10/21/2002 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regular Council Meeting 10-21-02 Page 9 Note: A request fora 5-foot side yard variance to Section 1165.05 (a) to allow construction of a proposed single building for use as a combined liquor and beverage store not under consideration was granted by the Board of Appeals on October 10, _ 2002. Council President Buckholtz said this is still on appeal as people are aware and tonight was the night that they were going to come in to address that appeal. So, I would call--the Steigerwalds have and Mr. Jiannetti - [a representative]. Mike Jiannetti would you like to step forward. Mr. Jiannetti said I represent the Steigerwalds. As you know, I know a few of you here. As you know the Steigerwalds own Golden Gate Beverage and submitted a plan to the Board of Zoning Appeals to get certain variances for the lot that everyone is (I am sure) quite aware of-the old Beverage Store on S.O.M. Center Road next to Deacon's (between Pizzazz and the auto dealership.) After due consideration of many things, Mr. Buckholtz and Mayor Rinker, we have made some decisions regarding our current plan. What I'd like to know though, from this Council-is given the state of (how can I say this) misinformation and some of the heated emotions that have followed this plan up to this point, if you would like, I'd like to speak on behalf of just the use itself-even though that's really not germane to the zoning issue or I can just skip all that and go right to how we are going to resolve the variance request. I guess I am going to leave that up to you-what do you think would be best for your community? Council President Buckholtz said well are you planning on pursuing the appeal at this time? Mr. Jiannetti replied, actually, no, we're not, Mr. Buckholtz. What we're going to do is this: we are going to submit a compromised plan. Bernie has 3 plans presently in his possession-isn't that right, Bernie? Mr. Samac replied that is correct. Mr. Jiannetti said the one that was submitted to the Board of Zoning Appeals which is the one that is at issue at this moment-one of the variances was allowed; two were not. We don't want to cause any more undue stress and emotion over this issue. What we'd like to do is we'd like to ask the Council, if they could, maybe put that in abeyance or whatever the parliamentary procedure is at this point and give us a chance to come back. We'd like to submit a compromised plan. Mr. Buckholtz, what we'd like to do is we'd like to make a plan that everyone could live with-that the citizens on Seneca and the surrounding community can live with, that the Village can live with and, of course, that the Steigerwalds can live with too. As you saw from the plans that Bernie had, we did try to go back and make what we call the "per code" plan. I think it's pretty close to code-if it's not exactly on code. And really what you have there (and pardon my French) and quite honestly, it's a dog. It really is. It's a square beverage store with 60-some parking spaces. What you've got is a big parking lot with a lot of parking spaces. And that's not good for the citizens either. I don't think they want to look at that. So what we'd like to do is we'd like to go back, we have a preliminary plan there, I'll call that Plan C if you will, it's not exactly the one, Bernie, that I think that we'll go to the Board of