Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Minutes — May 10, 2007 <br />Page 3 <br />and said he planned to take the plans to the Architectural Review Committee for review. <br />Schumann asked what type of restaurant the Blue Heron would be, and asked about the hours of <br />operation. <br />Carlson compared it to an Axels Bonfire Grill or a Champs, and said they would likely open at <br />11:00 a.m. The CDD explained the bar could be open until 1:00 a.m., 2:00 a.m. with Council <br />approval. <br />Schumann asked about the age group. Carlson said it would be a family oriented establishment <br />and they would sponsor local sports teams as they currently did at their Millers on Main <br />establishment. <br />McRoberts said he had a hard time seeing these establishments as being family restaurants and <br />did not find a compelling reason for the reduced setback. <br />Carlson explained that the size of the building allowed a separation of the bar and restaurant. It <br />was not equal to Millers on Main; it would be welcoming to the family and have an upscale feel. <br />The applicants explained the setback was from an internal property line and they needed to <br />configure the building to incorporate all the kitchen equipment and activities. <br />Schumann asked for staff's opinion on the parking. <br />The CDD said a bank would be a very compatible use and staff would not be comfortable with <br />another restaurant on the corner site. <br />Schumann opened the public hearing. There were no comments and Schumann closed the public <br />hearing. <br />Moore said it would be a great addition to the area, and typically, if a lot is full, patrons would go <br />somewhere else. <br />Bailly asked about the seating. The applicants explained there would be approximately 200 seats <br />inside the building and 80-110 in the oustide seating area. <br />McRoberts had concerns about the bar/game room being bigger than the dining area and had a <br />hard time seeing it as a family restaurant. He said he found no compelling reason for the reduced <br />setbacks. He had problems with the parking and traffic congestion from those leaving a <br />drinking establishment. <br />Carlson said they have clearly shown the setback does not create a problem, and pointed out that <br />they could move the property line if necessary. He thought the use at the corner was a great <br />response to the parking issue and a restaurant would be a great amenity to the area. He said he <br />was not sure whether any traffic design would help reduce DWI's. <br />McRoberts pointed out that people going to the developments to the north would have to drive <br />through to get to Elmcrest Avenue, and he felt they could meet the setback if they reduced the <br />bar size. It was the wrong location for that type of bar. <br />