Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 11/13/1995 - Zoning Board of Appeals ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOVEMBER 13, 1995 CITY OF MCHENRY IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION ) � OF MCHENRY STATE BANK AS ) Z-401 TRUSTEE UNDFR THE PROVISIONS OF ) MCHENRY STATE BANK TRUST 1313 A TRUST AGREEMENT DATED ) DIPAK PATEL SEPTEMBER 2, 1977, AND KNOWN AS ) TRUST NO 1313, FOR AN AMENDMENT ) 0-2 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE ) CITY OF MCHENRY, MCHENRY ) COUNTY, ILLINOIS. ) REPORT OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TO THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF MCHENRY, ILLINOIS A hearing on the above-captioned pedtion was held on November 13, 1995. Chairman Semrow called the hearing to order at 7:30 p.m. The following persons were in attendance: 1. Zoning Board Members: Thomas Bun, Randy Christensen, Chuck Lovett, Harry Semrow, Donna Tobeck. Absent: Frank McClatchey, John Swierk. 2. Attomey for Zoning Board: David McArdle. 3. Recording Secretary: Kathleen M. Kunzer. ,`. 4. Director of Building & Zoning: John A. Lobaito. 5. Petidoner: Dipak Patel, contract purchaser, 1311 Sunset Tenace, Rochelle Illinois 61068. 6. Attomey for the Petitioner: Diamond LeSueur Roth and Associates represented by Samuel Diamond, 3431 West Elm Street McHenry Illinois 60050. 7. City Council Members: None. 8. Court Reporter: None. 9. Registered Observers/Objectors: None. NOTIFICATION Notification of this hearing was published in the Northwest Herald on October 26, 1995. The Publisher's Certificate of Publication is on file in the office of the City Clerk with regard to this matter. Notices were sent to all abutting properties via certified mailing. The subject property was posted as required by ordinance. An Affidavit of Service ascertaining that all notification requirements have been followed xs on file in the office of the City Clerk. � Page 2 ZBA-Patel 11/13/95 LOCATION � The subject property is located east of Route 31 approximately 400 feet north of the intersecdon of Route 31 and Knox Drive and is comprised of appro�cimately 1.47 acres. SUMMARY The Petitioners are requesting that the subject property be reclassified from RS-3 Medium High Density single Family District to O-2 Office Park District. TESTIMONY Chairman Semrow swore in the following witnesses for the Petitioner: 1. Jerry Davenport, 137 Cross Trail McHenry Illinois 60050. 2. Dave Gelwicks, 3817 W Waukegan Rd McHenry Illinois 60050 3. Dipak Patel, 1311 Sunset Terrace Rochelle Illinois 61068. Attomey Diamond said that the contract purchaser, Mr. Patel, is planning to erect a Super 8 Motel on the subject property. The proposed O-2 zoning classification would permit this use. The Pedtioners are seeking a text amendment of the subject property. The property is comprised of approximately 1.5 acres. There is 3Q0 feet of frontage on Route 31 and the property is 200 feet deep. Mr. Davenport was the first witness for the Petitioners. Davenport is a planning project manager with Smith Engineering Consultants. Davenport has been retained by Mr. Patel to look at the site to determine the feasibility of putting up a motel on the subject property. There has been some preliminary � engineering, soils analysis and environmental impact study done on the property. It is the conclusion of Davenport that it would be possible to erect a motel on this site. Davenport noted that the Comprehensive Plan indicates this area to be office. Retail is planned for the west side of Route 31, but office is planned for East Route 31 in this general area. Davenport provided the Board with the surrounding zoning district classificadons and uses as follows: to the North RS-3 zoning; vacant to the South C5 zoning; retail to the East RS-3 zoning; park land to the West CS zoning; vacant, proposed commercial development. Davenport said that city utilities are available to the site. There is good access to both water and sewer. A traffic impact analysis has been done which indicates that the traffic impact would be less than if the site were developed with offices as opposed to the proposed motel. The actual traffic impact would be less than 3% per day increase of traffic on the highway; less that 1% during peak times. Davenport said that the developer is proposing a 16,000 square foot facility which would have 50 guest rooms. It would be a two-story building which would require approximately 50 parking spaces plus one space for each employee during each shift. The site would be able to accommodate the parking requirements of the city. Davenport said Illinois Department of Transportation will permit one curb cut on the lot; it is not clear if they would allow two. The Developer is satisfied with one curb cut. Davenport said there would be no need to seek a variance with regard to the bulk requirements of the � ordinance, unless the City would prefer to have the building set back further on the Iot. Davenport provided two concept plans. Exhibit 1, showed a building on the site with no need to vary the bulk requirements of the ordinance. EJchibit 2, showed the building setback deeper on the lot, a.nd would Page 3 ZBA-Patel 11/13/95 require a variance as to the rear yard setback. If the City shouid choose to posidon the building as � shown on Exhibit:?, a variance would be needed. The Petitioner would than have to come back before this Board in order ta seek a variance. Davenport said the size of the site is adequate for the use being proposed. QUESTIONS OF THE WITNESS BY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD Christensen asked what the Army Corps does when they review a site. Davenport said he is not certain if they actuaily came out to look at the site or what their review consists of. Christensen asked where the cattails are iocated on the property. Davenport said he did not see any cattails on the property. Christensen asked the depth of the detendon area. Davenport said it would be 3-4 feet deep with an average depth of 2 feet. However, it would be a dry detention area. Semrow said there would be 50 guest rooms. How many other rooms would there be? Davenport deferred to Petitioner Patel for this information. There would be a lobby, laundry facilities and other support rooms. Lovett asked if there would be banquet facilities. Davenport said he is not sure. Lovett asked the proposed height of the building. Davenport said it would be two stories, but that he is not swe of the exact height. Lovett asked if city sewer and water would be available on the site. Davenport said that is correct. Lovett asked if there had been an impact study done to ascertain the impact on city water and sewer of the motel. Lobaito said there is adequate capacity for this proposed use. Tobeck asked if there had been fill brought in to this property. Davenport said there has been fill � brought in. In one area there is as much as 4-5 feet, but in most places it is 2 feet or less. Tobeck asked if this property had been a designated wedands which had been filled. Davenport said the Army Corps did not call this out as a wedand. They were aware that fill had been brought in to the property. Tobeck said if there wasn't a problem with low-lying wedands, why was the fill brought in. Is the property level with the property abutting to the north and the south? Davenport said it is lower. Lovett asked how the fill being brought in would impact the buildability of the site. Davenport said that there is no problem with the small amount of fill which had been brought in. Conventional faotings will be allowed. Lovett asked if the development would conform to the landscape requirements of the ordinance. Davenport said that all aspect of the ordinance would be followed as the property is developed. Semrow said that Exhibit 2 Concept Plan might be more desirable, however a variance would be required in order to develop this property according to this plan. The Petitioner did not provide legal notice as to a request for variance; therefore Elchibit 2 Concept Plan is not a viable option. Attorney Diamond withdrew Exhibit 2 Concept Plan. Diamond called his second witness, David Gelwicks. Gelwicks noted that this site was selected due to its location on Route 31 and its close proximity to the Corporate Center, Motorola and the other large corporations which have recendy built in the Corporate Center. Gelwicks said the Petitioner had looked at sites along Bull Valley Road and Route 31 and this appeared to be the best lacation for this project. � Gelwicks said there is a demand for this type of motel in the area. There are two other Super 8 Motels in the County: one in Crystal Lake; one in Woodstock. They are filled most of the time. There is a need for more economy level rooms in the County. Page 4 ZBA-Patel 11/13/95 Gelwicks said the purchaser, Mr. Patel, is a partner in 11 other Super 8 Motel projects. He is � experienced in this type of business. It is a family run operation. Family members manage the motels on-site. Gelwicks said he believed the proposed motel to be a good use for this property. It would benefit the community. Attorney Diamond called his third witness, Dipak Patel. Patel said he has been involved in the motel business for the past ten years. Patel is in partnership with four friends in the business of owning and operating Super 8 motels. He currently managed the Super 8 Motel in Rochelle on Highway 38. Patel said the Super 8 in McHenry would have a resident manager. There would be management on-site 24 hours each day. Patel said the Super 8 would have stricdy lodging rooms. There would be no banquet facilities, lounge or restawant. All Super 8's are inspected by the franchise at least four times each year to assure quality management control. The nadonal franchise assists with marketing and advertising, but each motel is privately owned and operated. The motel would have a 24 hour front desk open. the motel would provide queen sized beds, 25 inch televisions in each room, and complimentary continental breakfast. Patel said that in adidon to the 50 guest rooms, the utilization of space in the facility would be a 400 square foot breakfast area; two rooms would be used for laundry facilities; one room would be used for a manager's office; there would be a front desk and lobby. Patel said that the motel would service a different type of market than the existing hotel in town. It would be more affordable. McHenry can support both types of establishments. The project would be locally financed. Burr asked if the motel would be filled. Patel said there is a need for this type of facility and it would � be filled. Christensen asked if the matter had been presented to the Plan Commission. Diamond said there is no need as it conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and there is no proposed subdivision of the property. Christensen asked the Pedtioner to install more landscaping than is shown on the concept plan. Patel said that is merely a concept plan. They will follow the requirements of the ordinance. Semrow asked if the Petitioner would seek to expand to three stories at some time. Patel said that 50 guest rooms should be adequate. Tobeck asked if the Petitioner usually builds a new building or does he generally rehab an exisdng structure to convert it to a Super 8. Patel said that in all but one instance a new structure was built. Tobeck asked if the Petitioner would rent rooms weekly or monthly or only on a daily basis. Patel said it is a Super 8 policy by franchise agreement to rent daily only. Tobeck said she has concerns regarding the proximity of the site to the park and the safety of the children using the park. She stated she is not sure about having a motel in such close proximity to the park. Semrow asked if the building will be sprinklered. Patel said if city ordinance requires it to be sprinklered, it will be. Semrow expressed concem regarding access to the rear of the building by emergency vehicles. The building would only be accessible on two sides, the south and the west. Semrow asked if there would be adequate parking lot lighting. Patel said the site would be well lighted. Semrow asked if it would be a secure building. Patel said it would have electronic locks. Patrons � would have to use their key to access the exterior doors. Lovett said the refuse disposal area should be in the rear yard. Diamond said the concept plan is not Page 5 ZBA-Patel 11/13/95 the final plan for the project. The development would conform to all requirements of the ordinance � including the location for the refuse disposal area. Tobeck asked if the motel is built and it is not successful, would Super $ take over or would it be up to the franchisee to sell the facility. Patel said he would have to find a buyer for the motel. There would be no help from Super 8 in finding a new owner. Chairman Semrow said, "there being no further testimony before this Board with regard to this matter, the Board will consider this Petition, unless there is a motion to recess by a member of the Board. There being no motion to recess, the Chair will entertain a motion with regard to this Petition." DELIBERATION AND RECOMMENDATION Motion by Christensen, seconded by Burr to recommend to the City Council that the Pedtioners' request to reclassify the subject property from RS-3 Medium High Density Single Family Zoning District to O-2 Office Park be granted; and that the Approval Criteria for Zoning Amendment, Table 33, page 401 of the zoning ordinance, have been met. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION Tobeck said that she would like the record to reflect her concerns regarding the safety issue of the motel being in such close proximity to the park and the safety of the children playing there, and that the Council take this into consideration and not provide any direct access from the park to this site. Semrow asked that the record reflect his concems regarding access to the rear of the building for all � emergency vehicles. VOTING ON THE MOTION Voting Aye: Burr, Christensen, Lovett, Semrow, Tobeck. Voting Nay: None. Not Voting: None. Abstaining: None. Absent: McClatchey, Swierk. Motion carried S-0. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Christensen, secondetl by Burr to adjoum the hearing. Voting Aye: Burr, Christensen, Lovett, Semrow, Tobeck. Vodng Nay: None. Not Voting: None. Abstaining: None. Absent; Mc(;latchey, Swierk. � Page 6 ZBA-Patel 11/13/95 � Motion carried 5-�. This hearing was adjourned at 8:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted ��� Harry Semrow Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals c: Agenda, Zoning Board of Appeals (7), Plan Commission (7), City Administrator, Director of Building & Zoning, Public Works, Administration, City Attorney, Engineering Inspector, Aldermen Reference Copy, Building & Zoning Zoning File, Landmark Commission Chairman, Northwest Herald, McHenry Star News, City Clerk File. Z-401 � �