage of
testimonies for all of the animals (and their humans) she has helped during her career.
Jan has been a pillar of the Wheat Ridge community for nearly 30 years, and that’s why it’s so upsetting to see all that she’s built being affected by the excessive noise level
coming from AutoWash. While I can respect that AutoWash is a family-owned business,
I do not believe that excuses the negative impact it is having on surrounding businesses
and residents, nor do I believe that ensuring proper sound mitigation being put into
place is an unreasonable expectation. Animals deserve a calm environment for veterinary care, and Wheat Ridge locals deserve to be able to open their windows or
enjoy time in their yards without the constant barrage of mechanical noise. There is a
surplus of car washes all across the Denver metro, but Jan’s clinic and the work she
does are truly one-of-a-kind. I hope Wheat Ridge acts to protect businesses like hers by
revoking AutoWash’s Special Use Permit until proper measures are taken to lower the disruptive noise levels that have become detrimental over the past year.
Cat Tarnoff
May 17, 2026 ∙ 7:50pm
Page 17 of 51
I began working with Jan Facinelli in 1997. At the time, she had a home practice and
invited me to join her, along with my three-month-old daughter. Later that year, she
bought the clinic at 4355 Gray St. It was a peaceful, welcoming place to work. We gardened in the backyard, and it was a wonderful place for my daughter to spend her
first four years. The love and care remain the same, but the atmosphere has changed
dramatically. The original self-serve carwash was not a problem and coexisted
peacefully with the neighborhood. The new automated operation has changed that. The
increase in noise is dramatic. It is no longer a calm environment for my animals when I bring them in for care. The noise is excessive, disruptive, and intrusive. Even with the
windows closed, the sound from the carwash can be overwhelming. In the past, my cats
would sit comfortably by the open exam-room window and remain calm throughout
their visits. Jan works with people and their animals during deeply traumatic moments,
including terminal diagnoses and euthanasia. The industrial noise from next door is not appropriate for the calm, supportive environment these situations require, just as a rock
concert or racetrack would be inappropriate beside a hospital. I have seen how these
changes have affected Jan. Her office is closest to the carwash, and the constant noise
is agitating and makes it hard to concentrate. It is painful to see the damage to the
tranquil environment she worked so hard to create. When she works up cases for my animals, I usually receive results after the weekend. With the relentless noise and
distraction from the carwash, I can only imagine how difficult it is to focus. I cannot
overstate the difference between the carwash as it once operated and as it operates
now. I urge the City of Wheat Ridge to address this noise issue. There is a reasonable
middle ground between forcing nearby residents and businesses to endure the current noise levels and requiring the carwash to close or return to self-service. Aerodry, a
Colorado-based company, is one example of a provider offering modern, high-efficiency
systems designed to reduce noise. The responsible solution is to limit noise from the
automated carwash so it can be a more welcome, sustainable and profitable part of the
community.
Kay Cee May 17, 2026 ∙ 1:33pm
I use Autowash and have been a customer for many years, most recently this location
on Lakeside. The way I see things is the city either did not do their due diligence and/or
the neighbors just decided to ignore the posting from the city when they were getting
permits to build. Now that it is built and probably cost millions, the city and neighbors want to shut them down??? This is a failure on the part of the city as far as I can see. I
hope Autowash can stay in business and if not, the city should be sued by Autowash!
Jennifer H
May 17, 2026 ∙ 11:40am
I live in NW Denver and had been waiting for the Autowash Lakeside to open for quite a while. I have a membership and drive from Denver to Wheat Ridge once or twice a week
to get a wash. As such, I have also patronized a lot of businesses along this corridor,
adding to the local economy. It’s my understanding that Autowash followed all of the
legal avenues to get the car wash approved and have been cooperative in reducing
Page 18 of 51
impact on the local residents. If they followed the process and got all the required
approvals, they should stay in place and continue to operate at the capacity it was
approved for. They certainly improved a section of 44th Ave that needed it and will attract more investments and improvements. I am empathic to surrounding residents
and businesses, but when you live and/or operate a small business within a half block
of a major commercial district, you can’t expect noise levels to never increase, or for no
development to occur. I have personally lived directly next to years of various
construction projects and that’s just part of living in an urban and commercial environment. Sometimes change is hard, but it appears that Autowash has been a good
steward of this parcel, and were given full permission by the city of Wheat Ridge. I hope
I can continue to travel from Denver to Wheat Ridge to utilize Autowash and all the other
small businesses like Grammy’s, Molly’s and ModMood. Without Autowash, I wouldn’t
be over there.
Gretchen Carrolla
May 17, 2026 ∙ 9:26am
Autowash (Lakeside) is not just a business; it is a vital part of our community. It
provides a convenient service that enhances the quality of life for residents and visitors The car wash has also demonstrated a sustainable business model, successfully
adapting to the needs of the community. This includes environmentally-friendly
practices and competitive pricing that benefits all customers. I believe in the
importance of supporting local businesses that contribute to our community’s vibrancy
and economy. Therefore, I respectfully request that you reconsider the decision to close Autowash Lakeside.
EVA LISA
May 17, 2026 ∙ 9:05am
Hello, My name is Eva Lisa. I live on Gray Street and can hear the dryers from my home
several houses down the street. The noise is distressing and causes unneeded urban
noise pollution. It's just awful to hear this at all hours of the day and night. We are requesting the front and back doors of the bays to be closed during residential hours.
Residential hours we propose are 9 to 6 pm like many of the other car washes in the
area. It is also quite sad that Dr. J Facinelli's practice is suffering as the high noise
decibel distresses the poor animals needing her care. Furthermore it is a shame to see
so many good people on this street pour so much time and energy into reasonable requests that could have been avoided right from the beginning. These are good people
with jobs and families who have spent hours upon hours working on a peaceful
resolution. I'm sure they would have liked to spend their time and energy else where. We
are just asking Wheat Ridge to do the right thing and support its' residents. Sincerely,
Eva Lisa 4301 Gray Street, Wheat Ridge
Rachel Rhodes
May 17, 2026 ∙ 8:55am
Page 19 of 51
The law is the law. The business has followed every requirement, including additional
requirements after the fact. The city approved the project, and should not be permitted
or required to walk back their decision after a business has been constructed, opened, and been in operation for some time. Additionally, the city has an obligation to approve
businesses that are helpful and wanted by the members of its community. The need
and desire for car washes has increased massively. Many people prefer to go to a car
wash that is well maintained and well lit for safety. Other nearby car washes are older,
not well maintained, or do not provide a membership subscription for convenience. I understand that nearby neighbors may not be pleased with the sounds of a successful
and bustling city. I’m sure that 25 to 30 years ago the Neighborhood was more quiet
than it is now. And even in times more recent. But this entire metro area has been an
evolution of massive growth. Roads and streets that used to be more calm are
invariably getting more busy. 44th Ave is a major thoroughfare. The sounds of city living are sure to impact residents and businesses that are closest to 44th Ave. I see residing
and operating this close to a main thoroughfare as a choice. If your home or your
business requires quietude in order to live or operate happily and successfully, then your
home or business should perhaps not be located on, or near, a main thoroughfare.
Sometimes we need to move away from that which no longer serves us.
Mason W
May 17, 2026 ∙ 8:54am
As a customer of this location, I wanted to share that my experience has been
overwhelmingly positive. The staff has always been professional, the property is clean and well-maintained, and it’s clear they’ve invested heavily into the site and surrounding
area. I understand nearby residents have concerns, and I think reasonable compromises
around operating hours or additional sound mitigation make sense if needed. But I also
think it’s important to recognize that this business went through the city approval
process, has tried to respond to concerns, and provides a service many local residents
use and appreciate. I’d encourage the city to work toward a balanced solution that
addresses neighborhood concerns without unfairly penalizing a business that has made a significant investment in the community.
Maureen Coghlan
May 17, 2026 ∙ 6:30am
Autowash is a great addition to the neighborhood and provides a needed diversification of carwash service in the area. The only other carwash options are self service and a
significantly more expensive, manned carwash. Autowash is convenient, reasonably
priced and keeps up their property. It is in an existing, commercial area, surrounded by
other businesses. I do not consider the sound coming from this business to be any
more disruptive than it's neighboring businesses. In fact, it is significantly less concerning than the parking lot across the street regularly filled with trash and people
clearly living in their automobiles. And, the Dollar Store a block away who regularly has a
police presence due to disturbances in the parking lot.
Page 20 of 51
RANDALL KASPER
May 16, 2026 ∙ 7:27pm
For the record I'm a monthly paying member & weekly patron of 3 of your other locations, none of which are even remotely as close to my house as this new one.
Would be nice to make a 5 minute trip to get my car washed instead of driving across
town & waiting in insufferably long lines at the other locations that ALWAYS have non-
functioning bays...but sorry Autowash, I'm going to have to side with the neighbors on
this one. I can confirm that every location of your washes is indeed very loud but none of them butt right up to houses that have existed long before your cash cow. You
should've known this site would've been an intrusion on their peace so this is on you for
neglecting that. Even if you manage to lobby your way into keeping this one open, I
won't be visiting it out of basic respect for my fellow humans. I suggest cutting your
losses & finding a more considerate location to feed your greed. You can afford it & the people will most likely show up anyway. Be better.
Jacob D DeVoe
May 16, 2026 ∙ 6:27pm
I am writing to express my support for the updated Autowash facility and to provide some perspective as a nearby resident. While I understand that any business can create
occasional inconveniences, I believe the concerns being raised do not reflect the overall
reality of the situation. I grew up with my backyard directly behind a car wash—an older,
louder, and far busier one than the modern systems being installed today. Even living
right up against it, the noise and activity were manageable. It simply became part of the normal background of the neighborhood. If an entire townhouse community with fifty or
more residents can comfortably live next to a car wash that is significantly louder than
this new, updated model, it shows that the impact is far less disruptive than some may
fear. It’s also important to recognize that this property was already a car wash. The new
owners are improving it, modernizing it, and replacing an outdated, run-down wash with
a cleaner, more efficient, and more environmentally responsible operation. This is not a
new intrusion—it is an upgrade to something that has existed here for years. Beyond that, the business provides clear benefits to the community. It creates local jobs,
increases foot traffic for nearby businesses, and improves the appearance and utility of
a property that had previously been neglected. A well-run car wash is a community
asset, not a detriment. While I respect that one neighbor with a home-based business
may find the activity inconvenient, it is not reasonable for a single individual to expect a long-standing commercial property to halt improvements or operations that benefit the
broader community. Living near businesses comes with occasional annoyances, but in
this case, they are minimal, manageable, and far outweighed by the positives. Thank
you for taking the time to consider my perspective.
J Davis
May 16, 2026 ∙ 6:23pm
It is unconscionable that a city, state or any government authority would revoke a
license after a person or organization has spent significant monies on not only the
Page 21 of 51
opening of a business, but also to address concerns on an ongoing basis. My question
is very simply: what’s the line? Where does this sort of government overreach end?
Who’s to say that your own business isn’t at risk when someone nearby no longer likes you operating there? I cannot imagine having invested millions of dollars on something
only to be told by the city that it’s too bad, cut your losses and close. I would
respectfully ask all who are somehow involved in this to consider the financial ruin that
could befall small business if this becomes an accepted precedent.
Dan L
May 16, 2026 ∙ 6:09pm
I’ve also followed some of the back and forth on the noise concerns, and I get it, nobody
wants a disruptive neighbor. But from everything I’ve seen, this company actually
responded. They reduced hours, shut down a bay permanently, put up a sound wall, kept the doors closed during operation. Most businesses would’ve dug in and done the bare
minimum. At the end of the day, closing this place doesn’t make the neighborhood
better. It just takes away something a lot of people use and leaves a vacant commercial
property in its place — and we’ve all seen how that tends to go. I’d much rather see the
city work with Autowash to hold them to the right standards than pull the plug on a business that’s clearly trying to get it right. Please keep this open.
Ron Sandberg
May 16, 2026 ∙ 6:04pm
My name is Ron Sandberg and I am a long time resident in nearby Edgewater, CO. I am also a subscriber to Autowash services, Lakeside being my most convenient locale. I do
not find that this site is extremely noisy or obtrusive and the owners have clearly taken
steps to mitigate that. I don't understand how the City of Wheat Ridge could review the
application, issue construction permits and grant an operating license to a business
which subsequently invested what I imagine are millions of dollars only to have that
retracted due to complaints from what seems to be one veterinary clinic nearby. To do
so would be anti-business and un-American. I can assure you that if this license to function as a business at this location is retracted, I will boycott every business in
Wheat Ridge from then on. The time for public comment on this venture has long
passed.
Diego Burciaga May 16, 2026 ∙ 5:59pm
Sounds like autowash has conducted extensive sound studies to be in compliance with
the permitted levels. It also appears that they’ve made attempts to be in compliance all
the way since before even building the autowash. If you disagree with the levels of noise
permitted perhaps that is a rule that should change municipal wise and not force a business to close because you’re unhappy the outcome wasn’t shutting the autowash
down. I understand the frustration with the noise levels but it’s what the law says. If city
noise frustrates you perhaps don’t live in an urban area.
Page 22 of 51
Michael Condon
May 16, 2026 ∙ 5:48pm
Please allow Autowash at Lakeside to remain open! There are bigger problems in Wheat Ridge and they have made significant improvements to help the neighborhood when
they expressed dissatisfaction. Closing another business will not help with the blight of
the area.
Tara Lane May 16, 2026 ∙ 5:47pm
I have been using Autowash in Lakeside the last few months ever since I got a new
vehicle that I want to keep clean. The location is so convenient as it is right around the
corner from me. I don't understand why this is even a discussion that this location could
possibly close or the hours be affected. I wish the they were a 24 hour location to be honest. Sorry, but this is a growing area. It's not like the car wash is in a remote area. It
is literally on a busy road with other businesses all around, including Walmart. If
someone nearby wants peace and quiet and a remote location for themselves then
maybe they need to move their location to a remote area. Please keep this location
open and do not put restrictions on this Autowash!
STEVEN CICCARELLI
May 16, 2026 ∙ 5:40pm
I am a chauffeur in Denver and heavily rely on this particular facility daily. It’s no secret
that DENVER has a very strong black car business. Please do not even consider closing it. Thank you in advance.
Jorge
May 16, 2026 ∙ 5:38pm
Its a great addition to the town gives that modern look to it and its always clean ,safe
and well maintained
Ethel Garcia
May 16, 2026 ∙ 3:45pm
Holistic Care for Animals has been a beneficial business in the Wheat Ridge community
since 1997 and I have been fortunate to take my pets there to be treated by Dr. Jan
Facinelli for many of those years. Anyone that has ever been to her clinic knows it is one of a kind for pets. Until last year, it has been a quiet, calm environment for pet owners,
their pets, and for Dr. Jan to care for pets. Pet owners can relate to their stress when
they have to visit the veterinarian, now imagine when you are trying to calm them down
and huge, noisy machines come on and keep running. Holistic Care for Animals and the
surrounding neighbors are deserving of the same consideration that the car wash business is asking for. The car wash owners and patrons are happy with it and want to
keep it going and Holistic Care for Animals and its neighbors were happy with their
neighborhood and want to keep it the way that it was. The business was given
permission to build and operate following certain rules and regulations and it has come
Page 23 of 51
down to Autowash saying they have done their part and the surrounding area saying
they have not done enough. How can a decision be made without another independent
study to prove the noise levels are meeting regulation? This isn’t about random noises we are all forced to experience in everyday life, this is about people living and working in
this environment day in and day out constantly. The community is only asking for what
they are legally entitled to as well as some empathy for how they are being forced to live
and work. If anyone; city council members, car wash owners or car wash patrons took
the time to hang out in the area for any amount of time, it would not take long for them to realize they would not want to live and work in this environment. How can anyone
decide it is okay for others to live like this without actually experiencing what they are
experiencing? I share the same hope as Dr. Jan and the surrounding neighborhood, a
good resolution for all parties involved. Thank you for your consideration, Ethel Garcia
Julie Knight
May 15, 2026 ∙ 8:56pm
I am an Autowash member and use this Wheatridge location frequently (work in area.)
This location is so quiet and easy to use and provides this community with an
affordable car wash option. I truly hope this location continues to stay open and provide excellent car washes and customer support to our community.
Janice Facinelli DVM
May 15, 2026 ∙ 4:34pm
My name is Janice Facinelli DVM. I have owned the property at 4355 GRAY ST. since 1997, at which time I opened my holistic veterinary homeopathy consulting practice.
The property has provided a quiet, peaceful home like environment for me to do my
working also enjoy gardening for the last 28 years. My clients have always commented
on how unique the atmosphere has been, and that their animals, my patients, weren’t
frightened as they were in conventional clinics. The calmness not only helped them, but
enabled me to observe them more closely so that I could focus and do the difficult work
required to help them. That has all changed since the opening of AutoWash in Feb. 2025. Other uses of my building have been to provide consults while sitting outside in
the beautiful back yard, in a very quiet environment. The meditative quality of the back
yard made it a perfect place for euthanasia also. That has not been an option in the last
year since Autowash opened. When I acquired this property, there was an existing self
serve carwash to my north. For 28 years the only occasional problem, had to do with the patrons of the car wash having their radios blaring during the vacuuming process. The
vacuums were next to my fence at that time. The previous owners put up signs to keep
the sound down to respect the neighbors and that took care of the problem for the most
part. There was the occasional patron who didn’t care that they were disturbing the
peace. When Autowash had the original community phone meeting , we were told that there wouldn’t be any big changes to what we had lived with for the previous 28 years.
That was not true. When the Automated carwash opened in Feb. of 2025, it was obvious
that things had changed, and not for the better. The noise coming from the air dry
blowers sounded like jets taking off, or air raid sirens. Loud, shrill, obnoxious, startling,
Page 24 of 51
and continuous noises came through my exam windows and walls, and were even
louder in my private office. My receptionist in the south end of the building could hear
them also. Forget being able to work outside in any capacity. Clients coming into the clinic, complained of their animals being startled by the noise, and I could tell a
difference in their demeanor in the clinic. They were more anxious, with pacing and
hiding. Numerous times during exams I had to run outside and take decibel readings at
my property line to document the noise violations. This was disruptive to my clients and
to my ability focus and concentrate. I was no longer able to use my office to study my cases, having to take my work home, because the noise was so disruptive. And I was no
longer able to enjoy working in my yard. I found it difficult to sleep at night, hearing the
sounds of the blowers even though I was miles away. This is a common symptom of
auditory noise stress. I experienced incredible stress over the situation and It affected
my health. I am extremely concerned about the consequences of the noise pollution on my property values, as the sell of my building is a large part of my retirement plan. I,
along with my neighbors have never wanted to close down the car wash. Instead we
just want back the peace and quiet we have known for the last 29 years. Problems with
dampness and noise are not unique to this car wash. There are many companies that
specialize in solutions to these problems that occur commonly in all kinds of car washes. The residents feel that keeping all doors closed during operations and erecting
real sound proof barriers, not decorative fences, would be two solutions. As a small
business owner, I applaud community development, but not at the expense of existing
families and businesses. Not once did the owners offer to come to our properties to
observe first hand what we were experiencing so that they could find the correct solution. Instead they have villainized us as the “small and vocal group of residents”
that want to close them down and ruin people’s livelihoods. That is so far from the truth.
We want solutions. Autowash voluntarily closed last summer when the City of
Wheatridge imposed mitigation deadlines. However, on their website, they blamed us
instead of taking the high road and admitting that they were volunteering to close for 3
months to mitigate problems. As to those patrons of the car wash who are minimizing
the noise issue because you want the car wash for your convenience and benefit, I ask you to consider how you would feel if you could no longer enjoy your home, or find
peace of mind in your yard because this Autowash now shared your fence. Remember,
that you might spend 15 minutes once a week hearing the noise and then you go to your
quiet home. We were hearing the noise for 24 hours a day until the hours were changed
to 7-10.pm. This last winter, with the changes Autowash made, and the doors being down during operations, the noise was almost negligible . And for that we were grateful
and encouraged that all would be well. However, now that the doors are open during
operation it is an intolerable situation once again, contributing to noise blight: (Noise
BLIGHT is defined as a severe, negative impact of persistent, unwanted sound on
human health, quality of life, and property values and leads to property becoming uncomfortable, unpleasant or unsafe to inhabit. Health effects can be cardiovascular,
sleep disturbance, mental health impacts and cognitive impairment.) I know this is a
very complicated and many faceted issue. I also believe that solutions can be found
Page 25 of 51
that will allow us to all be good neighbors and live in harmony as we have for the past
29 years!! That is my most heartfelt wish.
Hannah Sapp
May 15, 2026 ∙ 2:41pm
Hello all, I work for Autowash on the Customer Success team and wanted to share a
little of what the company looks like from the inside. This is a Colorado company,
family-owned and run by people who actually live here. The thing I appreciate most is that you feel it. Leadership isn't sitting in some out-of-state headquarters that none of
us ever see. The CEO knows employees by name! So do the facility managers, the
people in customer success, and the folks in marketing and accounting. That kind of
interconnectivity and respect changes how decisions get made when something hard
comes up. I've watched the company take neighborhood concerns seriously. When issues were raised around the Lakeside location, no one tried to brush them off.
Autowash paid for sound studies and put up sound barriers. The site's operations were
adjusted based on what people in the area said. None of that was cheap, and it would
have been a lot easier to do nothing. The company chose to do the work. That
willingness to listen and adjust is part of why I'm proud to be here! Autowash doesn't pretend it has every answer on day one. It pays attention and gets better. I'm asking that
Autowash Lakeside be allowed to keep operating. Autowash cares about the
communities where the company operates because they are also the ones we call
home. Thank you for taking the time to consider this!
Keyasia Saulnier
May 15, 2026 ∙ 1:53pm
Hi there, I completely understand that some nearby residents have concerns regarding
noise. However, from what I have personally witnessed, the company has made
consistent efforts to address those concerns and comply with the city’s requirements.
They have restricted wash hours, lowered wash bay operations, and worked to make
adjustments whenever concerns were brought forward. Having a car wash in that part of town has benefited many people, including local residents, commuters, and
employees. It has created jobs, provided a convenient service, and transformed a
neglected property into something productive and well maintained from what I can see.
We're really hoping that closure of Autowash@ lakeside is reconsidered.
Kyle Hollingsworth
May 15, 2026 ∙ 12:36pm
As a current veterinary client of Dr. Jan Facinelli, I strongly support revoking or
suspending AutoWash’s Special Use Permit until appropriate sound mitigation
measures are put in place. As someone who regularly visits Dr. Facinelli's veterinary clinic next door to the Autowash, I have personally experienced the excessive noise
coming from the facility. It is unbearable and the fact that the Autowash owners, who
claim to be community-centered, are fighting their neighbors on this is frankly offensive.
The constant sound from dryers, vacuums, and car wash operations is disruptive and
Page 26 of 51
inappropriate for an area that includes medical and professional offices, neighboring
businesses, and nearby residents. It creates an overwhelming environment not only for
people, but for the animals visiting Dr. Facinelli next door who are already experiencing stress and anxiety that so often comes along with a vet visit. You'd think after building
25 other Autowash's around Colorado that the owners would be aware of the need for
ample sound mitigation, wouldn't you? Let alone the advanced need for sound
mitigation in a residential area... The repeated concerns raised by neighboring
businesses and residents make it clear that this is not an isolated issue. If the business cannot operate within acceptable sound limits and without negatively impacting their
neighbors, then the Special Use Permit should clearly not remain in place until those
problems are fully addressed. I support responsible local business growth, but it should
not come at the expense of the health, comfort, and wellbeing of neighboring
businesses, residents, clients, and animals. Are we allowing car washes to push people out of their homes now? Is this where we want to be in Denver's already stretched-thin
housing market? The City should require independently verified sound mitigation and
demonstrated long-term compliance before allowing the SUP to continue.
George Aragon May 15, 2026 ∙ 12:35pm
Autowash has had a meaningful impact on my life, both personally and professionally.
As the Area Manager for the west side locations, including Lakeside, I take a lot of pride
in what I do every day. This isn’t just a job to me, it’s a career that I genuinely care about.
Autowash has given me the opportunity to grow, build valuable skills, and provide for myself, and I’m grateful for that. Because Lakeside is one of the locations I personally
oversee, I’m heavily involved in the day-to-day upkeep of the property. I spend a lot of
time making sure the site stays clean, safe, and welcoming for the community. Whether
it’s keeping trash under control, addressing homeless activity around the property, or
maintaining the overall curb appeal of the lot, I work hard to ensure the area continues
looking nice and well maintained. I care deeply about how this location reflects on both
the company and the surrounding neighborhood. One thing that has always stood out to me about Autowash is that it’s a family-owned and operated Colorado company. It
doesn’t feel corporate or disconnected. Leadership is involved, listens to concerns, and
genuinely tries to do the right thing for both employees and the communities we serve.
I’ve personally seen the effort the company has made to address concerns raised by
nearby residents. We reduced operating hours from being open 24/7 to a set schedule, even though that directly impacted both business and customer convenience. We
invested in sound studies, built a sound wall, and installed additional equipment to help
reduce dryer noise. Those changes were not easy or inexpensive, but they were done
because the company wanted to be a good neighbor. Unfortunately, some of these
changes have also made it harder for me to serve customers the way I want to. Since the hours were reduced, I now regularly deal with frustrated customers who come
directly to me because late-night washing no longer fits their schedules. Many people
only have time to wash their vehicles later in the evening, and it’s difficult not being able
to help them the way I used to. Even some of the noise-reduction changes have created
Page 27 of 51
new customer complaints that I end up handling personally. What’s difficult is that
Lakeside is by far our nicest location. It has our newest equipment, and I truly believe
we’ve put more effort into improving and maintaining this site than almost anywhere else. I take pride in trying to provide customers with the best possible Autowash
experience, so it’s frustrating and honestly sad when I feel like I can’t fully deliver that
because of ongoing restrictions and complaints despite all the efforts we’ve made.
From my perspective, Autowash has consistently shown a willingness to listen, adapt,
and invest in solutions to support the surrounding community while continuing to operate responsibly. I’m proud to work for this company, proud of the work we do at
Lakeside, and thankful for the opportunities it has provided me. I hope that is taken into
consideration, and that Autowash Lakeside is allowed to continue operating and serve
the community. Thank you for your time.
Leslie Baca
May 15, 2026 ∙ 11:44am
Dr. Jan Facinelli has been the veterinarian for my family pets for 26 years. And her clinic
has been at its current location for 29 years. I so appreciate the care my pets receive
there at what used to be a very peaceful clinic. I say “used to be” because her neighbor to the north, Autowash has disrupted this peace with noise from their automated car
wash since they opened last year in 2025. The noise is very disruptive. I could hear it
when I’ve brought my sick pets into her clinic several times. Sick pets do not need loud
noises when they are getting medical care. Dr. Jan has also been very distraught by the
noise. I worry that my pets can no longer get great veterinary care because Autowash has disturbed the peaceful environment of her clinic. I’ve never heard Dr. Facinelli
mention that she wanted the Autowash closed but just that they mitigate the sound so
she could get back to a peaceful quiet environment to do her work. I’ve read that
Autowash has at least 12 locations in the Denver Metro area and over 25 locations
statewide. Surely, they knew how noisy their automated washes are and that their
newest location on W44th Ave in Wheat Ridge was not a good fit since it is so close to
neighbors and a local small business, my veterinarian’s clinic.
Riley Knight
May 15, 2026 ∙ 11:24am
I have worked for Autowash for 5 years and I’m reaching out today to address the
ongoing discussions regarding our Lakeside location. I want to advocate for the value this business brings to the community and highlight the very real, permanent steps
we’ve taken to address neighborhood noise concerns. We want to be good neighbors,
and we’ve proven that through significant operational changes and physical
investments: -Permanent Bay Closure: We have permanently shut down our 4th bay to
directly lower the site’s noise output. -Enclosed Operations: We keep all of our bay doors closed while we are operating to ensure sound is muffled and contained. -Sound Wall
Installation: We have invested in a sound wall specifically designed to create a physical
barrier and further reduce the noise reaching nearby homes. -Restricted Hours: Lakeside
is our only site that does not run 24/7. We’ve limited our hours to 7:00 AM – 10:00 PM
Page 28 of 51
because we respect the neighborhood’s right to quiet mornings and evenings. It’s also
worth remembering what this site was before we took over. It was neglected and
unsafe. We stepped in to transform it into a calm, professional environment. For many of our customers, coming here is a part of their self-care or even a form of therapy, and
we’ve worked hard to make it a safe space for that. Bringing a business like Autowash
into the area is good for the city’s growth and ensures that this property remains a
managed, high-quality asset rather than a safety concern. So many of our local
customers relied on this site for years and waited a long time for it to be revitalized; now that it is a safe and high-quality space, they truly utilize and value it every day. Thank you
for your time and for considering the progress we've made at the Lakeside location.
Sheldon Steinbock
May 15, 2026 ∙ 10:21am I have been associated with the Holistic Care for Animals Clinic at 4355 Gray Street for
26 years, performing office management and administrative support duties. During
those 26 years I have been in the clinic on a weekly, and often daily basis. The previous
operation of the car wash that was located there was in operation during that entire
time. Not once was I ever bothered or did I even observe a noticeable noise level from that car wash operation. That changed in March of 2025 when the current car wash was
put into operation. Not only was the noise level loud enough to be heard but it was
immediately disturbing to me while I was trying to do my work there. I have also seen
the disturbance it has caused to the owner of the clinic and to the clients and their
animals who visit there for diagnostics and treatment.
Kasi Cooper
May 14, 2026 ∙ 8:15pm
About a year ago I ran into our good friend, neighbor, and veterinarian in the
neighborhood and noticed immediately that something was wrong. She was tense,
agitated, and visibly flustered, which was very unlike her and I immediately became
concerned. Jan is the type of neighbor and friend you dream of. Unfailingly kind, calm and generous, Jan is the welcoming committee when you move in and the first one to
reach out when you’re going through something. When we had our first child, Jan knew
we were far from family and became ours. She’s the first person we trusted to leave our
child with overnight, the first person we call when our dog is sick and over the years she
has become the first person we call when we need to call on our community. Jan asks for very little in return for all she does for us and the rest of her community, so when I
ran into her a year ago and realized that something wasn’t right, I was concerned. When
she told me about the struggle that she and her Wheat Ridge neighborhood were having
with one of their business-neighbors, I became angry. Jan told me that she wasn’t
sleeping due to stress and that she was afraid she would have to close her veterinary business after 29 years of operation, due only to the sound of the Autowash branch
which had just re-opened directly next door to her office in the Wheat Ridge
neighborhood of Lakeside. She told me the sound emanating from the Autowash’s dryer
bays was so overwhelming, so deafening, and so constant that she couldn’t think, let
Page 29 of 51
alone run a business focused on the care of animals. But most of all, Jan was dismayed
by the response of the owners of the Autowash chain, who seemed unconcerned and
largely unbothered by the negative impact of their Lakeside branch on the surrounding neighborhood, even after hearing directly how the sound coming from this re-opened
location was negatively impacting their neighbor’s daily quality of life. If you look at their
website today, you will see that Autowash has invested a great deal of time and energy
into fighting the reality that their neighbors are suffering because of them. You’ll see a
list of the efforts they’ve purported to implement in an effort to resolve their neighbor’s complaints, but if you look at the facts behind their “campaign” against their neighbors,
you’ll see the extent of the smoke and mirrors. If they’d actually followed the rules,
complied within code, and met the requirements of the Special Permit, then why would
their neighbors have any reason to complain? Historically, the neighbors of Lakeside
have had no issue with the operation of a car wash at this location for the last 10 years. The issues only arose when Autowash expanded its business, increasing the scope of
the Autowash chain, including larger and louder drying bays, which thereby amplified the
auditory impact on the surrounding neighborhood. The neighbors of Wheat Ridge are
not asking that the Lakewood Autowash branch be shut down, they’re simply asking for
them to comply within the criteria that was outlined in the Special Use Permit to assist in mitigating the negative auditory impact on the surrounding community; and yet,
Autowash continues to fight its neighbors. At the end of the day, Jan can go home. And
yes, she can close her business of nearly 30 years and find an escape from the
overwhelming, deafening, and unrelenting sound coming from her closest “neighbor”,
but Jan stays because her other neighbors cannot do the same. From what I know, the neighbors who live full time in Wheat Ridge’s Lakeside neighborhood have had to
rearrange their homes in order to find a place as far away from the Autowash as
possible to find even a modicum of relief from the sound emitted from their “neighbor”.
They’ve tried wearing sound-cancelling headphones, they’ve tried sound machines,
they’ve tried working elsewhere, they’ve tried communicating, and they’ve tried
compromising; and Autowash continues to fight their neighbors. The neighbors of
Lakeside Autowash cannot live comfortably in their own homes, they cannot escape the unrelenting sound the Autowash emits, they cannot reason with the owners of
Autowash, and Autowash continues to fight their neighbors. After learning the full
extent of facts in this situation, as far as I’m concerned the owners of Autowash are
corporate bullies who are attempting to present themselves as a small, local Colorado
business that adds value to their community while simultaneously making choices that actively go against that spirit of community and neighborliness in favor of protecting
their own greed. This is not the type of neighbor I want, and I’d be willing to guess it’s
not the kind of neighbor that the majority of commenters on this board would want to
have directly next door either. There are a plethora of options for car washes within a
five-mile radius of the Lakewood Autowash branch which the members of our community can utilize without much impact to their day-to-day, as well as 25 additional
“Autowash” locations from the “Autowash Companies” chain throughout Colorado for
their members to take advantage of their car washing memberships. If Autowash
Companies continues to flout code in favor of their bottom line, I do not think it
Page 30 of 51
unreasonable to ask the city council to revoke their Special Use Permit until they can
clearly demonstrate that they can follow the rules of said Permit and come into
compliance, with the option to reinstate when modifications have been made which align to the rules that are clearly laid out for them. Furthermore, I do not find it
unreasonable for the community to ask that there be enforcement of civil penalties
should any issues arise again after reinstatement, considering the propensity of
Autowash’s owners towards the belief that they are nonexempt from the very most
basic laws of a civil and neighborly society.
Sarah Moberg
May 13, 2026 ∙ 10:02pm
I have been taking my pets to Holistic Care for Animals since 2017. In November 2025,
while at an appointment, a very loud industrial noise came from outside the building where the Lakeside Car Wash now operates directly against the clinic. The sound was
impossible to ignore and disrupted the treatment room. My cat was visibly frightened,
and even the veterinarian stepped out to record the noise. The noise reminded me of
heavy industrial equipment, like a grain auger or elevator, and was loud enough that
hearing protection would feel necessary. I can easily see how this would disturb nearby residents and cause stress and fear in animals. I’m surprised some comments are pro
supporting a car wash that is so disturbing to the ones who are affected the most.
Surely the Autowash could do the right thing and consider their neighbors.
Sarah Moberg
May 13, 2026 ∙ 8:18pm I have been taking my pets to Holistic Care for Animals since 2017. In November 2025,
while at an appointment, a very loud industrial noise came from outside the building
where the Lakeside Car Wash now operates directly against the clinic. The sound was
impossible to ignore and disrupted the treatment room. My cat was visibly frightened,
and even the veterinarian stepped out to record the noise. The noise reminded me of
heavy industrial equipment, like a grain auger or elevator, and was loud enough that
hearing protection would feel necessary. I can easily see how this would disturb nearby residents and cause stress and fear in animals.
Gretchen Josten
May 13, 2026 ∙ 7:49am
My name is Gretchen and my family and I live directly across from Autowash. This is an emotionally charged issue that has been going on for over a year. I am a former small
business owner and I strongly support local business. I value a business that brings a
service to the community that makes their lives easier and does it in a responsible way
with their resources. I see the way that Autowash fulfills this role in a lot of people’s
lives and for that I am grateful. We as a community have never sought to shut down Autowash over the last two years. We took them at their word during the neighborhood
meeting that they would not cause detrimental effects on our neighborhood. We have
simply asked for the city to enforce the criteria that was outlined in Autowash’s Special
Use Permit. These are the guidelines that have not been met, and thus for the last year,
Page 31 of 51
they have been found to be out of compliance with the rules that were laid out in 2024
prior to building the facility and opening in 2025. The community is welcome to read
through the nine points that were clearly defined in the approval of their special use permit. They had clear choice in the way they would choose to either align with the rules
that were laid out or defy the rules. Our neighborhood has been reasonable and patient.
We are not asking for anything outside of what was outlined in 2024 when Autowash
was approved for their permit. They have chosen to defy the rules and therefore are
being subjected to the process of reviewing their permit. We are not unreasonable. We have been here for decades prior to the construction of this business living across from
a very functional and well kept self-serve car wash for almost 10 years that never
caused any issues in the neighborhood. The city was under the assumption that
Autowash would continue along that same path. However, things have not worked out
that way. The power to remedy this issue and come into compliance lies solely in the hands of Autowash. They had over two years to plan a building that could operate in
compliance, but did not. They have chosen to blame us as the problem. We are not the
problem. The solution is clearly outlined in the rules of their special use permit. There
are five car washes between 38th Ave. and 44th Ave. and Sheridan Blvd and Pierce. This
type of business must follow the rules that the city implements in order to operate. The answer lies with Autowash, and if they choose to follow the rules or not. They can make
this happen. They are choosing not to and blame us instead. We ask the city council to
revoke their special use permit until they can clearly demonstrate that they can follow
the rules of their permit and come into compliance. We ask for the permit to be
reinstated when they make the modifications that align to the rules that are clearly laid out. And following that we ask that there be enforcement of civil penalties should any
issues arise again after reinstatement. We thank you for holding space for this review
process.
Matthew Lanclos
May 12, 2026 ∙ 2:45pm
I feel Autowash has done MORE than enough to please neighbors who clearly will never be happy. We live in a big city. I hear sirens all the time Am I to tell those in need nobody
gets help because of some noise?! NO! KEEP AUTOWASH LAKESIDE OPEN.
Sean covi
May 12, 2026 ∙ 11:27am I use this carwash frequently and feel strongly that when a municipality approves a
business design that they should grandfather businesses they approved if future
changes occur. Thank you.
DAVID MELDMAN May 12, 2026 ∙ 6:35am
Autowash is an excellent community asset. It’s the best car wash in the area and you
should allow its SUP in perpetuity.
Page 32 of 51
Michael Zamora
May 10, 2026 ∙ 7:50pm
As someone who lives nearby, I really hope Autowash Lakeside is able to stay open. This location has become part of the routine for a lot of people in the area, including
myself. It is convenient, well-maintained, and provides a service that people genuinely
use on a regular basis. Living in Colorado, our cars take a beating from snow, road salt,
dust, pollen, and everything else that comes with the seasons here. Having a reliable car
wash nearby is not just about appearances — it helps protect our vehicles from long-term damage. The Lakeside location is especially valuable because it offers touchless
washes that are safer for newer vehicles, ceramic coatings, wraps, and sensitive paint
finishes. A lot of us specifically choose this location because we trust the quality of the
wash and know we are not risking damage from traditional brush systems. The property
is also clean, well-lit, and professionally operated. That matters to residents. It contributes positively to the area instead of becoming another empty or neglected
commercial property. The location is easy to access, close to other businesses people
already visit, and open during hours that work for commuters and working families.
What I appreciate most is that Autowash clearly invested in creating a customer-
focused experience. From the unlimited membership options to the free vacuums and app convenience, it feels like a business that actually listens to and values its
customers. You can tell people use this location regularly because there is always
steady activity there. Businesses like this are part of what make a neighborhood
functional and convenient to live in. Losing it would not improve the area or benefit
residents. It would take away a service that many people rely on every week and replace it with uncertainty about what comes next for the property. I respectfully ask that the
Lakeside Autowash be allowed to remain open. It is a responsible business, a useful
service for the community, and something many local residents would truly miss if it
were gone.
Dane Vickers
May 10, 2026 ∙ 1:48pm I live right by this location. It is well kempt and a great addition to our neighborhood.
Rebecca Johnson
May 10, 2026 ∙ 12:34pm
I'm a huge fan of Autowash!! I've been a member for years and it's one of the best car washes I've ever used. The team is always willing to make things right, as they've shown
with this location. As a member of this neighborhood, I'm very thankful for this location
and the corporation as a whole. If the city goes back on its word and its standards, I'd
be ashamed to live in this area.
David Kelley
May 10, 2026 ∙ 12:24pm
Page 33 of 51
This car wash has been a great addition to the area. Areas are always changing and this
change was for the better. A carwash is needed in the area and it seems that the
Autowash has taken all the steps to accommodate the neighborhood complaints.
Davidson M
May 10, 2026 ∙ 7:27am
I think that this car wash should remain open because it provides a service to the
community that in that area is somewhat scarce, everyone complaining about it making too much noise but don’t say anything about the 3 tire shops/ mechanic shops within 5
blocks from this car wash. If you’re gonna target Autowash then target them too or stop
hassling Autowash. Worse case scenario maybe reduce the hours of operation but keep
it open!!!
Joni Moore
May 9, 2026 ∙ 4:07pm
I am writing to support the neighbors by the Autowash on 44th &Gray St. in Wheat
Ridge. While visiting in late November and recently, I became aware of the noise that is
generated from that business. The drying cycle of the carwash is extremely offensive and bothersome. Residents nearby cannot eliminate the overpowering sounds made all
day long from the dryers because the doors remain open during those drying times. The
Autowash also rudely opens too early and closes too late. Business hours should be 9-
5, with the doors fixed to be closed during each drying cycle. When a local resident has
to wear noise-blocking headphones and move/alter their home set-up toward the back of their home because of the obnoxious noise disturbance, it should trigger action by
the council to correct the problem. The hours and noise levels are so offensive, the
residents are correct in requesting that changes need to be made.
AJ Tarachanowicz
May 9, 2026 ∙ 9:31am
I use this car wash weekly and choose it because it was in the neighborhood and it’s the most modern car wash around. I really hope to see that they’ll be able to continue
operations.
Will S
May 8, 2026 ∙ 7:20pm A great car wash that was desperate for updates. The noise can easily be limited with
doors during the cycle and limiting hours to typical hours people are awake like 6am to
8pm. Autowash is a greatly appreciated business in our town beyond the few negative
comments most of us really love the convenience and quality of the wash! Keep up the
good work, will be back again next week.
Brett Lilly
May 8, 2026 ∙ 11:53am
Page 34 of 51
Thank you for your time my name is Brett Lilly I am a long-term wheat ridge resident and
a long-term client of Dr. Janice Facinelli I am writing to share my experience with Dr.
Facinelli and the car wash next-door I believe it is important for the city to support new development but that new development cannot adversely and negatively impact the
existing businesses that we rely on I can state for many experiences that the new car
wash was creating much noise and foam spray and water disruption and other
problems that Dr. Facinelli had to focus on and deal with to the adverse effect of her
practice and her clients I would strongly urge that wheat ridge not allow the special use permit to be renewed as the adverse impacts from the car wash on Dr. Facinelli‘s
practice have been profound and should not be tolerated Thank you for your time and
consideration Brett Lilly
Jase Thulin May 8, 2026 ∙ 11:02am
Noise pollution is a real issue in an urban environment and the decibel level created by
the car wash and their machinery doesn’t align with current code. As such, efforts must
be made to rectify this issue.
Kelsey Moore Thulin
May 8, 2026 ∙ 10:32am
The autowash team has clearly come to the message board with some AI bots. Its
disturbing to see when this is quite obviously disturbing the peace to their neighbors.
No matter if they are a commercial business or not, they still should be neighborly. If I had a garage band and was disturbing my neighbors at all hours of the day, I’d still try to
work with them to keep the door shut and only practice during normal hours. That is the
neighborly thing to do. We’d really just like for them to keep the doors shut in the front
AND back while the machines are running the wash and especially the dryers. They can
leave the doors open the rest of the time to help air out the bays. Many car washes are
near neighborhoods throughout the city, but the ones who want to actually work with
their neighbors have agreed to only operate during simple business hours. 9-6 is reasonable operating hours. 24 hours for this location is just wrong and excessive. Two
simple asks: 1. operate the machines with the doors closed. 2. Keep it in normal
business hours. Please and thank you!
Heather Josten May 8, 2026 ∙ 7:33am
This 24-hour car wash has had a major impact on our family and others who live on the
same block. My family has had to rearrange the entire layout of their home and move
their living spaces toward the back of the house just to reduce the constant noise. No
family should have to redesign their home simply to escape the sound of a neighboring business. I understand that many people in the community appreciate having access to
the car wash, and I support local businesses. However, residents also deserve peace
and quiet in their own homes. A home should be a sanctuary — a place where families
can rest, sleep, and enjoy time together without constant disruption from commercial
Page 35 of 51
noise at all hours of the day and night. I believe there are reasonable compromises that
could better support both the business and the surrounding neighborhood. Limiting
operations to normal business hours, such as 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., and keeping the doors closed during the loudest wash and drying cycles could make a significant difference
for the families who live nearby. I hope the council will consider the long-term impact
this 24-hour operation has on the people who call this neighborhood home.
Trent Josten May 8, 2026 ∙ 7:27am
The new car wash has been very disruptive to our friends and families. The noise
increase from the previous car wash has made our family have to rearrange their living
set up in their house to try and find peace in their own home. Shutting the bay doors
during washes and closing at regular business hours (6/7pm) would bring more peace back to our families lives. A local business should strive to be a part of the community
they do business in, not create conflict and disruption.
Gregory M Isabel
May 8, 2026 ∙ 6:59am Keep this car wash open please! This location has been a carwash for a long time. The
new owners have made it look kept and the surrounding residents that live close to busy
W 44th Ave should not be allowed to shut this commercial property down!
Eric Norsworthy May 7, 2026 ∙ 8:55am
This facility improved the area and has made significant investments. Now the
community wants another abandoned car wash?
Hodding Hall
May 7, 2026 ∙ 8:52am
Here’s a more polished and persuasive version that keeps your core points intact while improving the flow, tone, and impact: This Autowash provides tremendous value to my
household and to the Wheat Ridge community as a whole. In Colorado, where weather
and road conditions make it difficult to keep vehicles clean, this business serves an
important practical need and has become one of the most frequented businesses in the
area. Beyond the service itself, Autowash transformed what was once a neglected and unattractive property into a clean, modern establishment that the community can take
pride in. They invested in Wheat Ridge, improved the appearance of the area, created
jobs, and built a business that residents actively use and support. What is especially
concerning is that the City of Wheat Ridge initially approved this project, allowing the
company to move forward with substantial investments in construction and development, only to later impose additional restrictions, fines, and operational
limitations. Requiring the business to remove a quarter of its service bays after
approvals were already granted sends a troubling message to current and future
business owners considering investing in Wheat Ridge. What confidence can local
Page 36 of 51
businesses have in the city’s approval process if projects can later be subjected to
changing standards after significant investments have already been made? Actions like
this risk discouraging other businesses from putting down roots in Wheat Ridge and investing in our community. If this location is forced to close, Wheat Ridge will lose a
valuable and heavily utilized community asset, and the city will be turning its back on a
local business that has worked to comply with the requirements placed before it. I
strongly encourage the city to work collaboratively toward a reasonable solution that
allows this business to continue serving the community.
Scott Galloway
May 7, 2026 ∙ 7:45am
I live down the street south of 43rd and have heard the dryers running during the day
and that's living a block away. I can't imagine what it's like being right next door. The car wash is very disruptive to the neighborhood especially at all hours. In my opinion the
neighborhood was here first and the business should fit in whether it be limiting hours
of operation or closing bay doors to silence the noise or both preferably.
Eric Greer May 7, 2026 ∙ 6:13am
Autowash is more than just a business, it's a community. The team at Autowash has
always been dedicated to clean, updated and great facilities. The location at Lakeside
transformed the community and we hope to see other businesses transform over time
as well. Stapleton/Northfield as an example of a run down city looks impeccable now, businesses including autowash work very hard to maintain a clean and awesome
facility for enthusiasts such as myself. Autowash has always been about the culture of
the car community and its commitment to do better, has been at the top of their
priorities. I ask that you step back and let Autowash continue to service the Lakeside
area and continue to see the positive image the company brings. We've got to stop
living in a culture that is ran negatively by a handful of people that complain or report
businesses and stand up to those and put an end to the negative changes this world has come to in recent years. Thank you for your consideration.
Reed Matthew Goede
May 6, 2026 ∙ 8:57pm
Where do I start? This is one of the best AutoWash locations in Town. There is no doubt this location adds value to the surrounding area! In our current climate, water is a
precious resource. This location recycles and helps eliminate wasted water. It sounds
like they have spent extensive time and resources into ensuring this facility would
comply with all regulations and neighboring desires. This location is extremely
beneficial and to see it not be allowed to operate is extremely disappointing. Please support Local, and not regulate them to death!
Keegan Remsen
May 6, 2026 ∙ 8:37pm
Page 37 of 51
This is the nicest carwash in the area and I was sad when it closed down last year.
Noise complaints for an all enclosed automatic carwash is interesting. I’m not sure
Autowash could have done anything better when building this carwash as far as noise levels go.
Amru Ashour
May 6, 2026 ∙ 8:12pm
As an Autowash, customer, I can confidently say that they are committed to creating a wonderful experience for everybody. As a frequent visitor of their many locations, I can,
without a doubt say that they are always listening to critiques and concerned citizens.
The city is unfairly targeting them, and backing out of their approved agreements
Aaron Pilcher May 6, 2026 ∙ 7:49pm
My Dad and I share a membership for all-out cars at Autowash and are huge fans of the
company. They’ve consistently gone above and beyond to provide excellent customer
service, maintain clean and welcoming locations, and invest in high-quality technology
that truly stands out from other car wash companies. Their attention to detail — from advanced water filtration systems to the overall customer experience — clearly shows
they care about both their customers and the community. Colorado is lucky to have a
local company like Autowash. Not every car wash appeals to people who genuinely care
about their vehicles, but Autowash has built a reputation that car enthusiasts and
everyday drivers alike trust and appreciate. I honestly believe in the company so much that I would buy stock in them if they were publicly traded. It’s disappointing to see
them being treated unfairly when they have spent years building a respected business
that serves the community well. I strongly support Autowash and hope the City allows
them to continue operating and expanding. Businesses that invest in quality, innovation,
and customer care like this should be encouraged, not pushed aside.
Israel May 6, 2026 ∙ 6:43pm
Keeping The AutoWash open is important not only for the customers who rely on it
every day, but also for the surrounding community that has benefited from the positive
changes it brought to the area. Before The AutoWash opened, the property was
occupied by an older car wash that had become neglected and was widely associated with criminal activity, vandalism, loitering, and homelessness-related issues that made
nearby residents and businesses feel unsafe. The abandoned appearance of the
previous property hurt the image of the neighborhood and discouraged investment and
customer traffic in the surrounding area. Since replacing the former business, The
AutoWash has helped transform the location into a cleaner, safer, and more professional environment that serves a real purpose for the community. A functioning
car wash is more than just a convenience; in an area where many residents depend on
their vehicles for commuting to work, transporting family members, and daily
responsibilities, access to an affordable and reliable car wash is a practical necessity.
Page 38 of 51
Clean vehicles also contribute to community pride and help maintain a more welcoming
appearance throughout the neighborhood. Unlike the previous property, The AutoWash
operates as an active business that attracts paying customers, and increases activity from responsible members of the community. This type of legitimate business
presence naturally discourages criminal behavior and reduces opportunities for illegal
activity that often occur around abandoned or poorly maintained properties. In addition,
The AutoWash contributes to the local economy through taxes, employment
opportunities, and support for nearby businesses that benefit from increased traffic in the area. Closing the business could risk allowing the property to once again fall into
neglect, reopening the door to the same problems the neighborhood previously
struggled with for years. Residents and business owners have already seen firsthand
how quickly an unmanaged property can become a hotspot for crime and disorder, and
many people recognize the improvements that came after The AutoWash took over the location. Businesses that invest in maintaining their property, improving safety, and
providing useful services should be supported because they play a major role in
stabilizing neighborhoods and encouraging future development. The AutoWash has
shown that it can successfully operate in a way that benefits the community while
replacing a property that once created fear, frustration, and negative conditions for the area. Rather than removing a business that has contributed positively to the
neighborhood, community leaders and residents should work together to support
businesses like The AutoWash that offer services people genuinely use. Keeping The
AutoWash open would continue the progress already made in the area and help ensure
the property remains a productive and positive part of the community instead of returning to the harmful conditions that existed before its arrival.
Mitch Cox
May 6, 2026 ∙ 4:34pm
My family and I started going to the Lakeside Walmart, Goodwill, and Molly’s when this
Autowash opened up. Since we have a subscription, it’s an easy and fun family outing
hitting all the locations, especially since this location is brand new with state of the art equipment. Unfortunately, since we live in the Golden area, there is little reason for us to
continue shopping in this area if this Autowash location is forced to be shut down. Also
seems like quite a waste to shut that invested so heavily in the community, and was
approved to do so.
Liat Fuller
May 6, 2026 ∙ 12:48pm
My family and I have utilized Autowash services for nearly a decade, and can first-hand
acknowledge that Autowash takes pride in their renovations, remodels, and new builds.
While this site was once vacant and neglected, today - it is clean, maintained, well lit, and actively serving the community. What stands out to me is that Autowash has
continued making adjustments in response to concerns that were raised. Reduced
hours, sound mitigation efforts, and continued investment into the property show there
has been a genuine effort to work alongside the City and surrounding neighborhood. I
Page 39 of 51
also think it’s important to recognize the positive impact local businesses have on
employees, families, and the community around them. Businesses willing to invest in
aging properties, create jobs, and continue adapting when concerns arise should be encouraged to keep finding solutions. I hope the City considers the improvements made
to the property and the broader community impact before making a final decision
regarding the permit.
Travis H May 6, 2026 ∙ 12:28pm
Watching this situation unfold has honestly been tough because I was using the
Lakeside location long before I even worked for Autowash or really knew much about
the company. I always thought it was a great wash and a really nice addition to the area,
especially compared to how the property used to look. Now after working here, I’ve gotten to see firsthand how much effort has actually gone into trying to make this
location work for everyone and how kind and considerate the owners really are. When
concerns were raised, the company didn’t ignore them or just do the bare minimum.
They spent a serious amount of time and money making adjustments, reducing noise,
changing operations, and trying to be respectful to the neighborhood. I live closest to this location so it’s still the one I use all the time, and I’d genuinely be really sad to see
anything happen to it after all the effort that’s been put into making it work. I’m proud to
work for a local Colorado company that genuinely cares about its employees,
customers, and the communities it’s part of, and I hope the city takes all of that into
consideration.
Eddy Lin
May 6, 2026 ∙ 10:42am
As a nearby Denver-area resident, I strongly support allowing Autowash @ Lakeside to
remain in operation and believe the Special Use Permit should be upheld. This site was
previously a long-neglected, deteriorating carwash that created ongoing issues for the
surrounding community. Its redevelopment into a clean, modern, and well-maintained facility is clearly an improvement for the neighborhood and the surrounding area. The
overall condition of the property has made the area feel safer and more welcoming for
all. Just as important, this project followed the full approval process established by the
City. It received the necessary approvals based on the determination that it would not
create impacts beyond what zoning allows. Changing course after the fact raises concerns about consistency and fairness in how approved projects are treated. Since
opening, Autowash has demonstrated a willingness to listen and adapt. The company
has made multiple efforts to address concerns, including investing significant
resources into sound mitigation, modifying equipment, reducing operating hours, and
even closing one wash bay indefinitely. These are meaningful, good-faith actions that show a commitment to being a responsible neighbor. No business operates with zero
impact, especially in a commercial zone. The question should be if reasonable steps
have been taken to mitigate concerns, and in this case, Autowash has shown it has.
This situation is not just about one property. It reflects how the City supports local
Page 40 of 51
businesses that follow the rules, invest in the community, and respond to feedback.
Autowash has done all of these following. I encourage the City Council to uphold the
Special Use Permit and allow Autowash @ Lakeside to continue operating. Thank you for your consideration and for supporting fair and consistent decision-making in our
community.
Logan J
May 6, 2026 ∙ 10:19am Autowash is a local business built by Coloradans who genuinely care about the service
they provide, those who keep it running, and the community they serve, as opposed to
conglomerate corporations that only care about profits and shareholder value. It would
be such a shame for the people of Wheat Ridge and others in the Western Denver region
to lose such a convenient location. It's also uncommon to have access to a touchless car wash that doesn't damage your vehicle's paint like a typical brush wash. The
company has gone above and beyond to accommodate the demands of a small group
of people who had plenty of time prior to the build of the wash to voice their concerns.
The owners have made changes to their operation and invested hundreds of thousands
of dollars to install new equipment all to appease a few unreasonably entitled people. Allowing Autowash to continue operating in this location is an opportunity to support a
beneficial local business that provides a valuable service to the community.
Seth C.
May 5, 2026 ∙ 4:56pm Love this location and its services. So convenient and well maintained. An instant
improvement compared to the old worn down wash that was there before. Not to
mention the company is entirely local which is what we should be supporting in our
neighborhoods. We should find solutions to keep a local business running not finding
reasons to shut it down. Really sad if the neighbors aren't willing to compromise.
Richard Bates May 5, 2026 ∙ 1:58pm
Every town in Colorado needs a car wash with everything that gets on your vehicle here
winter or summer. Autowash is one of the best there is for a touch less wash. They
keep there Autowash facilities clean and in tip top shape for there customers. Any town
should be glad to have them in it for the convenience it offers to the people that live there.
Teri Bates
May 5, 2026 ∙ 1:52pm
Autowash is the best car wash available. Their facilities are attractive, well maintained and an important addition to every city they are in. Autowash is far superior being
brushless and the best wash for every car. Every good business adds to the cities they
are in and should be supported. This is important to everyone who wants fairness to
Page 41 of 51
operate this and all businesses. Autowash is a much needed business in this city and all
others where they are located. They deserve your support.
Brandon
May 5, 2026 ∙ 1:26pm
I’m writing as a loyal customer and community member to express my full support for
allowing this car wash to continue operating at its current location. This business has
consistently shown that it cares about the neighborhood, its customers, and its long-term presence in our community. When concerns were raised about noise, they
didn’t ignore them—they invested in real upgrades, including soundproofing and
noise-reduction measures, to ensure they remain a respectful and responsible neighbor.
Local businesses like this one are part of the fabric of our community. They provide
jobs, convenience, and reliable service, and they’ve shown a willingness to listen, adapt, and improve when issues arise. The steps they’ve taken demonstrate good faith and a
genuine commitment to addressing the concerns of nearby residents. Given the
improvements already made and their ongoing efforts to operate responsibly, I believe
they’ve earned the opportunity to continue serving the community at their current
location. I hope the city recognizes the value they bring and supports their ability to remain open.
Zachariah DelGado
May 5, 2026 ∙ 12:44pm
I love this location especially when the Old Town Arvada location has multiple cars lined up. The Lakeside location has saved me so much time. I work graveyard shifts and I
wash my car before going to work at 11pm and it’s the only location that isn’t flooded
with other cars.
Nathan Luebbehusen
May 5, 2026 ∙ 12:13pm
Small and local businesses like Autowash are the lifeblood of our greater Denver neighborhoods. As a car enthusiast who’s experienced dozens of car wash brands,
Autowash stands head and shoulders above the run-down self-service washes and the
low quality corporate automatic washes. If you’re going to impose burdensome
approval processes for local businesses, the LEAST you can do is keep your word that
these expensive regulatory hoops allow for the continued operation of a great business. You are our employees, not our overlords.
Christopher R Stapor
May 5, 2026 ∙ 12:07pm
While I don't live in Wheat Ridge, I am an Autowash employee. And I'm very happy to be an Autowash employee. Autowash is a local 'mom and pop' operation that has not only
brought a wonderful service to the greater Denver/Front Range area, it is also the source
of many of our livelihoods. Furthermore, even though I've only been part of the team for
about a month now, I have to say, this business is run with consideration, integrity, and
Page 42 of 51
compassion. And I've worked for a lot of local businesses that can't say that. It is, quite
frankly, a blessing to find a company that believes in its mission and, more importantly,
its people. And the communities in which it operates. I believe in democracy, and the process of self-determination. My hope is that the local citizens will see the good-faith
efforts Autowash has put into ameliorating the concerns they have addressed. Thank
you for listening to my perspective. I wish you all nothing but the best.
Donald Trump May 5, 2026 ∙ 11:15am
Stop harming small business! MAGAtards have already made life hard enough!
(Comment reproduced verbatim as submitted; language reflects the commenter’s submission.)
Lee Burris
May 5, 2026 ∙ 10:49am
As the husband of an Autowash employee, I’ve followed the developments at the Lakeside site closely. I’ve been impressed—and frankly, surprised—by the length the
company has gone to accommodate the neighbors, spending over half a million dollars
on improvements and sound walls. It’s rare to see a business act with that much
integrity. My wife’s livelihood depends on this location, and I believe Wheat Ridge is
better off with a business that is this committed to following the rules and improving the neighborhood.
Veronica Burris
May 5, 2026 ∙ 10:46am
As an employee, I’ve seen firsthand how much effort and money Autowash has put into being a good neighbor. We didn't just ignore the noise concerns; the company spent
over half a million dollars on sound walls and equipment upgrades to make things right.
It’s rare to see a business go to these lengths to cooperate with the city and residents.
We want to be here, and we’ve proven we’re willing to do the work to fit in. Working at
Autowash is more than just a job to me. I take pride in providing a quality service to our
customers and we take pride in keeping our site in top shape. Seeing the City consider
revoking our permit is disheartening because we’ve followed every rule and jumped through every hoop asked of us. Our customers love going there, and I love working
here. Losing this location would be a loss for the employees and the many residents
who rely on us.
Amanda von Kleist May 5, 2026 ∙ 6:58am
I am writing in strong support of Autowash and asking the City of Wheat Ridge to please
consider what this business truly means to the families and community around it. My
husband works for Autowash, and his job there helps provide for our family. Like so
many local employees, this is not just a business to us. It represents stability, security, and the ability to care for the people we love. Autowash has also shown that it cares
about this community in ways that go far beyond washing cars. They have supported
Page 43 of 51
charitable causes like The Joshua School, a Colorado school for children with autism
and developmental disabilities. This is deeply personal to me because our special
needs son attends The Joshua School. As a parent, I know how important community support is for families raising children with special needs, and it means so much to see
a local company choose to give back in that way. Autowash is a family-owned business
that employs local people, supports local families, and contributes to organizations
helping some of the most vulnerable members of our community. Taking away their
permit would not just hurt a company. It would hurt employees, spouses, children, and families who depend on those jobs. It would also send the message that a business
that has invested in this community is not valued here. Please consider the human
impact of this decision. Autowash has been a positive force for many families, including
mine, and I hope they are allowed to continue serving Wheat Ridge.
Dylan von Kleist
May 4, 2026 ∙ 1:20pm
Autowash has been a meaningful part of my life, both professionally and personally. I’ve
had the opportunity to grow within the company, take on more responsibility, and build a
career while supporting my family. That’s not something I take lightly. The actions being considered by the City of Wheat Ridge put at risk a company that has provided so much
to me and many others. What makes Autowash different is that it’s a family-owned and
operated Colorado business. Every location is here in Colorado, and there is a real
commitment to investing in the communities we serve. Decisions are made by people
who are involved, accessible, and genuinely care about doing things the right way. This is not an out-of-state company moving in as so many other car washes are. It was
founded in Denver and has grown over more than a decade as a local family business
right here in Colorado. In my role, I’ve been fortunate to be part of community outreach
efforts supporting causes like breast cancer research, food banks, disabled veterans,
programs for children with autism, and animal rescue organizations. Autowash has
consistently given back to the communities it operates in, and that matters. Beyond
that, Autowash operates at the forefront of technology and conservation—values that are core to Colorado. The company continues to innovate and improve, representing the
kind of entrepreneurial spirit that helps put local businesses on the map. From my
perspective, this is a business that followed the process, received approval through the
proper channels, and then continued to invest significant time and resources to meet
evolving expectations. That level of effort should matter. Autowash provides real value. Not just as a service, but as a local employer and community partner. I’m proud to be
part of it and hope to continue building my future here. I respectfully ask that you
consider the full picture and allow Autowash to continue operating the Lakeside
location. Thank you for your time and consideration.
At 8:50 p.m. Mayor Stites declared a ten-minute recess.
Mayor Stites called the meeting to order at 9 p.m.
Staff Closing Remarks
Page 44 of 51
Director Mikulak stated that a special use permit is not a one-time entitlement
disconnected from future operations. She reiterated that the code does not provide the
Director with the authority to require site improvements to mitigate impacts—that authority rests solely with Council. She stated that voluntary changes have not
sufficiently mitigated impacts, that enforcement is not a permanent management
strategy, and that after more than a year of efforts, concerns have persisted. She
indicated that the car wash does not comply with applicable noise limits under all
conditions, that professional mediation was offered and declined, and that additional conditions are necessary to provide operational clarity consistent with the original SUP
criteria and application.
Autowash Closing Remarks
Attorney Peckler thanked Council and the public for their testimony. He acknowledged
the sincerity of neighbors' concerns and stated that the data does not show sound
levels equivalent to a jet engine—that sound is improving and further mitigation may be
possible. He asked Council not to cut off the 18-month collaborative process by imposing permanent conditions at this hearing, stating that doing so would eliminate
flexibility to find new solutions and lock in conditions without knowing whether they will
achieve the desired standard. He reiterated that Autowash's request for "no action"
means no permanent conditions on the SUP, not the absence of further noise mitigation
efforts. He requested the opportunity to review the mitigation materials submitted by the neighbors and indicated openness to continued engagement.
Council Questions
Councilmember Okada asked about the basis for the trash can condition. Director Mikulak confirmed it was based on periodic staff observation of overflowing
receptacles at the vacuum stations, a lesser concern than the noise issues but included as a site maintenance expectation. Councilmember Okada also confirmed that
professional mediation was offered and not accepted by either party. He asked Auto
Wash about the decision to close the fourth bay; Mr. Dreeszen explained it was based on sound study data showing that operating with only three bays brought
measurements within the then-understood standard. Councilmember Okada asked Autowash about the apparent incongruity between claiming to operate the quietest car
wash in the country while community noise complaints persist; Mr. Dreeszen
acknowledged the difficulty in reconciling those positions given that measurements show approximately 55 dBA at the property line, and expressed concern about the lack
of a fixed, agreed-upon standard.
Councilmember Quinn asked whether the car wash had violated the noise ordinance.
Director Mikulak confirmed there had been measurements over the past year that
violated the noise ordinance. On the applicable standards, City Attorney Renaud clarified
that the city's noise code decibel limits apply only to industrial properties; for residential
and commercial properties, the city's code applies to a reasonableness standard. The
Page 45 of 51
state statute, however, establishes binding statewide noise limits—55 dBA daytime and
50 dBA nighttime for residential; 60 dBA daytime and 55 dBA nighttime for
commercial—and those standards take precedence. On the applicability of the Hobbs v. City of Salida decision, Attorney Renaud noted that the case involved an outdoor
amplified sound permit, which is factually distinct from this matter; however, he stated
most municipal practitioners read it as signaling that future cases will hold that
statewide noise standards trump conflicting local enactments. Councilmember Quinn
also noted that the two sound studies in the packet—one by Wave Engineering (retained by Autowash) and one by EDI (commissioned by the City)—reached different
conclusions. Director Mikulak confirmed they were performed by different consultants
under different methodologies and conditions and that this variability is part of why she
moved away from relying solely on sound studies and toward the special use permit
enforcement framework.
Councilmember Ohm asked how state law addresses shooting-range noise. City
Manager Goff explained that state statute grants shooting ranges use-by-right protection and prevents lawsuits from property owners who moved in after a range was
established. Councilmember Ohm noted that the approved site plan showed two “do not
enter” signs on the Gray Street access and asked whether the City authorized their removal. Director Mikulak stated she did not know and would follow up. Referencing
staff’s statement that the Gray Street access was intended as exit-only, Councilmember Ohm asked whether that access could be closed. Director Mikulak confirmed it must
remain at least an exit and also serve as required fire access. Councilmember Ohm
asked whether staff reasonably relied on the application’s depiction of closed bay doors as representing typical operations. Director Mikulak confirmed that staff did rely on that
representation. Councilmember Ohm then asked whether dryers or blowers were referenced in the special use permit application, project narrative, or criteria. Director
Mikulak stated she could not locate those terms in the special use permit materials and
noted they would more likely appear in the building permit application.
Councilmember Snell asked whether the prior car wash at the location ever had blowers
or dryers. Director Mikulak stated she believed the automatic bay added in 2015 may have, but the four open self-serve bays did not. She also asked the fence's composition.
Dreeszen confirmed it consists of steel framing, three-quarter-inch plywood, and one-
and-a-half-inch polyurethane foam, selected based on density specifications
recommended by the sound engineer, constructed on a two-foot berm, making the
effective height approximately eight feet from the site's grade zero.
Councilmember Wood asked whether standard modeling techniques for sound walls
could be used going forward to design a barrier that would reliably achieve compliance
with applicable standards. Director Mikulak confirmed that an appropriate sound
engineer could design and model a more effective barrier, though it is not the city's role
to develop those design solutions.
Page 46 of 51
Councilmember Martell asked whether the fence could have been built taller. Dreeszen
stated the eight-foot total height was what the sound engineer recommended, that it
could theoretically be built taller, and that before construction Autowash asked staff whether the proposed wall would satisfy the requirement and received confirmation that
it would. Attorney Peckler added that the city code allows fences up to six feet by right
and that a taller fence would require a variance, which he indicated staff had historically
signaled they would likely support.
Councilmember Larson confirmed that the previous car wash operated as a legally nonconforming use without a special use permit. He asked about the wall along the
west side, referenced in some materials; Director Mikulak stated she did not have details on that specific element. He noted the claim that the city ended collaborative
discussions before the technical review was complete, citing language in the agenda
packet. Director Mikulak stated there was no withholding of the city's sound study; it had simply not been provided until shortly after the city received its final version from
the consultant, at which point Director Mikulak had decided to pursue a different course of action given the absence of sustained voluntary progress over 15 months.
Mayor Stites asked why sound-dampening foam was installed on the interior of the bay
doors if the doors are not closed during operation. Dreeszen clarified that the south-side
entry doors have been closed during every wash cycle since the first enforcement
action, with the sound foam applied to those doors. The north-side exit doors are left open in warm weather due to humidity and equipment protection concerns.
Mayor Stites closed the testimony portion of the hearing and opened deliberation.
Council Deliberation
Councilmember Wood stated she was inclined toward Option 1—modification of the
special use permit—as the path most likely to provide a workable outcome that allows the car wash to continue operating while addressing community impacts.
Councilmember Larson also supported Option 1 and recommended: retain (a) with
refinement; retain (b); remove (c) and (d); retain (e); and revise (f) to allow periodic,
random, non-announced monitoring, with City-initiated studies required after operational
changes.
Councilmember Okada expressed agreement with Councilmember Larson's framework
and proposed a modification to Condition A specifying that bay doors may be open
when no vehicle is actively in a wash or dry cycle, clarifying that the restriction applies only during active use of a bay. He also proposed limiting City requests for sound
monitoring under Condition F to no more than twice per calendar year.
Page 47 of 51
Councilmember Ohm supported Option 1 with all conditions, including the bay-door
requirement, unless Autowash demonstrates additional mitigation that would allow
doors to open. He supported the twice-per-year limit.
Councilmember Quinn stated he had initially favored revocation but was persuaded
otherwise by the public testimony. He stated he would support Option 1 but expressed concern about certain actions taken by Auto Wash during the process that he felt were
inconsistent with the stated commitment to operating in good faith.
Councilmember Snell supported Option 1 with the doors open only when no active wash or dry cycle is occurring, supported removing the signage condition, and supported the
twice-per-year sound monitoring limitation.
Councilmember Martell supported Option 1 and suggested expanding (E) to explicitly
reference the reasonableness standard in Section 16-103. She also expressed concern
that twice-per-year monitoring may be insufficient initially.
Councilmember Okada also noted that adding "reasonableness" to Condition E could
reintroduce the very interpretive ambiguity that had complicated the process to date, given Autowash’s concern about a shifting standard. He indicated comfort with the
existing language given the City Attorney's explanation of the existing statutory
definitions.
Attorney Renaud advised on Condition E, noting that the reasonableness standard is
already inherent in the reference to Section 16-103, which defines unreasonable noise through several specific sentences, and cautioned against adding a shorthand
reference to “reasonableness” that might be interpreted out of context. Councilmember
Martell accepted this clarification and indicated she could support Condition E as
written.
Councilmember Wood proposed additional language for Condition E that would require
compliance to be achieved through identified operational or physical mitigation, as
determined through modeling, so as to ensure a proactive path to sustained compliance
rather than reactive monitoring.
Councilmember Larson expressed some skepticism about the additional specificity, and
the proposal was discussed but not incorporated into the final motion.
On the frequency of sound monitoring under Condition F, Councilmember Martell and
Councilmember Snell both suggested that more than twice annually might be
appropriate in the near term given recent violations. Councilmember Okada reiterated
that given the cost and logistical complexity of obtaining sound studies and the existing
limitation to city-requested measurements, twice annually is appropriate and potentially frequent enough on its own.
Page 48 of 51
Attorney Renaud summarized the emerging consensus as a motion to adopt Option 1
with the following modifications: Condition A limited to requiring all bay doors remain
fully closed during all wash and dry cycles (removing the second sentence from staff’s draft); Condition B retained as written; Condition C removed entirely; Condition D
retained as written (note: subsequently amended out); Condition E retained as written;
and Condition F revised to limit city requests for sound monitoring to no more than
twice per calendar year, and directing the City Attorney to prepare written findings for
the next regular council meeting.
A friendly amendment was raised by Councilmember Okada to remove Condition D (site
maintenance and trash cans) from the motion.
Motion to amend: Councilmember Quinn
Second: Councilmember Okada
Vote: 7 ayes; 0 nays
Amendment to remove condition D carried.
Council voted on the motion as amended
Motion to adopt Option 1 — modification of the Special Use Permit — with the
following conditions:
(a) Bay Doors Closed: All bay doors (north and south) shall remain fully closed during all
wash and dry cycles. Doors may be opened only for vehicle entry and exit.
(b) Hours of operation limited to 7:00 a.m.–8:00 p.m.
(c) On-Site Signage: The operator shall install and maintain signage in visible locations
requesting that customers minimize noise, including prohibiting amplified music while on site.
(d) Site Maintenance: The operator shall install and regularly service trash cans which
are appropriately sized to accommodate trash deposited by customers without the
potential for overflow.
(c) (e) Operation shall comply with all applicable noise standards, including CRS 25-12-103 and Section 16-103 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws.
(d) (f) Monitoring: Upon request of the City made not more than twice in each calendar year, the operator shall conduct and submit sound measurements prepared by a
qualified professional to demonstrate compliance. Such requests may be made under
circumstances that include but are not limited to, equipment changes, operational
changes, or recommissioning of the eastern bay.
Page 49 of 51
The City Attorney’s Office was directed to prepare written findings consistent with this
decision for consideration at the next regular meeting.
Motion: Councilmember Ohm Second: Councilmember Quinn.
Vote: 7 ayes; 0 nays Motion as amended carried
Motion as amended and adopted:
(a) Bay Doors Closed: All bay doors (north and south) shall remain fully closed during all wash and dry cycles.
(b) Hours of operation limited to 7:00 a.m.–8:00 p.m.
(c) Operation shall comply with all applicable noise standards, including CRS 25-12-103 and Section 16-103 of the Wheat Ridge Code of Laws.
(d) Monitoring: Upon request of the City made not more than twice in each calendar year, the operator shall conduct and submit sound measurements prepared by a
qualified professional to demonstrate compliance. Such requests may be made under
circumstances that include but are not limited to, equipment changes, operational changes, or recommissioning of the eastern bay.
The City Attorney’s Office was directed to prepare written findings consistent with this decision for consideration at the next regular meeting.
ORDINANCES ON FIRST READING
None
DECISIONS, RESOLUTIONS, AND MOTIONS
None.
CITY MANAGER'S MATTERS
City Manager Goff requested consensus from the Council to send a letter to West Metro Fire District, co-signed with the cities of Lakewood and Edgewater, ahead of the fire
district's board meeting the following day. He explained that West Metro Fire District
and South Metro Fire District are both considering sales tax ballot increases this
November. Because sales tax is the city's primary revenue source, the letter would
encourage West Metro to explore alternatives, such as a property tax increase—similar to the approach that South Metro Fire District ultimately took after engagement from
Page 50 of 51
neighboring cities. The City Manager noted that the City of Edgewater had drafted the
letter for signature by the respective mayors.
Consensus granted by the Council to send the letter to West Metro Fire District.
CITY ATTORNEY'S MATTERS
Attorney Renaud noted that the direction to prepare written findings consistent with the
Council's decision on the Lakeside Autowash SUP was incorporated as part of the motion, and that the findings would be brought before the council at the next regular
meeting.
ELECTED OFFICIALS' MATTERS
Councilmember Okada reported attending the Red Rocks Community College
graduation on Saturday alongside Councilmembers Ohm, Larson, and Wood. He also
announced that he and Councilmember Larson would be hosting a district meeting at the historical society the following Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to noon.
Councilmember Larson expressed appreciation for the Red Rocks graduation. He
reported attending the Wheat Ridge Business Association meeting the previous Tuesday, where City Manager Goff presented the State of the City. He also attended the
O’Reilly Auto Parts ribbon cutting on Friday morning. Later in the week, he traveled to
Pueblo for the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials Colorado
Chapter 2026 Annual Conference, where he moderated a panel featuring Wheat Ridge
Senior Housing Planner Shannon Terrell on the Ridge Road foothills regional housing project connected to the Red Rocks Community College nursing campus.
Councilmember Ohm reflected on the Red Rocks Community College graduation, noting the inspiring remarks by President Landon Curry and the community built among
students. He shared that his son, along with two friends made in sixth grade, are
graduating and all three are attending Western Colorado University together.
Councilmember Wood also commented on the Red Rocks graduation. She announced
that she and Mayor Pro Tem Hultin would be attending the Civic Canopy Summit in Colorado Springs on Thursday and Friday—a conference focused on civil discourse and
constructive dialogue in a polarized environment.
Councilmember Quinn congratulated Steve Art on his retirement, noting an official
retirement party had taken place that day. He thanked members of the public who
testified at tonight's meeting. He also noted the concert at the Green on 38th Avenue on Friday evening and the block party at Esters Gold’s Marketplace on Saturday.
Page 51 of 51
Councilmember Martell reported attending her nephews' graduation in Kansas over the
weekend and the Action Center Western Gala fundraising event the previous week. She
reminded the public of an upcoming movie at the Green on Friday evening.
Councilmember Snell recognized the neighbors who attended tonight's hearing and
expressed appreciation for the council's collaborative deliberation. She announced that she and Councilmember Martell would hold office hours the following morning at Ann's
Pie Cafe from 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. and that regular office hours would resume on the
first and third Tuesday of each month going forward.
Mayor Stites thanked attendees for their respectful conduct. He noted City Manager
Goff’s State of the City presentation at the Wheat Ridge Business Association meeting, the O’Reilly Auto Parts ribbon cutting, and the second round of Wadsworth Business
Grant Program awards, which distributed $42,000 to local businesses. He commended
the Parks and Recreation Department—particularly Beth June—for the first Concert on
the Green, featuring 14-year-old DJ Kai White and drawing strong attendance alongside
the Stevens Elementary School carnival. He reported handing out Wheat Ridge T-shirts to graduating kindergarteners at Peak Elementary School. He also highlighted the Public
Works Open House scheduled for the following day from 3:00 to 7:00 p.m. at the Public
Works facility. Mayor Stites noted there would be no City Council meeting on May 25,
2026, in observance of Memorial Day, with the next meeting scheduled as a study
session on June 1, 2026.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Stites adjourned the May 18, 2026, City Council Special Meeting at 10:25 p.m.
_________________________________________________
Rachel Hultin, Mayor Pro Tem
__________________________________________________
Onorina Z. Maloney, Senior Deputy City Clerk