Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesZBA MINUTES July 18, 2000 AGENDA ITEM NO. 6: Consideration of a parking variance at 2300 Earl Rudder Freeway, lot 2, block 1, Sutton Place Subdivision. Applicant is Tom Bevans, Jr. Staff Planner Laauwe stepped before the Board and presented the staff report. Ms. Laauwe told the Board that the variance is to allow for redevelopment of a site in compliance with the Wolf Pen Creek Plan. Nightclubs are required to have one parking space for every 50 square feet. The proposed nightclub has a total of 13,171 square feet, for a total requirement of 264 parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to provide parking for cars, motorcycles and bicycles. The Zoning Ordinance, however does not consider motorcycle and bicycle parking towards the off-street parking requirement. The applicant has proposed the following parking: 183 spaces for cars 1 for every 72 sq. ft. (31% variance) 33 spaces for motorcycles 10 spaces for bicycles 226 total spaces proposed 1 for every 58.27 sq. ft. (14.4% variance) While the Board may take in consideration the proposed motorcycle and bicycle parking, the variance must be based on the number of spaces for automobiles. Thus, the applicant is seeking a variance to the off-street parking regulations by the amount of 81 parking spaces (31%). The applicant is proposing to redevelop the existing Wolfe Nursery site with a nightclub that will feature dining, a sand volleyball court, bar and stage. Due to the increase in intensity of the use, the parking requirement for the site has risen substantially. The Wolf Pen Creek Corridor Design Review Board (DRB) has met regarding the Roosters' plan and has given strong opinions that they favor a parking variance that would allow for more landscape vegetation rather than the placement of additional parking spaces. The Planning & Zoning Commission will be the approving body of the final site plan. The DRB wishes to limit the amount of surface parking in favor of landscaping and trails that will eventually connect the various entertainment and restaurants along the corridor. The City has hired a Code Consultant and is in the process of reviewing several sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Parking requirements within the zoning district is one area that may be revised. The owner also owns the abutting properties, making it possible to reconfigure the lots to add the required parking and landscaping. The Board may also grant a variance less than the requested amount (0-81 spaces). Ms. Laauwe ended her staff report by showing the Board pictures of the property. Mr. Lewis asked what is the parking ratio for a restaurant. Ms. Laauwe replied that it is 1 for 100 sq. ft. because a drive through is being proposed. Ms. Kuenzel stepped before the Board and offered clarification to the parking. Ms. Kuenzel told the Board that she had been working with the applicant since the beginning and she would be glad to answer any questions. Ms. Kuenzel told the Board that parking for retail is 1 per 250, which is one fifth of a nightclub -parking requirement. The parking requirement for a nightclub is 1-50. It is half that for a restaurant with a drive through. Chairman Bond opened the Public Hearing. Clint Schroff, representative for the applicant, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Bond. Mr. Schroff told the Board that both the applicant and landowner where in attendance and he encouraged the Board to ask them any questions. Mr. Hill asked what the allowed occupancy of the building will be. Mr. Schroff that he could not answer that at this time. They are going specifically on square footages for parking. Paul Clarke, the landowner, stepped before the Board and was sworn in by Chairman Bond. Mr. Clarke explained to the Board that when the application was turned into for ZBA consideration, it was prior to the DRB meeting. Since that time the site plan has changed. The phase 2 parking lot was for the adjacent property. The DRB asked that the phase 2 parking be shown now. The existing site plan shows the phase 2 parking to the west. Since then an alternative parking lot to the south side was planned which would bring the parking up to a night club ratio. The DRB asked them not to put that parking in but instead landscape it. Mr. Clarke told the Board that as a developer they did not want a "sea of concrete" at the focal intersection of Wolf Pen Creek Mr. Clarke ended by telling the Board that the surrounding property owners that were notified, are different partnerships but essentially they are the same partners. So it would be very easy to come up with a parking agreement that all concerned parties would agree to. Mr. Richards asked how many automobile parking spaces are there in phase 2. Mr. Clarke replied that it was an additional 30 spaces to the west. There were continued discussions with the Board and Mr. Clarke concerning the parking and the hours of operation. Mr. Hill made the motion to authorize a variance to the parking requirements from the terms of this ordinance as it will not be contrary to the public interest, due to the following special conditions: granting this variance will allow maximum flexibility to the Wolf Pen Creek Corridor Design Review Board to develop the area in the manner that they prefer; and because a strict enforcement of the provisions of this ordinance would result in unnecessary hardship to this applicant being: more surface parking would be required which would reduce the area available for landscaping and trails which is desired by the city; and such that the spirit of this ordinance shall be observed and substantial justice done subject to the following limitations: a variance of 81 parking spaces will be granted allowing a requirement of 183 parking spaces for the proposed 13,171 square foot nightclub. Mr. Sheffy seconded the motion. Mr. Richards asked what all was planned in the 13,171 square feet of the building. Ms. Kuenzel referred to the site plan and told the Board that it would include anything enclosed in the building i.e. meeting rooms, restrooms, any kitchen space and outside serving areas. It does not include the volleyball courts. Board voted (4-0-1). Chairman Bond abstaining from voting.