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
�
�