New Avondale Restaurant Proposed: Not Everyone Happy

[Thad Crowe]

It is really hard to, at least in zoning terms, to strike a balance between maintaining vibrancy of historic commercial districts and neighborhood quality of life. Things have a way of self-correcting when those who tire of the congestion move away, and those who welcome the action move in. But I support the menu approach - make sure a there is an available base level mixture of parking - on-site, nearby on-street, in nearby lots, and maybe allow reducing parking as density, sidewalk network, covered bike parking, legitimate transit (Riverside trolley, not empty lumbering buses) and other relevant factors increase. You could pick a healthy & functional area to try to identify these factors of success (the Riverside Avondale parking study is a good start for this). But also allow for some creative and flexible approaches - the research indicates that people will walk longer distances when you make the walk pleasurable and safe, so allow big restaurants seeking parking reduction seek out alternatives to parking, say to contribute to shade trees, better sidewalks, lighting, public art and other elements of interest in an ever-expanding walk-shed. Of course the downside to this is administration - it all crashes around you under clumsy hands.

[fieldafm]

say to contribute to shade trees, better sidewalks, lighting, public art and other elements of interest in an ever-expanding walk-shed.

Without responding to the entirety of your post for the sake of time (its almost happy hour, after all).. sounds like then, you would be in favor of some kind of incentive zoning scheme and/or parking in lieu program within the Overlay?

[Thad Crowe]

Absolutely I would! Because it seems what is in place is not working as well as maybe it should. Happy Friday!

[jcjohnpaint]

Welcome Thad.  Thanks for your point of view. 

[ProjectMaximus]

Absolutely I would! Because it seems what is in place is not working as well as maybe it should. Happy Friday!

Aww man! I was soo looking forward to hating this Thad fellow but he sounds like a reasonable guy! 

[fieldafm]

Absolutely I would! Because it seems what is in place is not working as well as maybe it should. Happy Friday!

That's a welcome breath of fresh air.

If you agree that there are better ways to address these issues and are in favor of seeking solutions such as those previously mentioned, why then are you advocating for the arbitrary reduction in the amount of seating in this restaurant instead of looking at win-win solutions that more sensibly address the root causes of the problem?

[Non-RedNeck Westsider]

Absolutely I would! Because it seems what is in place is not working as well as maybe it should. Happy Friday!

That's a welcome breath of fresh air.

If you agree that there are better ways to address these issues and are in favor of seeking solutions such as those previously mentioned, why then are you advocating for the arbitrary reduction in the amount of seating in this restaurant instead of looking at win-win solutions that more sensibly address the root causes of the problem?

C'mon Mike... to be fair, there are several different issues that can (and have) been worked through regarding seating quantities and the reasoning behind them.  If you want to look at arbitrary numbers, for one, we could start with the seating minimum to obtain a liquor license. 

[Thad Crowe]

Well to be honest with you fieldafm, I was trying to use the KISS principle because I am pretty busy & not local plus I was concerned not to deal with too much Nuance with the City. My experience with the egos on appointed boards is you have to be a little dramatic. Sorry about that. In the end there were some pretty big errors in my letter, so that was embarrassing. Like not understanding the parking variance and estimating 100 seats instead of the correct 180 for Orsay. And I didn't know my friend Ennis would pull my letter out of obscurity.  But it is all good.

[thelakelander]

^Haha. There was no ill will from my end, when I threw the story together. I went through the meeting agenda on COJ's website, saw the project's COA application, which included the letter, and thought it was interesting enough to share, since I accurately figured that most people probably didn't know anything about what was being proposed.

[Thad Crowe]

No problem, it is good to get the word out. Yes, arbitrary numbers are not good, like 150-seat minimum for liquor, but without structure bad actors can rush in. As far as shared parking, there is now a flat 400-foot distance for off-site parking. Maybe that could be increased with certain favorable factors present. The best solution would be Robert Mann's streetcars of course! Thanks everyone.

[fieldafm]

Well to be honest with you fieldafm, I was trying to use the KISS principle because I am pretty busy & not local plus I was concerned not to deal with too much Nuance with the City. My experience with the egos on appointed boards is you have to be a little dramatic. Sorry about that. In the end there were some pretty big errors in my letter, so that was embarrassing. Like not understanding the parking variance and estimating 100 seats instead of the correct 180 for Orsay. And I didn't know my friend Ennis would pull my letter out of obscurity.  But it is all good.

You would agree then that a letter from a professional signed with their credentials would tend to carry weight with a citizen-appointed zoning committee... and that it is perhaps unfair then when this professional opinion does not even adequately give the applicant the seating/parking rights they are allowed by right according to the muni code and other nearby businesses have been granted (especially considering the Overlay allows for no parking to be required if a non contributing structure is being replaced with the same square footage.. and COJ has previously allowed for this consideration when new construction exceeds the previous footprint)? 

Will you be sending a modified letter when the applicant goes to LUZ?

It's concerning when hyperbole and sensationalism are used by professionals, wouldn't you agree? Especially in a neighborhood that is fraught with messy zoning disputes.. all the while operating under a Code that is incomplete and not particularly effective when dealing with growth management issues (according to your own opinion.. One that I roundly agree with)?

I really could care less where you live, I just wanted to vet that particular concern as in the case of Mellow Mushroom and Kickbacks.. several neighbors blasted the opinions of others because they 'didn't live their', regardless of whether or not those opinions were given by people who owned commercial or residential property near the proposed business. Just making sure apples are being compared to apples.

I'm really glad you came on and clarified your position. Would you also be interested in consulting with others and making recommendations as to how the Overlay can be amended to better deal with these types of issues?


BTW, the more I think about.. The more strongly I agree with you about the windows.

[fieldafm]

No problem, it is good to get the word out. Yes, arbitrary numbers are not good, like 150-seat minimum for liquor, but without structure bad actors can rush in. As far as shared parking, there is now a flat 400-foot distance for off-site parking. Maybe that could be increased with certain favorable factors present. The best solution would be Robert Mann's streetcars of course! Thanks everyone.

I agree, and the frustrating thing is that the Ghyabj parking study identifies ample parking supply throughout R/A, yet code does not allow for a more efficient way to unbundle and utilize that parking.

[Thad Crowe]

Yes fieldsafm, you are correct. I was being a little flippant there about the drama. The Overlay is very difficult to dive in and quickly figure out, so yes I will be more careful. I am a latecomer to these disputes, so I am learning things as I go. Lisa Sheppard from the City's historic preservation office has been incredibly helpful. I sense that there is not exactly a meeting of the minds between the City's HP and Zoning sections. For example, the Pres. Comm. gets a design approved, which the applicant then uses to justify a larger building size. And the built-in parking variances for the Overlay are a one-size-fits-all and don't recognize unique site & vicinity characteristics. And yuck on the windows.

[Kay]

Any restaurant over 100 seats whether in a contributing structure, non-contributing structure or new development with the same square footage as the building being torn down requires parking at a 50% reduction from the regular code.

[Know Growth]

Nocatee Planner/Clay County Planner .......right behind Clay County Planner Fraser....WLA   

What's next: