Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutParking Variance Request • MITCHELL / �M MORGAN College Station Zoning Board of Adjustment August 4, 2006 City of College Station 1101 Texas Avenue S. College Station, Texas 77840 Attn: Jennifer Reeves, Staff Planner Re: Parking Variance for College Station Wings-N-More Restaurant located at 1511 University Drive East Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Adjustment: The College Station Wings-N-More Restaurant would like to construct an addition to their existing outdoor dining area overlooking University Drive. When initially laying out the site design for the restaurant,the owner desired an outdoor patio that looked toward University Drive through the existing trees and not looking out over a parking lot. This layout, while aesthetically pleasing did compromise the efficiency of the parking onsite. The additional setbacks required along University Drive, 20 foot setback for parking and 40 foot setback for all buildings as opposed to 6 feet for parking and 25 feet for buildings elsewhere in the City naturally lends itself to providing parking along University Drive and locating the building interior to the parking lot to achieve maximum efficiency. The owner in this case, opted for a different design to improve site aesthetics and not maximize site efficiency. 4.4 View looking east toward the existing outdoor patio 1 0 i I b..� . Y , ''' a", 101 ,.,, i ,.:: "List`' * ,, '.4: \a.„, :\., _, ':,ilt; il, l''.1 , ,ii,poi , 4.411":. 'I -IP 01- ' ' i _ 4 - A -1, , 1' gill View looking north across University Drive at the existing outdoor patio and the trees Variance Request Section 7.2.H-Number of Off-Street Parking Spaces Required Wings-N-More would like to add an outdoor bar and increase the size of the outdoor patio by 650 square feet. In order to accomplish this they must add 10 parking spaces. In the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) there are several options available to provide the required parking. ❖ Option 1 - Provide the 10 spaces onsite. ❖ Option 2 - Justify for a large-scale development why fewer parking spaces are required based upon a parking study prepared by a professional engineer or transportation planner. ❖ Option 3 - Provide an alternative parking plan for shared parking. This requires that the shared parking be provided off-site but within 250 feet of the subject property under a shared parking agreement. This may be accomplished for multiple use developments where the parking of the multiple uses is located near one another and they have different peak parking demands or different operating hours. This shared parking must be enforced with a recorded agreement. 2 ❖ Option 4 - Provide an alternate parking plan for off-site exclusive parking where additional or"extra" parking is provided on an adjacent lot (not more than 250 feet away) and these spaces cannot be counted toward meeting the parking space requirement of more than one user. Again this alternative parking must be enforced with a recorded agreement. All of these options have been explored. Option 1 is not possible on the existing site due to a lack of available space. The remaining three options require the cooperation of the adjacent owner of the shopping center. Wings-N-More has approached the adjacent owner but they are not willing to enter into a signed agreement for shared parking. They have indicated that they do not oppose "overflow" parking into the large field parking lot rather it is the official agreement that they oppose. Although there were parking concerns early in the development of the Gateway Center, these problems have ceased since the completion of the Home Depot and Linens N Things parking areas. The early parking difficulties occurred when the restaurants were the only completed developments. The UDO sets out the required parking ratio for different users. In this particular case those that are applicable are as follows: Restaurant (w/o drive thru) 1 parking space/65 SF Shopping Center(C-1) 1 parking space/250 SF In the case of shopping centers, the entirety of the site, regardless if there are individual outparcel lots, may be parked at 1 park space /per 250 SF as long as no more than 25% of the shopping center square footage is utilized for intense uses, uses that, individually, have a parking requirement greater than 1:250 in C-1 unless additional parking is provided in accordance with the above requirements for that square footage of such uses in excess of 25%. In the case of the Gateway Shopping Center, the City determined early on in its development that signage would be based on the definition of the site as a single building plot. We believe the parking should have been determined under the same basis. The difference between the Gateway Shopping Center and many other large shopping center developments is that the first buildings to be constructed in the Gateway were the restaurants instead of the large retailers. In the case of most shopping centers, the large retailers are constructed first and the outparcels follow. 3 To illustrate the difference in magnitude of the required parking count based upon the two interpretations, the following data was compiled for all development located west of the main drive entrance at Glenhaven. Parking Required Based Upon 1:65 for Restaurants and 1:250 for Retail Gateway Station (Starbucks (1400 SF)/Talbots/etc) 23311 SF 94 Spaces Wings-N-More Restaurant 7962 SF 123 Spaces Texas Roadhouse Restaurant 6692 SF 103 Spaces Rockfish Restaurant 5590 SF 86 Spaces Linens N Things 28197 SF 113 Spaces PetsMart 22861 SF 92 Spaces Circuit City& Adjacent Retail 31320 SF 126 Spaces Required Parking 737 Spaces Parking Required Based Upon 1:250 for Shopping Center** Gateway Station (Starbucks/Talbots/etc) 23311 SF Wings-N-More Restaurant 7962 SF Texas Roadhouse Restaurant 6692 SF Rockfish Restaurant 5590 SF Linens N Things 28197 SF PetsMart 22861 SF Circuit City &Adjacent Retail 31320 SF Required Parking 125,933 SF 504 Spaces **The current restaurant uses comprise only 17% of the shopping center 4 These results show a huge discrepancy (233 parking spaces) between the two interpretations. Pictures typical to that below have been taken during the restaurant peak periods and it appears that the center does have plenty of parking. • .aa-.i ,`.,, jam,.' .-t s t Coc. a:iille �y iv_ t. v x t View looking from drive aisle behind Wing-N-More toward Linen N Things parking lot With the additional parking available within the shopping center it does not make sense to choose the interpretation of each building individually, rather the shopping center should be parked under the shopping center category. Adding additional parks to meet the first interpretation does not make sense from an aesthetic or environmental sense. The more parking we add, the more runoff we create contributing to higher water levels in our creeks, as well as increased pollution from the lack of natural grass filters. These higher parking counts also contribute to less green areas surrounding developments. If the parking is truly warranted then it should be constructed, but to park a site for the ultimate worst condition that may occur once a year is not necessary and is truly more harmful than the perceived benefits gained. Take for instance, the parking for Sams or Post Oak Mall, these are both great examples of meeting the parking requirements of the ordinance but at what overall cost to the community, would not these developments looked nicer had there been greenspace rather than unused concrete. 5 Therefore, • Wings-N-More is respectfully requesting a variance to Section 7.2.H of the ordinance to grant the restaurant a variance to 10 parking spaces. • We believe this variance is necessary because Wing-N-More in an effort to save the trees and view from University Drive for the outdoor patio had to compromise parking efficiency onsite. • Wings-N-More has explored alternatives to this variance and those specifically outlined in the UDO are not available because the adjacent owner does not desire to enter into an agreement for shared parking even though they do not oppose the overflow parking. • We do not believe this will be contrary to the public interest because the parking can be accommodated within the shopping center as seen in the parking calculations as well as our observations of the onsite conditions. We are continuing our onsite observations during all peak restaurant times and we will have data, including pictures illustrating the parking status during the first weeks of school to present to the ZBA at their meeting. The adjacent owner is willing to allow the restaurant use to overflow into the shopping center but does not desire to enter into a formal agreement. It is our sincere belief that this variance is warranted based upon the parking that is currently provided. To have an excess of 200 parking spaces based only upon the definition of the site is a telltale sign that there is no real need for additional parks to be constructed. Thank you for your time and your consideration of the Wings-N-More request. Sincerely, a414(6 Z71&->. 711 crAk- Veronica J.B. Morgan, P.E. Managing Partner Attachments Cc: file Mark Dennard, Wing-N-More 6 ,. GATEWAY SHOPPING CENTER BUSINESS SQUARE FOOT REQUIRED PROVIDED Gateway Retail 11,724 47 48 (04-22) Texas Road House 6,301 97 142 (99-439) Home Depot 119,304 477 563 (02-187) "need to account for buildings in parking lot" Cheddars 7,575 117 129 (00-30) Chicken Express 2,325 24 25 (03-266) Gateway Station 23,311 93 117 (03-203) Gateway Car Wash 1,609 2 2 (03-233) Free Birds 2,515 25 25 (05-114) Gateway Station 2-A 51,085 204 336 (05-70) Olive Garden 7,685 77 136 Wings & More 7,963 123 123 (02-112) Total Square Footage=241,397 divided by 250 = 966 parking spaces required Total Parking provided= 1,646 w/out storage building area in Home Depot parking lot 25% of 241,397 = 60,349 Total Restaurant square footage=28,458 w/Starbucks in Gateway Station(03-203) NOTE: This shopping Center is considered one Building Plot for signage only,Not Parking. All of the restaurants are stand alone on parking. There is a shared parking and access agreement from Frank M. (Owner/Developer) and Mark Dennard (Wings &More Owner) for 28 parking spaces. (See Site Plan file for Wings & More 02-112 for parking and access agreement.) NOTE: The parking and square footage numbers were calculated to see how this Center would have come out parking wise if it were considered as one building plot for parking. requirements. Wings 'n More already has 28 off-site parking spaces. The applicant states in the letter that if the parking was calculated like a shopping center, the parking ratio would be 1/250 as opposed to 1/65 for restaurants without a drive through. If this were the case, Wings 'n More would not need a parking variance because according to the shopping center ratio, the entire development would have over 200 extra parking spaces. Staffs view on this is that if this entire development had came in all at once then we could have reviewed a master plan and would have taken a comprehensive look at how this center should operate circulation, access and parking wise. Because of the way this development currently functions and the spillover parking concerns that have been expressed, staff is recommending denial of the parking variance. Responses Received: Staff has received --fefur phone calls, -two from the adjacent Gateway Retail Center and two from the Single Family neighborhood that backs up to University Drive along Summer Glenn. The business owner's have stated strong opposition to the variance request because of a large parking problem with spillover parking into the Center. It was stated that Wings 'n More patrons park in the adjacent building's parking lot all the time. The two property owners that back up to University Drive also expressed concern with the parking congestion as they frequent the restaurants and Gateway Retail Center as well as the noise pollution from the existing outdoor patio and made mention that trash blows against their side yard fences. SPECIAL INFORMATION Ordinance Intent: The purpose iroff-street parking standar is to establish the guidelines r off-street parking areas consistent with the proposed Ian is is done to eliminate the occurrence of non-resident on-street parking_ in adjo g neighborhoods; avoid jLle-traffic congestion and public safety hazards caused by a failure t • e such parking areas; and expedite the movement of traffic on public th roughfares in a safe manner, thus increasing the carrying capacity of the streets and reducing the amount of land required for streets, thereby lowering the cost to both the property owner and the City. / ((A (-"efe(A , Pvj g('-'-t1()°,if Iv 9 e__111-)1 AJ3c 7,/ f/ I'`.4-egfej4. 4‘u ( pie 4 611-• " A5 'eil"/