10-10-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

...iJ ■ff ' fIt-JIll HpYarU Cmi MmmI Um PtnaH - (Hilio^r Sfvltog Ihm applionts bm tlto pcppotad outdoor MotiQg vnt in the from tlong Shoreline Mve end in the rear adjacent lo lha City-ownad paricing lot. While Che City Code doM't dpaeiflcally addrow outdoor aeatuig at a cooditioiia] uae, tl ia an expansion orihe cxiiliat icataurani aa it will ofhr an additional S4 aeats in the rear and 30 scats in the front. Staff haa se;>aritad this expansion from the interior expansion, ai the sundirdi by which this alnald be reviewed difibr - the outdoor seating is not entirety permanent in natiae and poiceiialty has difibraiit impacts than an intaiior expansion. Issues aiaoeialad wHh the outdoor seating in front of the building that should be cotiaidered by Ptansing Commiasioa include: • impacta on pedestrian uae of the sidewalk - whether Uquoraervice will be allowed • exterior ti^ng to seppoft the outdoor seeling • whether exterior apeakan wilt be used, or whather there will be a tendency to ptevide outdoor eeating with accew to entcftainment (i. e. leevHig the doors open to dineis can beer the musk) • any fencing or odMr barrier between uMes and sidewalk - does front SHliog provide a more attractive location for overflow petroni to congregate, and whet impecta doee this hove on the aurrounding area Tha outdoor aeoting located at lha front of the buildiiig will cncrooch upon lha City's sidewalk aaaanwnt by appioxtmataly 4.5*. aa would lha propoaad 7* x I3.S* venibult. Ptimiifii Cdmniiasioo ahoiild diactMB wbni effect the outdoor seating would have on the eeeemewU and whather the edhrity that comae with this outdoor seating area would be conaidwed ‘pennanant* (aaa lha an^^mm dmeriptiooe below), and whether it obstructs aeeesi fer the public uae of the sidew ilk. Imuee fer diacuesion tegardkig dw outdoor scoring at the rear of the building include: • li^ttoraeoeasibility to outdoor patrone • control of patron overflow to packing lot • lighting end noiaeimpicia to neiifebofhood to the north • whether exterior speakers will be uaad, or whether there will be atandency to providt outdoor aaaringiwuofis with aeceaa to entertainment (i. e. leaving the doors open 10 outdoor petiofia can hear the music) Qff-Strttt Paririn^l- tl L-ll A primary concero fer both the hUerior and exterior uae expeneions end the potential activity meorined with them haa to do with parkiiig.Baaad on lha total amount of fisiaurant/ber square feotiis. existing and propt^ the following atnounl of off-ilM parking would be requited in aocordance with Section 78>IS16: •es-jiii iMtl«.2SS9 f^SWU PARKING Exisffng S,F.Proposed laUrior S.F. Proposed Ootdoor S.F.TOTAL Sgitan Footage 2,174 i.t 2,000 s.r*From-532 t.f- Rear-1,666 s.£«6,372* i stall/80 s.f.27sUllt 25tUlls Front • 7 stalls Rear-21 stalls MTouISlalh * TImm rcncet ttifTs aealytli of llit interior and exterior spaces and dirfer sligbtly from Umm preaMlod by tba applicant*! arcbllart In tome intunces Ihe City has regulated required parking based on 8S% of the gross square fooUge of Uio building rather than 100% of public floor area. This is because it is more accurate at a staff level lo calculate groos building squire footage rather than calculaling only area considered public floor area. This method as shown below, would yield similar retulta. 7.472.S I f. X 85% • 6,521.625 / 80 - 81J stalU It can theieforB be concluded that approximately 80 parking stailt would be needed to serve the existing rcatiurantfoar and proposed expansions bated on the City Code requirement of one tull per 80 square feet Off-Street Paridne Avnilnljj|j[Y The bustnesMS existing on the north side of Shoreline Drive, west of Shadywood Road have historically shared the CityK>wned parking lot located to the rear of all the busneaaes. This it out of necassity u limited on-street parking exists along Shoreline Drive. The Navarre munictpal parking lot was acquired and inqnoved in 1964-65. The bttsiiiaaea that back up to Ihe perking lot were originally assessed for the Unprovementa to it baaed on Iheir aroounl of ftoiHage on a traveled street The Narrows site was istfwcd for 104.5* of fronUge (reflecting the 112* lot width minus the 7.S* public eaacmant along the east boundary) or 8% (1/12) of the total frontage assessed. At the time of assetsinem, no commitments were made (that we can find) that would apportion qiicciflc numbers of perking lulls to specific properties. We do know that in 1983 the Council adopted Resolution No. 1594 that resulted from leltlcroem of a claim by the former owners of 2385 Shadywood Road and granted variancea that would allow an offlee builduig requiring credit of 26 parking suits in the municipal lot These vanances were granted wi*'. a waiver of the 1-year expiration, ao the potential still exisu for that property lo lay claim to as many as 26 stills. The existing City-owned parking lot contains approximately 122 marked stalls aa counted by lUff at the site on June 15,2005. The conditional use permit review conducted for the Narrows CUP in 2000 indicated that 154 parking stalla are needed to serve all butin^m having rights to Ihe City-nwned lot That analysis was baaed on rough estimates of square IboUges (based on footprint sue) of the businemee that existed at that time.