Winter Park Sings the Parking Blues

by Anne Mooney | Apr 1, 2017 | Headline, Zoning and Development

Winter Park Sings the Parking Blues

Fuzzy Parking Math Doesn’t Add Up

The March 27 Commission meeting shows what can happen when a city like Winter Park tries to solve a systemic parking problem one project at a time. Things don’t work out the way everyone thinks they’re going to.

Marathon Meeting

The 133,830 square feet of commercial development sent forth March 7 by the Planning & Zoning Board arrived at the City Commission March 27. The meeting, which began at 3:30 pm, lasted until nearly midnight. By 10:30 or so, many of the people who were still hanging in there were scratching their heads. The remarks in these video clips, which occurred toward the end of the meeting, tell the tale.

Commissioner Sarah Sprinkel, “We Can’t Kick This Can Down the Road Much Longer.”

Rick Frazee, “Nothing’s changed.”

Joe Terranova, “You can’t fit a size 10 foot into a size 6 shoe.”

Pat MacDonald, “This has been a very different evening than we all expected.”

Three Projects All Too Big for Their Parking Lots

Three large commercial construction projects – Orchard Supply Hardware at 2540 Aloma Avenue, Villa Tuscany Memory Care Center at 1298 Howell Branch Road, and the BFC Holdings project at 158 E. New England Avenue – shared the agenda with a presentation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). All three construction applicants sought variances because of insufficient parking.

Orchard Strikes Out

First up was Lowe’s subsidiary Orchard Hardware Supply, to be built on the current location of the Aloma Bowl. Orchard needed a total of 135 parking spaces. They had 87 spaces on site and could lease 24 additional spaces from neighboring Panera Bread, leaving them 24 spaces short.

Strong opposition came from the bowlers, represented by Winter Park High School bowling team captain Danielle Allison. Ms. Allison and her volunteers had gathered nearly 3,000 signatures of citizens seeking to keep the facility open as a bowling alley. The sale of Aloma Bowl to Orchard was contingent on Commission approval.

Despite the Commissioners’ understanding and their admiration for Ms. Allison’s tenacity, at the end of the day, Orchard’s fortunes rose and fell on parking. After discussion and citizen commentary, the Commission voted to deny the application, pointing out that if the applicant would consider a smaller building, their parking dilemma would go away.

The following day, Ms. Allison told the Voice that she hoped Aloma Bowl would remain open for the community, but she said she did not know the owner’s plans for the building. The owner of Aloma Bowl could not be reached for comment.

Villa Tuscany – Too Big Not to Fail

Next up was the Villa Tuscany Memory Care Center at 1298 Howell Branch Road. This was to be a 41,000-square-foot memory care and assisted living project that would be built on land zoned R-3, high density residential, that sits adjacent to a single-family residential neighborhood. The neighbors had well-organized opposition, not to the proposed use of the facility, but to the size and scale, which they said was incompatible with the surroundings.

Even though residents of the facility would not have cars, plans for the facility did not provide adequate parking on site for staff and visitors. The applicant would be able to lease the missing parking spaces, but those were on the other side of Howell Branch Road.

Commissioner Peter Weldon broached the possibility of tabling the project and allowing the applicant to come back at a later date with revised plans for a smaller project. Weldon failed to receive a second for his motion, however, and the Commission voted 5 – 0 to deny the application, pointing out once again that a smaller project would obviate the need for extra parking.

BFC Holdings New England Ups the Ante

By the time attorney Mickey Grindstaff approached the podium on behalf of the Battaglia family’s 52,000-spare-foot project at 158 E. New England Avenue, tension in the chamber was palpable. While the BFC Holdings project had City staff support, P&Z had sent the project forward with no recommendation.

Staff recommended reducing the parking requirement from the four spaces per 1,000 square feet of office/ retail, called for by City Code, to three per thousand. Planning Director Dori Stone explained that staff was comfortable allowing fewer parking spaces. “In a downtown setting,” she said, “Class A Office, which is a different breed of office than we have in a lot of other places in Winter Park . . . can support three spaces per thousand, because the way they operate is different, the way their customer base is different, the way they function, look and feel is different than a typical office.”

Ms. Stone did not elaborate on what those differences might be. Planning Manager Jeff Briggs acknowledged that no other building in Winter Park enjoyed this reduction in parking requirement.

Winter Park Needs Another Parking Study

Stone recognized the need for further study of how parking functions in downtown Winter Park. “No matter how you count the spaces,” she said, “downtown Winter Park has parking issues.” Staff will embark on the fourth parking study in seven years – which those in the know believe will result in a recommendation for some sort of parking structure in the Central Business District.

Don’t Tie Parking Regulations to a Specific Project

Commissioner Carolyn Cooper admonished staff that if the City’s parking code needs to be reviewed, the discussion should take place outside the context of a specific project to avoid placing both the applicant and the Commissioners in a difficult position. “If staff truly supports a change in code,” she said, “they should bring us an ordinance, supported by data, so that we have the opportunity to evaluate a change in the parking code.”

‘How Much Longer ‘til Everyone Goes to the Mall?’

Grindstaff noted that BFC Holdings is being asked unfairly to shoulder a city-wide problem. But it is not just the BFC project that is suffering. Alan Deaver, a merchant and property owner in downtown Winter Park, collected signatures from 45 Park Avenue merchants who are being squeezed by the parking deficit and who will be severely impacted by the BFC Holdings project. “How much longer until everyone goes to the mall?” he wanted to know.

Not Ready for Prime Time

Using the new math, BFC New England would need 133 spaces for office and retail, and an additional 95 spaces for the two restaurants planned for the ground floor of the new building. The developer plans to put 57 spaces on site and to use 90 spaces in the Bank of America parking garage across the street, which they also own. The 90 B-of-A spaces would be available only by valet, as the garage is closed to the public.

Using the newly contrived formula, BFC is short 81 parking spaces. Compare this with the 24 spaces Orchard was short and the four spaces Villa Tuscany was short. It’s worth pointing out that by existing code, to which the other projects were held, the BFC project is short 121 spaces.

Mayor Steve Leary finally showed mercy on those assembled by moving to table the BFC Holdings application. His motion passed on a 5 – 0 vote. The BFC New England project will now make its way back through City Planning staff. There is no scheduled date for its return to the Commission.

To comment or read comments from others, click here →

Individual Property Rights vs. the Common Good

by Anne Mooney | Mar 13, 2017 | Headline, Zoning and Development

Individual Property Rights vs. the Common Good

Are They Mutually Exclusive?

The proponents of property rights went toe-to-toe with the advocates of neighborhood compatibility in a Planning & Zoning (P&Z) Board meeting Tuesday, March 7, which lasted well into the night. An overflow audience packed the Commission Chamber and spilled out into the elevator foyer. Tempers flared and rhetoric grew heated as citizens, applicants and P&Z Board members aired conflicting views.

At the end of the day, P&Z sent forward for Commission approval a total of 133,830 square feet of commercial development, with requests for variances for around 300 parking spaces.

Three Controversial Projects

At issue were three large commercial developments, two of which had been to P&Z before.

1. Villa Tuscany Memory Care Center, 1298 Howell Branch Road — 41,352 square feet, requesting a variance for 4 parking spaces.
2. Orchard Supply Hardware Store, 2540 Aloma Avenue (on the site of Aloma Bowl) — 39,877 square feet, requesting a variance for 45 parking spaces.
3. A Three-Story, mixed use building at 158 E. New England Avenue — 52,601 square feet, needing a parking variance of 200 spaces, more or less. The issue of how many parking spaces is hotly disputed, but everyone, even the applicant, agrees they need more.

Villa Tuscany Memory Care

Winter Park Elderly Services, LLC, first brought this project before P&Z in October 2016. The proposal was for a 50-bed, 34,986-square-foot memory care and assisted living facility at the intersection of Temple Trail and Howell Branch Road. The building site fronts Lake Temple and there is also a sinkhole on the property. The proposed height of the original building was more than 35 feet, requiring an 85-foot setback from Lake Temple. Staff recommended denial.

At the October meeting, P&Z voted to approve the use for a memory care facility, but tabled the request for building variances. They asked the applicant to return with a plan for a smaller facility. Instead, the applicant returned with a request for a larger facility — 6,366 square feet larger, with 51 beds — but it is only 35 feet high.

It’s Still Too Big

The neighbors weren’t buying it. “It is still too big,” they said. “It’s not compatible with the neighborhood.” Residents Barry Render and Nancy Freeman, representing 13 area HOAs, offered petitions with more than 200 signatures of people opposing the project and a Powerpoint presenting 10 reasons why P&Z should vote to deny.

But Not As Big As It Could Be

The incompatibility argument having been heard, attorney Becky Wilson, representing the applicant, returned to the podium with the property rights argument. The applicant was requesting a building about half the size he was actually entitled to under City code, warned Wilson.

P&Z Sides with Developer

Bob Hahn began the board’s discussion of the project by objecting to “accusations of profiteering.”

After a short discussion, the P&Z Board voted unanimously to approve the application and send it forward to the Commission.

Orchard Supply Hardware

Lowe’s subsidiary Orchard Supply Hardware seeks to build a second store within Winter Park City limits. The first slightly smaller store (32,355 square feet) is going up on 17-92. This project will sit on the present site of the Aloma Bowl, which has been sold to developers.

Real Estate Bubble?

Steve Miller of Miller’s Hardware spoke about the impact of commercial development on traffic and the general quality of life in Winter Park. “We may have a real estate bubble going,” he cautioned.

Lamenting the Loss of Aloma Bowl

A large group of citizens dressed in blue “Save Aloma Bowl” t-shirts protested the loss of the bowling alley, which has provided a family-friendly athletic and social outlet for generations of Winter Parkers of all ages. The Winter Park High School Bowling Team Co-captain described its importance in her life.

Once again, individual property rights collided with the interests of the common good. Becky Wilson, attorney for the applicant, explained it this way.

P&Z members sympathized with the residents, but explained that it was not within their purview to save the bowling alley. Shelia De Ciccio asked for understanding from residents in the audience.

After a discussion about signage and parking, the P&Z Board voted unanimously to approve the application and send it forward to the Commission.

158 East New England Avenue

BFC New England LLC first appeared before P&Z in November 2016 requesting approval for a three-story mixed-use development in the downtown core of Winter Park. The second and third floors would be occupied by Class A office space, while plans for the ground floor included retail space and two restaurants.

The Problem?

In a word . . . parking. Especially daytime parking.

The November staff report cites City parking code at 4 parking spaces per 1,000 feet for office and retail, and 1 space for every 4 seats in a restaurant. At the November hearing, BFC Holdings proposed 40,000 square feet of office and retail, requiring 162 spaces. They agreed to a total of 380 restaurant seats — an additional 95 spaces, for a total requirement of 257 spaces. BFC plans to put 57 spaces in the new building and to use another 90 spaces in the Bank of America garage across the street, which they own. Using these rules, they are short 110 parking spaces.

Now, City staff proposes to reduce the parking requirement to 3 spaces per 1,000 feet of retail/office. By those rules, BFC would need 133 spaces for office/retail, plus 95 for restaurant, totaling 228 spaces, leaving them only 81 spaces short. Bear in mind, this building will go up on a parking lot that currently holds 60 to 80 cars. The loss of those spaces will put further pressure on an existing parking deficit.

For daytime office and retail use, the 147 available spaces might be okay, especially since the two restaurants in the Bank of America building, Luma and the Wine Room, are currently open only in the evening – but nothing prevents them from opening for lunch.

Valet Parking in the Loading Zone

What if the two restaurants planned for the new building open for lunch – even with limited seating? Since parking for those restaurants would be in the Bank of America garage, which is closed to the public during the day, how would cars get in? Well, valet parking could get them in, but where on New England Avenue does one put the valet? Daniel Butts, speaking for BFC New England, proposes to put them in the loading zone.

P&Z Kicks the Can Down the Road

Following lengthy discourse on the relative merits of various parking scenarios, presiding P&Z chair Ross Johnston called for a vote. The vote ended up in a 3 – 3 tie, James Johnston having recused himself. As P&Z was unable to reach a decision, City staff will now take the proposal before the Commission, explain the rationale behind the opposing votes, and the decision will be up to the Commissioners.

Now What?

Those present at the meeting left with a number of unanswered questions. Though they are not questions that can or should be answered by P&Z, they are still left hanging.

Where Will the Green Space Go?

With a robust economy, commercial development is surging to satisfy pent up demand. As the favorable economic climate nurtures larger projects, infill developments test their boundaries. Traffic approaches gridlock — and parking? Forget it. Sidewalks, bike paths and especially, green space risk becoming a distant memory.

Is Everyone Playing by the Same Rules?

Conflicts occur at boundaries. In the interests of perpetuating the human race, our forebears found it advantageous to create a set of rules that allow Party A and Party B to preserve the integrity of their territory and still live peacefully side by side. But how well do the rules work if they are not always the same for everyone?

For instance, with Park Avenue merchants already losing business because of a downtown parking deficit, is it wise to create a special set of rules for large commercial projects?

Should We Hit the Pause Button?

Just this past January, Maitland Mayor Dale McDonald hit the Pause Button on high-density residential development in order to take a more global look at where his city is headed and what will be left of it when it gets there.

Might it be time for Winter Park to take a page from that book and pause to examine where we are headed with all this commercial development? After all, no developer comes to the City saying, “I want to build a bad development.” But how many big box stores does it take to make this too much of a good thing?

Are Individual Property Rights & the Common Good Mutually Exclusive?

City Fathers Chase and Chapman had it right when they drew up their plans for Winter Park in the 1880s. We still prosper from their vision. They began with a good plan, they codified it and they wrote it down for everyone to see and to follow. To this day, our Charter and our Comprehensive Plan provide a context within which neighbors can settle boundary disputes.

These documents also give us a way to achieve a balance between individual property rights and the common good.

To comment or read comments from others, click here →