HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoard of Zoning Appeals - 9/21/1983BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1983 MEETING PAGE FIVE
and also from New York Avenue. The road is also a dead end with little traffic.
Mr. King inquired if the proposed building is in direct line with other buildings.
Mr. Spellman replied yes.
Mr. Luebke stated that this request is similar to what was planned last year.
Mr. Spellman stated that they had problems with the building and were not able to
use it. The proposed building will be smaller and will be constructed by
Bob Albright. Mr. Spellman continued that about 3' away from the proposed building
location is considered to be out of the floodplain area.
Mr. Rosenquist stated that he received a telephone call from Carol Flanagan. When
Mr. Rosenquist explained where the building would be located, she voiced no objections.
Motion by Dan Goldthwaite to grant the variances as requested. Motion seconded by
Anne Hintz. Motion approved 5-0.
Regarding the findings of fact, Mr. Goldthwaite felt that the Ordinance relative
to floodproofing is ridiculous in this case since the building will be used for
storage of boats. Mr. Goldthwaite also felt that literal interpretation of the
Ordinance would deprive the appellant from having the building and it shouldn't.
Mr. King stated that a similar variance was granted before to the appellant and
through no fault of the appellant's, action could not be taken. Mr. King also
stated that similar variances have been granted in the area.
Mr. Larson informed the Chairman that he would not be participating on the next
appeal.
IV. Appeal of James Larson, agent for Willard Eichstadt, owner of the
property located at 1805 Jackson Street, proposes to erect a commercial
structure. The following variances are required: (1) a rear yard set-
back for one of the parking stalls of 22' is proposed, whereas a 25'
rear yard setback is required. (2) a 8' front yard setback for parking
is proposed from Jackson St., whereas a 25' front yard setback is required.
(3) ground sign is proposed to be setback 2' from Murdock and Jackson
Streets, whereas a 25' front yard setback from each street is required.
and (4) two enter/exit signs setback 2' from Murdock are proposed, whereas
25' front yard setbacks are required.
Mr. Rosenquist stated that the appellant is proposing to construct a Kentucky Fried
Chicken business at the corner of Murdock and Jackson Streets. The appellant is
requesting a 22' rear yard setback for one of the parking stalls, whereas a 25'
rear yard setback is required; an 8' front yard setback for parking is proposed
from Jackson Street, whereas a 25' front yard setback is required; a ground sign
is proposed to be setback 2' from Murdock and Jackson Streets, whereas a 25' front
yard setback from each street is required; and a 2' setback from Murdock Avenue
for two enter/exit signs, whereas a 25' front yard setback is required.
Mr. James Larson, architect, 600 S. Main Street, appeared before the Board.
With him was Mr. Mike Twohig, 900 N. Main Street, from Kentucky Fried Chicken.
Mr. Larson stated he had quickly met with Mr. Rosenquist before the agenda went out
last week. Since that time, a change has been made that will affect traffic flow
on Murdock and Jackson and on-site traffic. The 8' front yard setback from Jackson
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MINUTES SEPTEMBER 21, 1983 MEETING PAGE SIX
Street should be amended to read 3'. Mr. Larson explained that this amendment
will allow fora better traffic flow to the west of the building.
Mr. Twohig explained that a drive-in window will be on the west side of the building.
The original plan called for 23' between the parking stalls, but after meeting
with the engineers from Kentucky Fried Chicken, and upon their suggestion, we are
going to put 29'-30' between the two rows of parking stalls. This change is based
upon the amount of traffic flow and the time individuals may spend in the building.
Also, traffic to the drive-in window would have more room. Mr. Twohig continued
that traffic exiting can come around traffic at the drive-in window and exit to
the west of the building, thereby causing less traffic at the intersection.
Concerning the two enter/exit signs, Mrs. Hintz inquired if there is any other
place they could be put.
Mr. Larson replied that they could be placed elsewhere, but could not be
seen.
Mr. Goldthwaite inquired if 22 parking spaces are required.
Mr. Rosenquist replied yes, that is the exact requirement of the Ordinance.
Mr. King inquired when the amendment to the site plan was prepared.
Mr. Larson replied the day before the meeting.
Mr. King stated he is concerned that the neighbors were not notified of this change.
Mr. King inquired of Mr. Larson if he has notified any of the adjacent property
owners regarding this change.
Mr. Larson replied no.
Mr. Rosenquist stated that the Board has made minor amendments to other variances in the
past without notifying the neighbors, but the decision is up to the Board.
Mr. Larson explained that the amendment came about last Friday after meeting with
Kentucky Fried Chicken representatives. He indicated that they are not trying "to
sneak something by the property owners".
Mr. Luebke stated that Kentucky Fried Chicken usually has adequate advertising on
the building. Is the large sign on the corner necessary for this business.
Mr. Larson replied that the sign is the standard size.
Mr. Twohig stated that a very small sign will be on the building. He felt that
the larger sign is important to pick-up traffic from all four directions.
Mr. Goldthwaite felt that this area is very heavily traveled and the sign might
block vision clearance.
Mr. Larson stated that the bottom of the sign will be about 9' off the ground.
Mr. David Westover, 733 Powers, stated that he is Secretary for the Knights of
Columbus. He indicated that their only objection is to the sign. The Knights of
Columbus could not have a sign, and Mr. Westover did not think that they should
either. He continued that the proposed sign might hurt the Knights business because
they do serve food also. Mr. Westover indicated that he personally is not against