A conditional use hearing for Pelican Landing II took place an hour before the regularly scheduled Sadsbury Township Supervisor’s meeting on August 11.

Those in attendance were: all three supervisors, (Roy Whaley, Kevin VanHonk and Don Ellis), Sadsbury Secretary Rose Mumau, Zoning Officer Paul Roiz, Sadsbury Solicitor R. Charles Thomas, Bill Singleterry, of Pelican Landing II, Mary O'Polka, of Pelican Landing II, their attorney Bill Gregg and the court stenographer. There was no one in attendance from the public at large.

The hearing began with Roy Whaley stating the purpose for such which was to hear the applicant's desires for another use of the property on Rt 18, on the east side of Conneaut Lake.

Singleterry and O'Polka have been carrying out some construction but have not altered the footprint of the structure. They have knocked out some walls and made some of the existing rooms larger. The other plans are for an ice cream and hot dog stand to be placed in one of the old motel rooms. That was the nature of the gathering.

At past meetings, O'Polka and Singleterry had expressed that they did not see where they were adding anything in particular that would warrant permission for another use. They had stated that because they already offered hot dogs and ice cream, it would be more or less an extension of the current services, or in this case menu items, offered. They had also made it clear that the footprint of the structure had not been and would not be changed in any way.

In the end though, a conditional use hearing was set.

After being sworn in, R. Charles began by saying why they had been assembled, which was to determine another use in terms of the ice cream and hot dog stand, use of efficiency apartments, an office and a utility room.

The main concerns, on the part of supervisors, were that of parking and whether or not the Liquor Control Board had an issue with the renovations.

Bill Gregg had handed out the parking plan that had been designed by a local architect, Robert Frost, and the supervisors, R. Charles and Roiz examined the design.

Roiz reviewed it and said the method of calculations used by Frost had been OK and it appeared to be in order.

The LCB was discussed next with Gregg stating that he had received a statement from them, which he had also distributed to the officials, and LCB did not have a problem with any of the plans as long as there were no violations.

The LCB had asked if there was a passageway from the licensed area to the other areas of the building in question and there is not one. So, all was in accordance with the LCB.

Gregg explained exactly how a licensing takes place and how the LCB literally takes measurements of the areas that are to fall under the license. All was in order along those lines.

Gregg then began to ask Singleterry a list of questions so that his answers would be on the record. He asked him to go through the details of the renovations. Singleterry complied with his wishes.

R. Charles spoke up and said that he wasn't seeing how the plans before him matched up with what he was saying. After some time, they cleared that up and everyone appeared to be on the same page in terms of understanding what was being discussed.

The issue of a firewall was broached as there has never been one between the Mary O's portion of the building and room number one. Previously, the Mary O's section would have just been another part of what was then called Seymour Ducks.

Whaley didn't understand why MDIA had never required a firewall to be placed and Singleterry explained that it had just never been a requirement at all. The kitchen has not ever been changed around so, in other words, that part of the building has always “bordered” what would have been one of the motel rooms.

They decided that this would be something that MDIA would have to clear up.

It was requested of Roiz to go on the record and answer whether or not the parking plan was in accordance with the ordinance and he answered that indeed, it was. He said at first, there was a slight problem since the office space had not been clarified but it had since been and the parking was in compliance.

Supervisor VanHonk asked if the Planning Commission had given approval and they had done so with everyone on that board voting yes to the plans.