Council To Hear Additional Appeal on Proposed Old Marco Restaurant

The ongoing issue concerning the debate over a potential new restaurant in Old Marco continues to be one which is apparently not settled. An official appeal over the recent 5-2 vote to approve a revised site development plan has been filed with the city on behalf of the Snook Inn concerning safety and traffic issues surrounding a proposed new restaurant.

Attorneys for the petitioner filed a revised site development plan for a 7,480 square foot restaurant with 168 seats proposed to be located at 1202 Bald Eagle Drive. The 37 ½ - foot high building will also have 37 parking spaces plus five onsite boat slips. Of the 37 automobile parking spaces provided, 12 spaces will be provided off-site across Lee Avenue. (Lee Avenue is the roadway which runs into the Snook Inn property) at the end of Bald Eagle Drive. Section 30-484 of the City Codes allows for off-street parking on lots under the same ownership, as long as the lot is contiguous and not separated by an arterial or collector road (Lee Avenue is not a collector). Based on the 168 seats proposed, 42 vehicle parking spaces would be required. However, the applicant has provided five boat slips, a bike rack/bench, and recycling receptacle for which six credit are applied providing the petitioner with the necessary 42 parking spaces)

Throughout the discussions several board members raised the concerns of safety, however when the time came to vote they would vote in favor of the proposal.

Planning Board members Jason Bailey, Nanette Rivera, David Vergo, Mike Hogan and Geoff Fahringer all voted in favor of the motion to approve. Members Nanette Finkle and Hayden Dubois opposed the approval.

Legal counsel for the Snook Inn during the week of December 19 would file an appeal of the Planning Board’s action as found in Sec. 30-678. Appeals. “The city council may affirm, affirm with conditions, reverse or reverse with conditions the action of the planning board.”

Daniel Smith, Director of Community Affairs was unsure when that issue would be coming before council for its Appeals Hearing.