The City Plan Commission met 01/12/2022. One of the items they took up was a special use permit for a restaurant with alcohol sales and consumption located at 1016 East Pacific Street. Located in a small commercial building in an otherwise residential neighborhood, the restaurant Alpine Swift would operate 4 days a week from 4PM until 9 or 10PM and serve pizza, sharables, salad, and dessert as well as beer and wine. The property has no parking lot and no place for a parking lot, so back in November the Board of Zoning Appeals approved a variance that would allow this restaurant to operate with a capacity of 30 without having to offer the 10 off-street parking spots that would otherwise be required by municipal code.
City planner David Cress gave an overview of the application to the Commission. The subject area was located on the northeast corner of Pacific Street and Tonka Street. It was an existing commercial building, already in place, had had been most recently used as a photography studio.
The applicant was requesting to use that existing building and establish a restaurant with alcohol sales and service, something that was allowed by the property’s current C-2 general zoning. He noted the approval of the variance back in November as well as the 30-person occupancy limit, and told the commission that the applicant had also applied for a beer and wine license which would go before the Safety and Licensing Committee later that evening. He finished up by saying that staff had reviewed the application against city standards and zoning and recommended it for approval.
There was a public hearing related to this item, but nobody came to speak, so the commission moved on to discussion of the item.
Commissioner Andrew Dane said he had read the report but the commission had been getting a lot of special use permits for beer and wine sales and he wanted to clarify what exactly the criteria was that the commissioners were supposed to be taking into consideration when evaluating the project.
City Planner Cress referred him to the “Finding of Fact” section on page 3 of the staff report. That section identified the 8 criteria under Section 23-66 of the municipal code that staff used when conducting a recommendation review of any special use permit.
- Proper zoning district
- District regulations
- Special regulations
- Comprehensive plan and other plans
- Traffic, landscaping and screening
- Neighborhood compatibility
- Impact on services
Mayor Woodford also noted that a special use permit comes with conditions that the permit holder has to uphold. Those conditions are listed within the recommendation, and approval is conditional upon satisfaction and maintenance of those requirements.
Commission Dane asked if there was anything that was relevant to the City Plan Commission and their decision that came out of the Board of Zoning Appeals discussion and vote regarding this business.
City Planner Cress answered that the relevant piece of information was that the variance had been approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Mayor Woodford said that the Plan Commission was supposed to just focus on the items that Mr. Cress had outlined. He went on to say, “I’d just like to speak in support of this request for special use permit, and appreciate the applicant working with the city and the various departments of the city and the neighborhood to move this process forward.”
Alderperson Alex Schultz (District 9) was concerned about the location of the business and the availability of parking for a restaurant with a capacity of 30. He was very familiar with that location because he was an associate of one of the former tenants. He said that there were already parking congestion issues and he wanted to know how allowing this restaurant to set up shop there would
Mayor Woodford reminded him that what was before the Plan Commission right then was the special use permit application related to alcohol sales and consumption, so for the purposes of the discussion they needed to refer back to the report from city staff and the items pertinent to the Plan Commissions’ review of this application.
Alderperson Schultz then expressed concern about the potential for this business to have 30 patrons visiting and consuming alcohol. He wondered what conversations had been had regarding potential conflict with the neighborhood. He said they were constantly seeing issues between commercial enterprises and residential neighborhoods, particularly when a business changes from one that never had a liquor license to one that does want to serve alcohol and the city is then allowing the first liquor license to take hold on that property. This was particularly an issue when the commercial enterprise was next to a high-density residential neighborhood. In this particular case, there were no other commercial properties acting as a buffer, but rather this business was surrounded by residential homes. It was a quiet neighborhood, so he was curious about what the conversations with city staff had looked like regarding the potential for conflict in the neighborhood.
City Planner Cress said that, as the mayor had touched on, the parking concern had already been acted on by the Board of Zoning appeals; however, parking was something they take into consideration during the special use permit process as well as throughout the broader city staff review process. They have a technical review group that includes staff from various city departments including the Police Department. The Police Department had weighed in on the issue of parking pointing out that parking was available but then going on to state that that the applicant needed to be aware of the possibility of patrons parking too close to driveways. They also listed on-street parking rules as a reminder to the applicant, restaurant staff, and customers to be good neighbors and be aware of the rules regarding parking on the street.
In terms of the business’ potential impact on the neighborhood, he said that with any special use permit there is a requirement to complete a plan of operation. Alpine Swift’s plan of operation was attached to the staff report. What they were proposing was something he considered to be relatively modest hours of 4PM-10PM 4 days a week. That was definitely different from a nightclub or tavern that would be open past midnight. That was something they took into consideration when reviewing the compatibility with a neighborhood. He also noted that one of the conditions of approval was compliance with the plan of operation they had submitted, so those hours as written in that plan would need to be adhered to if this permit was approved.
Alderperson Vered Meltzer (District 2) said, “As the alderperson for this district, I just wanted to share for the record that I have not received any contacts with any concerns.” There had been some questions about parking, and they would have to see how that goes, “But there definitely has not been any concern about the liquor license aspect of things. And also, I just want to point out there’s a somewhat similar business—Moon Water Café (http://www.moonwatercafe.com/)—which I think is just something that my district is in love with and has had a very, very positive reception and positive response in the community in the neighborhood.”
There was no further discussion and the special use permit was approved unanimously.
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=910318&GUID=5AD77122-C307-45DC-BE8F-8D68D546E58E
Be the first to reply