Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-01 Joint Board MINCity of Stillwater Stillwater Township Joint Board Meeting Sept. 1, 2010 David Johnson, Stillwater Township, chair Township Supervisor Countryman; Stillwater Mayor Harycki, Stillwater Councilmember Roush Staff present: Stillwater Planner Mike Pogge Chair Johnson called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Minutes of the previous meeting were approved by unanimous vote. PUBLIC HEARING Zoning Text Amendment to the Village Commercial Zoning District and Special Use Permit for restaurant with alcohol sales at 145 New England Place. Mr. Pogge reviewed the request for a new restaurant in the former Liberty Café site. The request requires both a zoning text amendment, as currently code prohibits alcohol and liquor sales, and a special use permit, he said. Currently, code allows tearooms, delis, coffee shops and soda fountains, but not including the sale of alcoholic beverages. Mr. Pogge said it is unclear as to why that language was included in the VCD zoning; however, he said it is clear that it was not against the initial wishes of the developer to have a restaurant in the district. He noted that in 2003, when the City was limited in the number of full liquor licenses it could issue, it reserved a liquor license for this location; he said a license was never issued at that point nor was the zoning code changed at that point. He said the applicants are looking to have a full- service restaurant and, long-term, plan to modify the outdoor space to accommodate a patio in the northwest corner of the site. He pointed out the Joint Board’s role is to take action on the requested zoning text amendment and to review and comment on the special use permit request. Regarding the zoning text amendment, Mr. Pogge stated the purpose of the Village Commercial District is to provide a local center of convenience shopping and personal services primarily to the residential neighborhood. A restaurant to serves the Village Commercial and Liberty area has long been sought, he noted. Also, he noted that a liquor license was previously reserved for such a use. Mr. Pogge said the primary question is what restrictions should be placed on the use. He said a number of conversations have been held with the neighborhood, including the homeowner associations and in neighborhood meetings. He said a number of concerns were raised, which, it is believed, have been addressed in the zoning text amendment; the proposed amendment, he said, restricts time of operation, liquor and food sales ratio, and outdoor music. He said there was a lot of conversation about the 60% threshold suggested for food sales. He explained that 60% was selected as that is the threshold the state looks at for determining a restaurant versus a full bar; he said the state does annual audits of that number and if the City were to be more restrictive, the City would have to take on that responsibility. On a question by Councilmember Roush, Mr. Pogge explained the 60% threshold determines the classification of liquor license and tax rate. Councilmember Roush asked the owners how liquor sales could be restricted to meet the threshold; the applicants explained that their whole business plan is based on food sales, with beer and wine to complement food. Applicant, Brian Pilrain, stated that numbers from another restaurant they operate indicates 81% food, 19% liquor, and noted that expending 90% of their advertising/market budget on food sales, keeps the percentage well above where it needs to be. Mr. Johnson opened the public hearing. Paula Kroenig, 213 Pine Hollow Green, spoke in support of the proposal and said she and others she has talked with were satisfied with the responses the applicants provided to questions/concerns expressed at the neighborhood meeting. No other comments were received, and the hearing was closed. Mayor Harycki agreed with Ms. Kroenig’s comments regarding neighborhood support. Mayor Harycki said his only concern would be with the proposed hours of operation and suggested giving consideration to allowing the business to remain open later. Mr. Pogge said the initial ordinance distributed at the neighborhood meetings proposed 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 6 to 11:30 Fridays and Saturdays, which did elicit some comments/concerns from residents. Mr. Pogge said, from a staff perspective, they would be comfortable with allowing later hours on the weekends, but he said consideration also has to be given to the long-term and what the next business might be. In discussion, it was noted that the hours of operation indicate time of last call, not when everyone has to be out of the premises. Supervisor Countryman asked about the process for changing the ordinance should the neighborhood get comfortable with later hours; Mayor Harycki noted the ordinance could be amended in the future to accommodate that. Mr. Pogge suggested that if the Board is comfortable with it, the ordinance language should indicate that the ending hours is a last call for serving of alcohol. The applicant asked about the possibility of “splitting the difference” between the original proposal of 11:30 p.m. on weekends and the current proposal of 10:30 p.m.; he said a final seating on Friday and Saturday nights of 10 p.m. would limit people who typically take about 45 minutes to enjoy their meal. Chair Johnson pointed out the proposal is that 10:30 p.m. would be the last call for serving of liquor – people can certainly stay beyond the time to finish their meal or their drink. Councilmember Roush noted the ordinance language needs to be changed to reflect that. Chair Johnson spoke of the original discussions related to this development and the feeling that this comm ercial district was to primarily be a convenience center for the neighborhood; he spoke of a concern about opening the door too wide so that another business might come in that wouldn’t necessarily be as well received and may not be appropriate, as well. Councilmember Roush referred to language that would prohibit “happy hour” specials or advertising to attract regional clientele and asked whether that is within the City’s authority to do; Mayor Harycki suggested that limiting the advertising could be subject to challenge. Mr. Pogge said the City believes it can make that restriction because it is a zoning restriction and part of an SUP process. Chair Johnson said he thought the community would like to see a successful business at that location and said he thought the advertising restriction would be an unnecessary one. Mr. Johnson pointed out that, by its very nature, Stillwater depends on regional patrons and to single out this business would be inconsistent. Councilmember Roush agreed that from a marketing standpoint, it would be important not to restrict the adve rtising or “happy hour” specials. The applicant noted that from the residents’ standpoint the concern was regarding other businesses that might be located in the district in the future. Chair Johnson said he thought the food to alcohol ratio would control the type of future businesses. Supervisor Countryman spoke in favor of taking this conservative approach with an option to change in the future based on performance; she said she thought this business would be fine with these restrictions because of its business plan and approach. Supervisor Countryman did express concern with the use of “tavern” in the business name, suggesting that it belies what is inside; she suggested a name that would get at the family atmosphere of the business. Ms. Countryman also suggested that it would be harder to take away a happy hour if allowed initially than it would be to change the language to permit it in the future. Chair Johnson spoke of the need to allow a certain amount of flexibility to be competitive in the marketplace; he suggested perhaps limiting any happy hour specials to a certain timeframe, such as conclude by 6 p.m. There was discussion as to the language “happy hour specials,” whether that referred to food and/or alcohol. The applicant said restricting specials on both food and alcohol would be very restrictive. Councilmember Roush said he would vote in favor of allowing happy hour and would be OK with restricting it to conclude by 6 p.m. There was also discussion of the interpretation of “regional advertising.” Chair Johnson suggested that wording was another gray area; he also noted that in order to be successful, this business will need to attract patrons from outside of the Stillwater area. Chair Johnson asked about the restriction on live entertainment inside; the applicant stated on occasion they have had live entertainment for special events, but said in speaking with Mr. Pogge that is something that could apply to do with a special permit. Mr. Pogge pointed out that bands inside of restaurants have resulted in complaints in the past. Regarding entertainment, the applicant stated their only concern is with the desire to possibly have one speaker playing low-volume music on the patio. In discussion, Councilmember Roush suggested better language might be to prohibit live, amplified entertainment. Mayor Harycki moved to approve the zoning text amendment ordinance with a recommendation that the City clarify language related to outdoor amplification to it read “no live, amplified music”; clarify the latter hours of operation are a last call for service, not the need to be out of the door; that the City look at allowing happy hour specials with a concluding time of 6 p.m.; and that the restriction of advertising to attract regional clientele be stricken. Councilmember Roush seconded the motion. Motion passed unanimously. Related to the special use permit, Chair Johnson suggested the recommendations were addressed in the previous motion. Mr. Pogge said the only other restriction is related to parking, that if the patio is developed in the future, five additional parking spaces be provided to support that use. Supervisor Countryman asked the applicant about views of any future expansion; he replied they would love to expand and purchase the rest of the building at the W illernie location, but this site does not provide any opportunity for future expansion. Ms. Countryman asked about special events and catering; the applicant stated catering is done out. Chair Johnson concluded the discussion by noting the Joint Board gives its blessing to the proposal and wishes the applicants well. Ms. Countryman reiterated her suggested that the emphasis on family orientation by made from the outset. Other business Mr. Pogge provided an update on the City’s negotiations to purchase a piece of property between Boutwell and County Road 12 for an armory site. He said a purchase agreement has been reached with a Nov. 1 closing date. He reviewed a timetable of activities, with a possible annexation date of summer of 2012, construction beginning in October 2013 and completion May 2015. Mayor Harycki said what is envision is something that will look like a school, with many of the same facilities, including gym space and auditorium; he noted there is a potential for it to include a community center. Mayor Harycki pointed out one of the reasons the City has agreed to participate is the desire to relocate the fire department and this offers many cost - saving advantages for shared facilities. Chair Johnson said he would expect there will be a considerable number of people, especially who live in the area, who will want to weigh in on this. Mr. Johnson expressed a concern about the location surrounded by residential areas and potential traffic and access issues. Mayor Harycki noted there are limited sites for the fire department due to response time and limited sites that would work for an armory site due to new federal regulations post 9-11. Councilmember Roush said he understood Mr. Johnson’s concerns, but said he voted to pursue the purchase because of the financial benefits of the consolidated services, with an estimated $2 million savings for a fire station. Chair Johnson referred to the history of the site and the previous development proposal; Mr. Johnson also suggested the City needs to be diligent in influencing the Guard’s design decisions related to access and orientation of the site. Mr. Pogge agreed there are many design issues that have to be addressed and many conversations needed with the County regarding access off County Road 12. Supervisor Countryman asked when residents would be notified; Mayor Harycki said that is a long way off. On a question by Mr. Johnson, Mayor Harycki explained options should the Guard not proceed. Mr. Johnson suggested the City look for ways to get community in put before getting too far into the process; he spoke of the strong feelings regarding designating commercial zoning in the annexation area and suggested this project could be viewed as being much more commercial in nature. In discussion of that issue, Mr. Pogge noted that the project will require changes in zoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment; he agreed this is a very aggressive schedule and a big community change, which needs community discussion. Councilmember Roush asked if any surplus acreage could be used as a dog park; Mr. Pogge pointed out that eliminating the wetlands on site reduces the acreage to nearly the minimal required for the project. Meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m. on a motion by Supervisor Countryman, second by Councilmember Roush.