An East Side couple hoping to construct a cidery on their property in Marion will be permitted to continue the project after the County Courthouse ruled against neighbors opposing the work.
The appellants, Lauren and Michael Halcik and Guy and Melissa Peterson, last week argued the proposed distillery and microbrewery doesn’t belong at the site off S.R. 32, which is less than half a mile from their homes. The Summit County Council, after an hour of debate, opted to deny the appeal of the conditional-use permit granted in October, allowing Dendric Estates Cidery to move forward.
Dallin Petersen, the attorney representing the appellants, argued the project was initially represented as a small facility that would make alcoholic beverages using apples and provide an intimate tasting experience to guests. However, he said it has grown into a restaurant, which isn’t a permitted use, that is expected to bring daily visitors and cause a nuisance for neighbors.
“The nature of drawing tourists to this community to enjoy alcohol and outdoor music in the midst of single-family homes and small farms is the very definition of a nuisance, at the point of preventing residents from enjoying their property. People move to Marion with the intention of being surrounded by small farms and to escape the noise of cities and development,” the appeal stated.
Project applicants Brendan and Carly Coyle told the Eastern Summit County Planning Commission in the fall that they have no interest in running a full-scale restaurant, and plan to offer small plates to accompany the cider they produce. The ingredients would come from a greenhouse on-site or other local sources.
The Coyles’ plan to convert 15 of the 20 acres into an apple orchard and will construct a 3,350-square-foot production facility to process the apples as well as a 3,000-square-foot tasting room with approximately 50 seats on the remaining land. They also want to build three 700-square-foot guest rooms and two greenhouses.
The appellants’ representation argued the scale of the operations made it a restaurant and suggested it was possible there could be an overflow of guests. The appellants also argued the Planning Commission did not conduct due diligence to ensure the cidery met all code requirements and that the panel did not provide residents the opportunity for public comment or address neighbors’ concerns about noise, traffic or the lack of lodgings in the area.
The Planning Commission first heard about the project in a public hearing on Oct. 6. The panel granted a conditional-use permit on Oct. 20 and did not take public comment at the meeting. County planners maintained the Planning Commission followed the proper noticing and procedures.
Justin Keys, an attorney representing the Coyles, simply argued the proposed cidery will not be a restaurant and said 12 conditions of approval instituted by the Planning Commission mitigate the impacts of the project. The stipulations include a 150-person limit for any single event as well as requiring all parking to be onsite, the construction of a privacy fence to help buffer lights and noise, an 11 p.m. curfew for events with outdoor music prohibited after 9 p.m. and a one-year review of the conditional-use permit.
Ultimately, the County Council agreed the project doesn’t meet the definition of a restaurant. The Coyles plan to develop traffic access in the spring of 2023.