HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 11/29/1993 - Zoning Board of Appeals ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
NOVEMBER 29, 1993
CITY OF MCHENRY
� IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION )
OF DAVID A. K�UK FOR A RECLASSIFI- ) Z-373
CATION FROM C�UNTY A-1 TO C-3 ) DAVID A. KRUK
COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL WITH A ) 5603 W. BULL VALLEY ROAD
CONDITIONAL USE PURSUANT TO THF ) HAYSTACKS MANOR
ZONING ORDINANCE FOR 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 petition was held on November 29, 1993. Chairman
Semrow called the hearing to order at 7:40 p.m. The following persons were in
attendance:
1. Zoning Board Members: Randy Christensen, Emil Kleemann, Harry Semrow, John
Swierk, Donna Tobeck. Absent: Richard Adamson, Wayne Dixon.
2. Attorney for Zoning Board: David McArdle.
3. Recording Secretary: Kathleen Kunzer.
4. Director of Building & Zoning: John A. Lobaito.
5. Petitioner: David A. Kruk, 12826 S. Orchard, Alsip, Illinois 60658.
�
6. Attorney for the Petitioner: Diamond, LeSueur, Roth and Associates,
represented by Samuel Diamond, 3431 West Elm Street, McHenry Illinois 60050.
7. City Council Members: Alderman Baird, Alderman Bates, Alderman Bolger.
8. Court Reporter: Cheryl Barone.
9. Objectors:
1. Robert Fry, 513 Brookwood Trail , McHenry
2. Kevin Harrington, 505 Brookwood Trail , McHenry.
NOTICE OF PUBLICATION
-----------------
Notification of this hearing was published in the Northwest Herald on November 12,
1993. The Publisher' s Certificate of Publication regarding this matter is on file
in the City Clerk' s Office. Notices were mailed to all abutting landowners and
certified mailing receipts are on file in the office of the City Clerk. The subject
property was posted. An affidavit of compliance with all notice requirements has
been filed with the City Clerk with regard to this Petition.
SUMMARY
The Petitioner is requesting that:
a) the subject property be reclassified from A-1 county Agricultural to C-3
Community Commercial upon annexation to the City of MrHenry;
b) that a C��nditional Use be granted to permit the construction and operation of
� a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages.
Page2
ZBA-Kruk
11/28/93
L' LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
The property which is the subject of this petition is located at 5603 West Bull
Valley Road and is comprised of approximately 4 acres.
TESTIMONY
Attorney Diamond provided the Board with an overvipw of the Petitions �vhirh are being
presented at this hearing. The zoning classification and actual uses of all abutting
properties wa� indicated on an aerial photo for the Boards clarification of the
properties surrounding the subject property. Diamond said that it was the consensus
of the Plan Commission that this proposal basically conforms to the Comprehensive
Plan. If there needs to be a map amendment, that is a sPparate issue which will be
addressed by the Plan Commission. The only reason there is a request fnr a
conditional use is because there would be consumption of alcohol on the �remises in
conjunction with the restaurant use.
Diamond said the Petitioner purchased the property in September without any
guarantees. Water and sewer are available to the site. It was determined that the
Petitioner can not cross connect to Brookwood Trail . He will connect to the east
from the Amoco site. The Petitioner will meet all code requirements. He is not
asking for any variations.
Chairman Semrow swore in the following witness for the Petitioner:
1) David A. Kruk, 12826 S. Orchard, Alsip, Illinois 60658.
Kruk said he purchased the subject property on September 10, 1993. He plans to
� convert the existing residence to a restaurant. This was the setting he was looking
for. That is why he purchased it without any guarantee of its use as a restaurant.
Kruk said that with regard to his experience and training in this field, he has been
going to culinary art school and restaurant management training classes. He has
hired an architect and an engineer for the project. The existing structure is
approximately 3,000 square feet in size. Kruk said he wants to preserve the existing
structure type when the addition to the facility is added. The site is approximately
4 acres in size. Kruk said it is a heavily wooded, fairly level site. He wants to
keep as many of the existing trees and landscape as possible during the remodeling
process. He would like to leave the front of the site (which abuts Bull Valley Road)
intact, if possible. The only thing which may disturb it would be the installation
of the water or sewer mains. The addition to the structure would be to the south
elevation. Kruk said he plans to use the existing driveway for entrance to the site.
Kruk said the current zoning for the parcel is A-1 County Agricultural . He said he
is requesting C-3 Community Commercial as recommended by City staff. Kruk described
the uses for all abutting properties.
UESTIONS OF THE PETITIONER BY MEMBERS OF THE BOARD
Chairman Semrow asked how many square feet the restaurant will be when the addition
has been added to the existing structure. Kruk said the square footage will be
6,000. Semrow asked if there would be adequate parking as required by ordinance.
Diamond said the Petitioner would comply with all parking and landscaping
requirements of the ordinance. Retention facilities would be addressed as well , when
,� the final engireering has been completed. Semrow said that if the restaurant is to
be 6,000 square feet, there should be 120 parking spaces shown on the plan. It would
appear that the plan is deficient in that respect. Diamond said the Petitioner would
have the requi �ed number of parki ng s paces on the s i te. The s i te pl an woul d be
revised again if necessary.
Page3
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
�" Christensen asked if the Petitioner was planning to reside in the structure. Diamond
said there is no provision in the Zoning Ordinance for living beneath a commercial
business in the City of McHenry. This is being proposed to be considered as a
condition within the confines of the annexation agreement with regard to the subject
property. Diamond stated that the Petitioner would meet all building and zoning
codes with regarding to a residence within a commercial structure. Christensen asked
if there would be an entrance from the restaurant to the residence. Kruk said there
would be.
Semrow asked if the building in question is built into the side of a hill . Kruk said
that is correct. Semrow said that the living quarters then would be on the first
level and not actually in a basement.
Swierk asked if the Petitioner would reside in the living quarters. Kruk said that
is correct. Diamond said the living quarters would be about 1,400-1,500 square feet
in size. Semrow asked what percentage of the original structure would be used for
the restaurant. Kruk said about 50% of the existing building would be used for the
restaurant. Kruk said he is planning to add approximately 3,000 square feet to the
restaurant.
Tobeck asked what kind of restaurant was being planned, family? catering to a certain
age group? Kruk said he is planning an upscale restaurant with fine dining. Tobeck
asked the proposed hours of operation. Kruk said Monday through Thursday, 4:30 p.m.
to 11 p.m. ; Friday through Sunday, 4:30 - midnight. Tobeck asked the proposed number
of employees. Kruk said he anticipated 15 employees.
�
Semrow asked if the Petitioner was planning to offer a dinner menu only; there would
be no lunches served on the premises? Kruk said that is correct. Semrow asked the
Petitioner if he foresaw any likelihood of extending the hours of operation to
include lunch. Kruk that would be a possibility at some point; as of this time, he
was not planning on being open for lunch.
Swierk referred to the building plans which were presented by the Petitioner at this
hearing. Swierk said the bar area appeared to be quite large in relationship to the
dining area. Kruk said these plans were drawn up by his architect. It was
irrelevant to him how large the bar area would be. Swierk asked McArdle if there was
some point when this would become a bar serving food rather than a restaurant serving
alcoholic beverages. Is there a formula for percentage of seating whereby this would
tell us if this is in fact a bar or a restaurant? McArdle said thPre are no
restrictions with regard to the liquor license and the amount of seating in the bar
area of a restaurant. McArdle asked if there was an objection on the part of the
Board with someone coming into the establishment, having a drink and leaving without
having eaten dinner. Diamond said this would be an upscale restaurant; it would be
similar to the Dobyn's House.
Semrow asked if the Petitioner planned on using the existing driveway as a means of
ingress/egress for the subject property. Kruk said that would be correct. Semrow
said to the bes+ of his recollection, the driveway accesses Bull Valley Road at the
bottom of a hill and just west of a curve in the road. Semrow asked the Petitioner
how there could be no adverse impact upon local traffic. There would be a potential
� of 120 vehicles accessing or leaving this site at a location where there is a curve
and a decline in the roadway. There would be a traffic hazard during peak traffic
times, such as the evening dinner hour. Kruk said he does not think there will be
a problem with traffic at the location. Semrow asked the Petitioner if he thought
there was a potE�ntial for a safety problem. Diamond said he did not think there was
a safety issue ,�s far as traffic is concerned.
Page 4
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
� Semrow said the City will require the lot to be bermed along the front property line
in order to �,creen the parking from the road. Diamond said the Petitioner will
comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, unless the City chooses to
waive any of the requirements for one reason or another.
Christensen said there would be a berm along the front property line, but what about
the property line to the east. Christensen said he was concerned regarding this 3-
acre parcel being presently zoned A-1 in the county. In the event this property is
brought into the City, it will not be properly screened from the adjacent restaurant
commercial property to the west. McArdle said this issue could be addressed in the
annexation agreement. Christensen asked if all abutting property owners had been
notifi�d. Diamond said that the property owners as shown on the amended list of
abutting taxpayers had been notified. Semrow said that all green cards had been
returned and had been made a part of the record of these proceedings.
McArdle asked if this restaurant serving alcoholic beverages would be without live
entertainm�ent. Diamond said that with regard to the conditional use permit, the
Petitioner is requesting that alcoholic beverages be served on the premises in
conjunction with the restaurant use. Semrow said that in the C-3 District it is
permitted to have as a conditional use a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages and
having live entertainment. Semrow said that the C-2 District restricts the
restaurant to having no live entertainment. Semrow asked why the Petitioner sought
C-3 rather than C-2 zoning. Was he intending to have live entertainment on the
premises? The Petitioner indicated that the staff recommended C-3 zoning in order
to conform to the C-3 zoning on the northwest corner of the intersection of Bull
Valley and Crystal Lake Roads. Diamond said the Petitioner would have no problem if
� C-2 zoning were granted rather than the proposed C-3. It would be more restrictive
and if that is what the Board wants, that would be satisfactory with the Petitioner.
UESTIONS OF THE PETITIONER BY THE OBJECTORS
-----------------------------------
Robert_F�•. Is it your intention to have live entertainment at this restaurant?
Kruk said it is not.
Would the Petitioner manage the facility himself or hire a manager? Kruk said he
would manage it himself. Has the Petitioner worked in a restaurant before? Kruk
said he has worked in a restaurant, but that he has never managed one. Is the
Petitioner a member of the Illinois Restaurant Association? Kruk said he is not,
although he is familiar with the organization. Is the Petitioner aware that there
are approximately 6,000 new food licenses issued each year in the state of Illinois?
Kruk said he was aware of that fact. Is the Petitioner aware that of those 6,000
restaurants, about 4,000 fail in their first year? Kruk said he is aware of that.
Is the Petitioner aware that of the 6,000 licenses issued each year, approximately
1,000 fail in the second year? Kruk said yes, he is aware of that. Is the
Petitioner aware of the 97 us�s which would be permitted in the C-3 Zoning District
if it were granted to this property, especially in the event that this restaurant
failed within its first two years. Kruk said he is not planning for the restaurant
to fail .
If the C-3 zoning were granted but the conditional use permit was not granted to
allow alcoholic beverages, would the Petitioner still open the restaurant. Kruk said
he would not. Will the Petitioner have room on the proposed site plan for the
� required 120 parking spaces? Kruk said he would conform to the City code. Is there
any parking on this site now? Kruk said only as required for the existing single
family residence. Would the parking lot be created within an area that is currently
highly wooded and grassed at this time?
Page5
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
� Kruk said yes , that is true, although the parking area to the east of the building
is not as heavily wooded as the perimeter of the site. Would the Petitioner have to
remove some oj' the existing trees? Kruk said that is correct. Is it not true that
the environmer�t would be changed when the proposed project is completed? Kruk said
the environment will not change. He hopes to maintain the setting as much as
possible. Is it not true that the number of trees on the site would be drastically
reduced due to the installation of the proposed parking lot? Kruk said that the area
where the parking lot would be located is not as heavily wooded and that the trees
on that part of the site are not as mature as in other locations on this property.
Is it true that half of the existing building would be used for the restaurant? Kruk
said that is correct.
If the Petitioner purchased the property because of the great setting, why is he
proposing to change it so drastically? Kruk said that he hopes to maintain as much
of the countrified character as possible. Would there be traffic congestion at the
access point to the site on Bull Valley Road? Kruk said that he does not think there
would be any traffic congestion. Would the Petitioner widen the access driveway?
Kruk said that if the City requires the drive to be expanded, he would widen it.
Would the Petitioner lose trees due to the installation of water and sewer mains on
this property? Kruk said he would. Does the Petitioner have a site plan which
documents the existing trees on this site? Kruk said he does not. Would the
Petitioner live on the premises alone? Kruk said that is correct. How many bedrooms
would be contained in the apartment if this request is granted? Kruk said there are
four bedrooms in the Pxisting residence. At the completion of the project, there
would be two bedrooms.
� Fry gave an overview of the zoning and uses in the immediate vicinity of the proposed
project. He asked, is the Petitioner asking the City to overlook the buffers which
have been set up to protect the existing residential neighborhood? Kruk said that
this is not the case. Is the Petitioner aware that the location of the access drive
to this site would cause auto headlights to shine on his patio door? Is the
Petitioner aware that the location of the access drive to the site is 50 feet from
Fry's property line and 60 feet from his children' s swing set? How would the
Petitioner screen the refuse and grease containers? Diamond said the Petitioner
would comply with city codes.
Kevin Harrin�ton_ Would there be left turn lanes or acceleration or deceleration
lanes exiting the site? Diamond said that the Petitioner will follow City staff
recommendations. If the engineering calls for left turn lanes and
acceleration/deceleration lanes, they would be installed. Would there be only one
access drive? Would the Petitioner make it into two lanes? Diamond said the
Petitioner would do what is required by the City.
UESTIONS OF THE PETITIONER BY THE BOARD
Christensen asked what type of lighting would be used in the parking lot and what is
required by c�,ty ordinance. Lobaito said the parking lot is not required to be
illuminated. The only restriction is that the lighting can not be directed toward
adjacent properties.
Chairman Semrow called for a brief recess at 9:08 p.m. The hearing reconvened at
9:23 with all members of the Board still in attendance.
�
Page6
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
`" Christensen said he would like to see a tree surve of the ro ert This
Y p p y. project
could change the character of this property and this area. Kruk said the majority
of the trees which would be removed would be in the front when the water and sewer
mai ns are i nsta�l 1 ed. Chri stensen asked i f the 1 ocati on for the water and sewer mai ns
is known at this time. Kruk said it is not. Christensen asked if there are many
large trees in the right-of-way where the mains would be installed. Lobaito said
that is correct. Christensen said that if a tree survey were provided, the Board
would know how the topography of the land would change and how the character of this
site would be altered due to the construction of the parking lot for this facility.
Kruk said that most of the trees, especially the larger pine trees, are on the
perimeter of the property and would not be affected by the installation of the
parking lot. Christensen asked if the drive would be required to be curbed at the
entrance. Lobaito said he is not sure. Christensen asked if there were plans
regarding the sign that would be proposed for this site. Kruk said he does not want
a large neon sign.
Semrow said he has concerns about the drive access to the site. Would the Petitioner
be willing to relocate the drive to a point further west than where it is currently
located? Semrow said he is concerned with the curve just east of the drive, and that
anyone who has been drinking and is exiting the site, could have vision problems, and
slowed-down reflexes. There could be a safety problem with the drive location. Kruk
said that if that is what it takes, he would be willing to move the location of the
drive further west; however, then he would lose even more trees, and that appears to
be of concern to this Board. Diamond said that if the City engineers and the
Building Department see this drive location as a safety hazard, the drive would be
\., moved. If a second entrance is required and/or the existing entrance is recommended
to be moved, this will be done. The Petitioner has indicated that he will do
whatever is required by the City.
Swierk asked if the Petitioner would bring the sewer to the west property line.
Diamond said there would be a 15" forced main and the subject property and the parcel
immediately to the west are basically the only parcels which would be serviced by the
forced main. Swierk said that if the drive is pushed further to the west, would this
be acceptable to Mr. Fry and alleviate his safety concerns regarding his family. Fry
said there is a lot more to this issue than just the access drive and its location.
Kleemann suggested that the hearing be recessed until such time as the Petitioner has
prepared a new site plan with the drive location changes and showing that it has been
widened. Diamond said that he would prefer to see the hearing carried out to its
conclusion. If the Board would like to have the access drive moved to the west, the
Petitioner has agreed to move it.
Diamond asked the Petitioner if he reaffirmed the allegations made in the Petition
for the Conditional Use. Kruk said that he did. Diamond asked the Petitioner if he
would agree to having a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages without live
entertainment. Kruk said that was correct. Diamond asked if at any time the bar
portion of the establishment would be open without the dining room being open. Kruk
said it would not.
�
Page7
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
`'' Christensen ask��d the seating capacity of the dining room. Kruk said it is 72 seats.
Christensen ask�d the seating capacity of the bar area. Kruk said it is 62 seats.
Swierk said that is a very high percentage of total seating. 46% of total seating
is for the bar area. Kruk said that he would prefer patrons to be able to sit in the
bar while waiting for the next available table for dining. Swierk asked what would
be the anticipated time for a wait. Kruk said approximately 1-1 1/2 hours. Swierk
said that since the Petitioner has never managed a restaurant before, is he being
backed by a larger corporation. Kruk said this is his project and that he is not
being backed by anyone.
Semrow asked if the Petitioner was planning to sell packaged liquor. Kruk said he
is not.
Christensen asked the purpose of the dumbwaiter. Kruk said it would be used to bring
food and supplies up from the lower level .
UESTIONS OF PETITIONER BY OBJECTORS
Robert_Fr,y_ Is there any intent to refer to liquor sales on the sign which would be
posted on the property? Kruk said there would be no reference to alcohol . The sign
would state "Haystacks Manor" . With regard to the bar area, would people be seated
at bar stools or would they be seated at tables while waiting for a dining table?
Kruk said there would be tables as well as stools at the bar. Would the Petitioner
be willing to eliminate the bar and bar stools? Would he be willing to agree to
having people sitting only at tables in the bar? Kruk said he would not be trying
to create a bar atmosphere. Semrow said the Petitioner has asked for the conditional
`.. use to serve alcohol in conjunction with his restaurant. Fry asked the Petitioner
to define the difference between a lounge and a tavern. Kruk said that a tavern
serves only liquor. A lounge serves liquor and food. Fry asked Lobaito the maximum
size sign permitted in a C-3 District. Lobaito explained that the maximum size free-
standing sign would be square footage equal to 1/2 of the lot frontage. What is the
lot frontage? Kruk said the lot frontage is 431 feet. Lobaito said the maximum size
for the free-standing sign would be approximately 215 square feet. Fry said there
could conceivably be a sign with a 10' X 20' face in front of this site.
Swierk asked if the Petitioner might not consider increasing the tables and seating ,
in the dining room so there would be less of a wait rather than have such a large
percentage of seating in the bar area.
Chairman Semrow swore in the following persons wishing to make a statement at these
proceedings:
1) Elizabeth Ellmann, 5625 Chesapeake Drive, McHenry. (Former owner of subject
property) .
2) Jeanine Pachel , 1550 Lake Shore Drive, Unit B, Chicago Illinois 60610.
(Current owner of 3-acre parcelimmediately to the east of the subject
property) .
3) Robert Fr,�, 513 Brookwood Trail , McHenry. (Current owner of residential
property =mmediately to the north of the subject property) .
STATEMENTS BY WI:TNESSES FOR THE PETITIONER
� Elizabeth Ellmann: "When we originally bought this property, 14 years ago, we agreed
to annex to the City, although it never happened. Four years ago, Amoco came into
the City, and Mobil , as well , although that station has not been built yet. We
wanted to maintain the virginity of the land in this area. We lost. After 2 1/2
years of trying to sell this property as a residence, we finally agreed to sell and
Page8
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
� market this as a possible commercial site. We felt the potential use by Mr. Kruk as
a restaurant would be the most acceptable in this area and that it would help the
neighborhood to retain its charm. Most of the trees which we planted would be
retained. Regarding the dangerous driveway, we had no problems with it and there has
been a speed reduction in this area since Amoco went up on the corner. This entire
area has become commercial ."
Jeanine Pachel : "The property lends itself to commercial development. I have no
objection to what is being proposed by the Petitioner to this Board. I am grateful
for the safety and lighting concerns which have been expressed by the Board. "
CLOSING STATEMENT BY OBJECTORS
Robert_Fr�_ "The Ellmanns are friends of mine. There are a lot more facts than the
Board is aware of with regard to this issue. The Board should be concerned with the
future and not the past regarding this property. Ms. Pachel will benefit greatly if
the zoning and conditional use are granted. During the Amoco proceedings, we were
all on the same side of the fence. During the Backhaus proceedings, again we were
on the same side of the fence. During these proceedings, the residents in the
neighborhood thought that the city envisioned an end to commercial development at the
boundary for the Amoco property. The city created buffers adjacent to the existing
residential neighborhood. At this time, it seems inappropriate to jump the buffers
which have been established and move the commercial boundaries further to the west.
The boundary if extended to the west will continue to expand and grow to the west.
Mr. Kruk has no experience in management of a restaurant. The probability that it
could fail is great. If it fails, the residents in the area, and not those who have
`.- moved away, would have to put up with C-3 Zoning and all of the 97 uses which would
be permitted in this location. Mr. Kruk could move his drive access and it will not
change the fact that there are still 97 uses which could be permitted on this site. .
Mr. Kruk can put up a 10' X 20' sign and it will light up my yard every night until
11 p.m. or midnight. 120 cars would be entering or leaving through the evening and
night only 50' from my property line and 60' from my children's play equipment. The
best interest of the City and the residents in this neighborhood will not be served
by granting the Petitioners request, and I respectfully ask the Board to deny the
request."
CLOSING STATEMENT BY PETITIONER
Diamond said that he understood the concerns of the Objectors and the Board. The key
to the Petition is the uniqueness of the subject property. According to the
Comprehensive Plan, this is a relevant zoning factor. The City Council can put
whatever restrictions they want into the confines of the Conditional Use and in the
Annexation Agreement for this property. The City Council can choose to restrict the
sign. Look at the site plan, which leaves the entire front of the property as it
faces Bull Valley Road intact, except where the installation of the water and sewer
mains will be installed. This is a unique property which would lend itself to this
type of a use. The proposed project would increase the tax base. This would be an
upscale restaur�int. The property does not lend itself to many of the permitted C-2
and C-3 uses. 7his is a unique opportunity to develop this site and it should not
be passed up.
Swierk said he agreed with the layout of the project and agrees this is a good
� location for a restaurant. This parcel is large enough for a Planned Unit
Devel opment (PUI)) .
Page9
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
`"� Diamond said tne Petitioner has no problem with the C-3 being restricted to the
restaurant use unless it would come back to this Board as a PUD. The Petitioner
agrees to be b��und to hi s pl an as presented at thi s heari ng by the terms of the
annexation agrEement.
McArdle said thp City could restrict the use of this property within the terms of the
annexation agreement, but it would still be C-3 as shown on the zoning map forever -
even after the expiration of the annexation agreement. Diamond said that the
Petitioner would agree to Estate Zoning with the granting of use as a restaurant so
that the zaning would revert back to the underlying Estate Zoning if there was no
longer a viable restaurant on the premises. This too, could all be addressed in the
annexation agreement.
Chairman Semrow said, "there being nothing further before this Board with regard to
this Petition, the Board will consider the Petition at this time, unless there is a
motion to rece�s by a member of the Board. There being no motion to recess, the
Chair will entertain a motion with regard to the Petition."
DELIBERATION AND RECOMMENDATION
-------------------------
Motion by Tobeck, seconded by Swierk to recommend to the City Council that
The Petitioner's request that the subject property be reclassified from A-
County Agricultural to C-3 Community Commercial upon annexation to the City of
McHenry; and that the Approval Criteria for Zoning Amendments , Table 33, page
401 of the Zoning Ordinance, have been met.
�
Voting Aye: None.
Voting Nay: Christensen, Kleemann, Semrow, Swierk, Tobeck.
Not Voting: None.
Abstaining: None.
Absent: Adamson, Dixon.
Motion denied 0-5.
Motion by Swierk, seconded by Tobeck to recomm�nd to the City Council that
The Petitioner's request that a Conditional Use Permit be granted to permit
the construction and operation of a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages be
granted; that there be no live entertainment permitted; and that the Approval
Criteria for Conditional Use, Table 31, pages 357-358 of the Zoning Ordinance,
have been met.
Voting Aye: None.
Voting Nay: Christensen, Kleemann, Semrow, Swierk, Tobeck.
Not Voting: None.
Abstaining: None.
Absent: Adamson, Dixon.
Motion denied 0-5.
�
Page 10
ZBA-Kruk
11/29/93
�
Swierk said, in his opinion, if this project were brought back to the ZBA as a PUD
with an underlying residential classification and restrictions as to the sign,
parking, land�caping, access drive, trees, etc. , he would be in favor of the
proposal .
Kleemann said that he agrees this should be restricted as to the restaurant use and
not just be zoned C-3. All expressed concerns would have to be addressed or he would
not be in favor of the proposal .
Christensen said that although not much was said about the issue during the course
of this hearing, he has strong concerns regarding the living quarters beneath the
commercial business. This would be spot zoning, We would be putting restrictions
on the property to east. These items should be addressed more fully and in more
detail .
Diamond said the project could take on the characteristics of a PUD or a conditional
use classification. This could be classified as a conditional use. Additionally,
the lower level living quarters and the other issues could be addressed through the
conditional use. The property could then be left zoned residential .
Chairman Semrow said that all Objectors would be notified as to when this matter will
be presented to the City Council for action.
ADJOURNMENT
There being nothing further before this Board with regard to this matter, Chairman
�-- Semrow called for a motion to adjourn.
Motion by Christensen, seconded by Kleemann to adjourn at 10:35 p.m.
Voting Aye: Christensen, Kleemann, Semrow, Swierk, Tobeck.
Voting Nay: None.
Not Voting: None.
Abstaining: None.
Absent: Adamson, Dixon.
Motion carried 5-0.
Respectfully s bmitted,
�
Harry S ow, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
c: Agenda, 7.oning Board of Appeals (7) , Plan Commission (7) , City Administrator,
Director of Building & Zoning, Public Works Administration, City Attorney,
City Eng�neers , Objectors (2) , Aldermen Reference Copy, Petitioner, Building
& Zoning Zoning File, Landmark Commission Chairman, Northwest Herald, City
Clerk Fi� e.
t Doc/ZBAMIN.373