Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-12-17 WORKSHOPCottage / Grove 41/lere Pride andPCOsPerity Meet To: Planning Commission From: Max Pattsner, Planning Intern Date: December 13, 2018 Subject: Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements Introduction In response to issues raised regarding the amount of off-street parking a new restaurant in Cottage Grove is required to provide, the restaurant parking requirements of 25 peer cities were evaluated to determine if Cottage Grove's requirements were in keeping with other communities in the metro area. The charts located below show where Cottage Grove stands on various metrics of required parking for restaurants. Several alternative parking proposals are also discussed below. The aim of this is to alleviate some of the unintended negative consequences of enforcing a uniform parking standard for all new restaurants, which may provide either too much or too little parking in specific cases, and also to increase flexibility in parking requirements for new restaurants who may have different parking needs than were common in the past. Background Parking requirements have been addressed in several memos and staff reports in the last few years, including in February 2002 (Planning Case No. TA02-017), June 2013, and January 2016 (CUP2015-047). In November 2015, a staff report was produced proposing revisions to parking regulations in Cottage Grove (Planning Case No. TA15-047). The ordinance in question, City Code Title 11-2- 9F, provided the following calculation: "At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or where there is no design layout, 1 space for each 50 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. Except that in cases in where there is a bar area separate from the food service area, a dance area larger than 100 square feet, or other public areas, additional parking will be required as necessary." This ordinance is largely the same as the ordinance used currently, except that the square foot standard has been changed from 1 space for each 50 square feet to 1 space for each 60 square feet. The staff report identified an issue with leasing empty spaces in the city, noting that the "which- ever is greater" language in the parking requirement made it so that parking would always default to the higher calculation based on gross floor area. This would make it difficult or impos- sible to fulfill the requirement within the parking lot designated to the building, and the space Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 2 of 9 would ultimately go unleased. To alleviate this issue, the staff report proposed modifying the ordinance so that it stated: "One space for every 3 seats, based on the seating design plus 5 additional spaces for employees. Where there is no seating design, one space for each 50 square feet of gross floor area shall be provided. Additional parking may be required as deemed necessary." This proposal eliminates the "whichever is greater" language and would keep parking require- ments from automatically defaulting to the greater option, allowing restaurants to have some control over their required parking based on how many seats they choose to provide. The goal of this proposal was to decrease the number of restaurants that were not able to lease space in the city due to burdensomely high parking requirements. It is important to note with the "which- ever is greater" language, it does not take into account the potential for a restaurant use to have a larger kitchen than dining area. Thus, you are requiring parking for areas in which the public are not seated and/or served. The proposal was not adopted, and the current ordinance does not reflect this recommendation. Current Ordinance The current parking ordinances for restaurants as well as the ordinances for neighborhood shopping centers are included below: Parking Requirements for Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 Restaurants Parking Requirements for Regional, Neighborhood, and Community Shopping Centers Shopping center (regional) At least 5.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Parking demand for restaurants and theaters located within the center will be added to the shopping center minimum parking requirements Shopping center (neighbor- At least 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Parking demand for restaurants and theaters hood or community) i located within the center will be added to the shopping center minimum parking requirements Peer Communities Communities in the Twin Cities metro area utilize a variety of different metrics to determine parking requirements for restaurants. The two most widely -used metrics are spaces per seat and spaces per square foot of gross floor area. Some communities also take into account the maximum number of workers on a shift, whether the restaurant serves liquor, and kitchen area Restaurants, classes 1 and 2, cafes, At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or, where there is no design layout, 1 cafeteria food, traditional restaurants space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater Restaurants, classes 1 and 2, bars, At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or where there is no design layout, 1 taverns, nightclubs space for each 50 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. Except that in cases in which there is a bar area separate from the food service area, a dance area larger than 100 V square feet, or other public areas, additional parking will be required as necessary Restaurants, class 3, drive in estab- At least 1 space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area in the building lishments and fast food restaurants Parking Requirements for Regional, Neighborhood, and Community Shopping Centers Shopping center (regional) At least 5.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Parking demand for restaurants and theaters located within the center will be added to the shopping center minimum parking requirements Shopping center (neighbor- At least 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Parking demand for restaurants and theaters hood or community) i located within the center will be added to the shopping center minimum parking requirements Peer Communities Communities in the Twin Cities metro area utilize a variety of different metrics to determine parking requirements for restaurants. The two most widely -used metrics are spaces per seat and spaces per square foot of gross floor area. Some communities also take into account the maximum number of workers on a shift, whether the restaurant serves liquor, and kitchen area Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 3 of 9 versus public area. Below is a list of parking requirements for 25 communities that was created in 2013 during a previous review of the City's parking requirements (Planning Case TA2013- 018) and has been updated to reflect the current requirements for each city. The graph details the requirements for each community and includes the number of spaces required for a hypo- thetical restaurant containing 6,550 square feet of gross floor area and 352 seats: NarKina Keauirements for Z5 Neer communities Andover 1 stall for every 2.5 seats. 141 Spaces One space per 2.5 customer seats; and one space per five seats of outdoor eating area, excluding 110 (Square Feet without liquor) Apple Valley the first ten outdoor seats. 121 Spaces Brooklyn 4 spaces, plus no less than 1 space per 100 and no more than 1 space per 50 square feet of gross 110 seats Center One space for every two seats, and one space for every two employees on maximum shift. 176 + Employee parking Spaces equal to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one for each employee on the 132 spaces Edina (Over 1,000 square feet) 1 parking space for every 40 square feet of dining and bar area, plus 1 (60% dining area, 40% kitchen Champlin parking space for every 80 square feet of kitchen area. area) Golden Valley Without liquor license: one space per 60 square feet of GFA or one space per two and one-half (liquor) Rosemount seats whichever is greater. With liquor license: one space per 50 feet of GFA or one space per 131 (Square Feet) Chanhassen two seats, whichever is greater. 176 (Seats) For most of the metrics, Cottage Grove falls somewhere near the center of the communities surveyed. The graphs below show the range of parking requirements using three different metrics: seating (with liquor), square feet (with liquor), and square feet (without liquor). At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or, where there is no design layout, 1 118 (Seats, liquor or no liquor space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area (50 square feet for bars, taverns or nightclubs, 110 (Square Feet without liquor) Cottage Grove whichever is greater. 131 (Square Feet with liquor) New Brighton 4 spaces, plus no less than 1 space per 100 and no more than 1 space per 50 square feet of gross 110 seats Crystal floor area. Min: 70 spaces Max: 135 spaces Spaces equal to one-third the maximum seating capacity, plus one for each employee on the Edina major shift. 118 + Employee parking Ramsey No Liquor -1 space per 100 SF of GFA With Liquor -1 space per 60 SF of floor area plus 1 66 spaces (no liquor), 110 spaces Golden Valley space per 25 SF of bar area. (liquor) Rosemount No Liquor- 1 per 60 square feet or 1 per 3 seats. With Liquor- 1 per 50 square feet or 1 per 2 118 spaces Roseville seats, except when a bar area is separate from the food service area, a dance area larger than 100 118 spaces Hastings square feet, or other public areas, additional parking may be required. 131 (square feet) 118 (seats) Inver Grove One space per each 60 SF floor area. 110 spaces Heights 1 space for each 3 seats based on design capacity. 118 spaces Lakeville 1 space per 40 square feet of dining area and 1 space for each 80 square feet of kitchen area. 108 spaces Woodbury At least one space for each 40 square feet of gross floor area of dining and bar area and one 176 spaces Maple Grove space for each 80 square feet of kitchen area. 108 spaces For most of the metrics, Cottage Grove falls somewhere near the center of the communities surveyed. The graphs below show the range of parking requirements using three different metrics: seating (with liquor), square feet (with liquor), and square feet (without liquor). No liquor: One space per 60 square feet of gross floor area or one space per 2.5 seats; whichever is greater. With liquor: One space per 50 square feet of gross floor area or one space per two Minnetonka seats, whichever is greater. 131 (square feet) 176 (seats) New Brighton 1 per 60 square feet of floor space. Nightclubs/bars: 1 space per 50 square feet of floor space. 110 seats Oakdale One space for each three seats plus one for each two employees 118 + Employee parking No liquor: 1 parking space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area. With liquor: 1 parking Prior Lake space for each 50 square feet of gross floor area. 131 spaces Ramsey One space for each 3 seats. 118 spaces Richfield 10 spaces per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. 66 spaces Rosemount 1 per 3 seats 118 spaces Roseville 1 space for every 3 seats under maximum designed capacity. 118 spaces Savage 1 space per 75 SF of floor area. 88 spaces St Louis Park One space per each 60 SF floor area. 110 spaces White Bear Lake 1 space for each 2 1/2 seats, based on maximum design capacity. 141 spaces Woodbury One space for each two seats based on capacity design plus employee parking 176 spaces For most of the metrics, Cottage Grove falls somewhere near the center of the communities surveyed. The graphs below show the range of parking requirements using three different metrics: seating (with liquor), square feet (with liquor), and square feet (without liquor). Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 4 of 9 Min Parking using Seats (w/ liquor) 200 Iso ■ = Reqs based on number of seats 160 140 ■ = Req°s not based on number of seats 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 G ©,� y� ���� ��oia tea` ZR 1�1 �� ca {°a �a Q qtr `�-� , (p 44t Using seating to determine required parking puts Cottage Grove near the middle, but toward the lower end of its peer communities. Many communities do not have parking requirements based on seating, and they are represented on this graph in blue, while the communities who do have seating requirements are shown in red. For this metric, the mean number of spaces required for the hypothetical restaurant is 123, the median is 118, and the range is very wide at 110 spaces (176 maximum and 66 minimum). Cottage Grove, at 118, is at the median number of spaces. Because of the "whichever is greater" language used to determine requirements in Cottage Grove, this metric is rarely if ever used. In the majority of cases, determining parking require- ments by square feet of gross floor area yields a higher requirement, so that metric is used instead. Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 5 of 9 Min Parking Using Square Fee#. (w/ liquor) 200 so ■ = Req's based on sq ft gross floor area ■ = Req's not based on sq ft gross floor iso area 140 12{1 100 K 40 0 ySIIO a ye !0 1 t 1411 le�� ■� � 4P .1 p *#? � \\s- , ` o �e jk XW �,'�� �� �(.`� Ps �' � ���4 A �o � �*�� ���4� �y��� �� � �{.�0 �y*� 4* �6 bV �J Using square feet to determine required parking puts Cottage Grove near the middle, but toward the higher end of its peer communities. Cities with gross floor area parking requirements are shown in red, while those that don't are shown in blue. Using this metric, the mean number of spaces required is 121, the median is 118, and the range is 110. Cottage Grove, at 131, is above the mean and median, but far below the maximum of 176. Interestingly, communities who use seating to determine parking tend to cluster toward the high end of required spaces, whereas communities who primarily use square feet tend to cluster toward the low end. This could be an anomaly because of the hypothetical restaurant used (for example, 6,550 square feet might be low for a restaurant with 352 seats, etc.), but it provides an interesting contrast. Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 6 of 9 _8v _'c 120 1W so so 40 20 0 Min Parking Using Sq Feet (No Liquor) ■ = Reqs change fused on liquor license \\ Qo �, rk� \ $ �E� pec pcA Ide i Using square feet to determine required parking for restaurants that do not sell liquor puts Cottage Grove near the low end of communities, but not far from the center. Cities where there is a difference in number of spaces required depending on whether liquor is served are high- lighted in red, while those that do not have a difference are in blue. Using this metric, the mean number of spaces is 118, the median is 118, and the range is 110. Cottage Grove, at 110, is below the mean and median, but far above the minimum of 66. Fast Casual Dining Fast Casual Restaurants have rapidly increased in popularity in the past decade. The availability of alcohol at increasing numbers of these locations is stretching the definitions of what a liquor - serving establishment can be. At a restaurant like Chipotle, alcoholic beverages may be served, but the turnover time at the restaurant does not slow to the rate typical of a classic bar or tavern. Fast -casual restaurants remain popular because of the quick ability to eat and have an alcoholic beverage and not require a long dining timeframe. Based on this changing trend in restaurant offerings and consumer preferences, the distinction in expected turnover times between a restaurant that does serve alcohol versus one that does not may be disappearing. In order to allow for more flexibility for restaurants that serve alcohol but do not fit the mold of the typical sit-down restaurant, bar, or tavern, the parking requirements for Class 2 Restaurants may need to be reduced from 1 space for each 50 square feet of floor area to 1 space for each 60 square feet of floor area in order to match those for Class 1 Restau- rants. alp \\ Qo �, rk� \ $ �E� pec pcA Ide i Using square feet to determine required parking for restaurants that do not sell liquor puts Cottage Grove near the low end of communities, but not far from the center. Cities where there is a difference in number of spaces required depending on whether liquor is served are high- lighted in red, while those that do not have a difference are in blue. Using this metric, the mean number of spaces is 118, the median is 118, and the range is 110. Cottage Grove, at 110, is below the mean and median, but far above the minimum of 66. Fast Casual Dining Fast Casual Restaurants have rapidly increased in popularity in the past decade. The availability of alcohol at increasing numbers of these locations is stretching the definitions of what a liquor - serving establishment can be. At a restaurant like Chipotle, alcoholic beverages may be served, but the turnover time at the restaurant does not slow to the rate typical of a classic bar or tavern. Fast -casual restaurants remain popular because of the quick ability to eat and have an alcoholic beverage and not require a long dining timeframe. Based on this changing trend in restaurant offerings and consumer preferences, the distinction in expected turnover times between a restaurant that does serve alcohol versus one that does not may be disappearing. In order to allow for more flexibility for restaurants that serve alcohol but do not fit the mold of the typical sit-down restaurant, bar, or tavern, the parking requirements for Class 2 Restaurants may need to be reduced from 1 space for each 50 square feet of floor area to 1 space for each 60 square feet of floor area in order to match those for Class 1 Restau- rants. Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 7 of 9 Drive-in or Drive-thru Restaurants According to research by the market research company NPD Group, between 38 percent and 57 percent of fast-food restaurant visits take place at the drive-thru window. This number is de- pendent on the type of fast food being served, with chicken restaurants such as KFC and Popeye's averaging around 38 percent, and burger restaurants averaging around 57 percent. McDonalds has the highest rate of any chain, with 65 percent of business occurring at the drive- thru.' Restaurants that operate a drive-thru window also tend to operate at a higher turnover rate when serving in -restaurant than traditional sit-down restaurants, and thus require less parking per person served than traditional restaurants. The current parking ordinance for Class 3 restaurants—which includes fast-food and drive-in establishments—requires "at least 1 space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area in the building." This number is the same used for traditional restaurants and does not reflect the re- duced amount of parking needed for this type of restaurant. It may be the case that the amount of parking required for Class 3 restaurants should be reduced significantly. Currently, peer communities vary widely on parking requirements for fast food restaurants or restaurants with drive-thru windows. Chanhassen, for example, reduces the parking requirement from 1 space per 60 square feet for restaurants with no drive-thru to 1 space per 80 square feet for restaurants with a drive-thru. Other communities increase required parking, with the City of Golden Valley requiring 1 space per 100 square feet of gross floor area for a traditional restau- rant and 1 space per 40 square feet for a fast food restaurant. Alternative Recommendations Much has been written in academic and planning publications about the negative effects that can occur when suburban off-street parking requirements are too high. This section will summa- rize the most salient points of two studies on the subject: "Suburban Parking Requirements: A Tacit Policy for Automobile Use and Sprawl" (1995) by Richard W. Wilson from the Journal of the American Planning Association (JAPA), and "An Opportunity to Reduce Minimum Parking Requirements" (1995) by Donald C. Shoup, also from JAPA. The authors of these two studies agree that it is common for suburban communities to require off-street parking that meets peak demand for uses but is far too high for average or even near - peak demand. This causes an oversupply of parking for most of the year, which can be a major cost burden on businesses, and may prevent them from being able to lease tenant spaces they could otherwise lease. Despite this, there is the legitimate issue of overflow parking, which must be addressed if park- ing requirements are ever to be reduced below peak demand. Overflow parking, which will occur on several days out of the year in any lot that has fewer spaces than peak demand, can be addressed in one of several ways, including: 'Kim McLynn. "Drive Thru Windows Still Put the Fast in Fast Food Restaurants, Reports NPD". NPD Group. May 2012. https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/pr_120530a/ Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 8 of 9 1. Shared parking agreements: Businesses located near each other may share a certain percentage of their parking lots with each other. This can be especially effective when uses are complementary, such as a restaurant that sees most of its business in the even- ing, and a grocery store that sees most of its business during the day. 2. On -street parking allowances: On -street parking can be allowed on residential streets adjacent to a commercial use at certain times of day, during special periods of higher - than -usual parking demand, or it can be metered to deter overuse of on -street or residen- tial -area parking. These deterrents can be used to account for rare overflow parking need without on -street parking occurring regularly. 3. Determining parking demand for specific uses by examining demand for similar uses: Instead of using peer communities' requirements to determine a blanket parking require- ment for restaurants, Cottage Grove might allow potential lessees to submit their parking demand at other locations or the demand of similar uses and use them as extenuating circumstances to have requirements waived. For example, a Chili's might be able to show that a 60 -space parking lot is sufficient for a similarly -sized restaurant in a peer community, and that might be used as an extenuating circumstance to allow a proposed Chili's to reduce their required parking from 120 spaces to something more like 70 spaces. Another problem that might arise if parking requirements are lowered is that of changing tenants and changing uses on the same lot. A fast-food restaurant with a drive-thru may have a reduced parking requirement, but if it is ever replaced with a sit-down restaurant, that parking may no longer be sufficient. Because of different conditions such as the area being built-up or an in- creased price of land, the new restaurant may not be able to add parking to meet the higher requirement and may not be able to locate in the space. To address this issue, the City may be able to create alternative mechanisms in its code to allow a restaurant occupying an existing building to waive some of its parking requirements, provide parking off-site (which is currently permitted in City Code Title 11-3-9[D-7]), or share parking with nearby uses. While solutions like this may not be without negative side-effects, it might be advantageous to build some flexibility into parking requirements so as to avoid having tenant spaces sit empty while restaurants desired by the community are forced to locate elsewhere due to harsh restrictions. Summary of Findings 1. Cottage Grove determines parking requirements for restaurants based on the floor area of the building or the number of seats in the restaurant, depending on which requires more parking. The City also requires more parking spaces for restaurants that serve liquor. 2. A staff report submitted in 2015 recommended removing the "whichever is greater" language from the ordinance, which would allow for more flexibility for restaurants, allowing them to base parking on seating except in cases where there is no seating. 3. By most metrics, Cottage Grove is near the middle of peer communities in terms of how much parking is required for Class 1 restaurants, and its requirements are generally in line with the rest of the metro in that regard. Planning Commission Proposed Restaurant Parking Requirements December 13, 2018 Page 9 of 9 4. The rise of fast -casual dining is eroding the distinction between restaurants that serve liquor and those that do not, potentially reducing the need for a difference in parking requirements between Class 1 and Class 2 restaurants. 5. Fast-food restaurants with drive-thru windows have high customer turnover and tend to do a large percentage of their sales via the drive-thru. The current parking requirement for these restaurants is the same as for traditional restaurants, which may be higher than is necessary. 6. Planning and academic literature identifies some negative consequences for suburban communities stemming from parking requirements that are too high. In many cases, it is rec- ommended to require parking below what is demanded at yearly peak demand, and several options have been put forth as ways to abate some of the negative effects of reducing park- ing requirements. Recommendation Based on the findings, City staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the parking ordinance as it relates to restaurants and consider the following changes: A. That the parking requirement for Class 2 restaurants be reduced to match the requirements for Class 1 restaurants, in order to build in more flexibility for establishments that serve alco- hol. The new requirement would read: "At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or, where there is no design layout, 1 space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. Except that in cases in which there is a bar area separate from the food service area, a dance area larger than 100 square feet, or other public areas, addi- tional parking will be required as necessary." B. That the parking requirements for Class 3 Restaurants (drive-in establishments and fast food restaurants) be reduced when the restaurant is part of a regional, neighborhood, or commu- nity shopping center, or when the restaurant can show that a large percentage of sales take place at the drive-thru window. The new requirement for Class 3 Restaurants would read: "At least 1 space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area in the building, or at least 1 space for each 85 square feet of gross floor area where a drive-thru window is the primary mode of business. Except that in cases in which the restaurant is part of a regional, neighborhood, or community shopping center, at least 1 space for each 120 square feet of gross floor area will be required along with the spaces required for the shopping center (see: Shopping Center (regional) or Shopping Center (neighborhood or community)). C. That the language "whichever is greater" be removed from the parking requirements for class 1 and 2 restaurants. The new requirement for Class 1 restaurants will read: "At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or, where there is no design layout, 1 space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area." The new requirement for Class 2 restau- rants will read: "At least 1 space for each 3 seats, based on capacity design or, where there is no design layout, 1 space for each 60 square feet of gross floor area. Except that in cases in which there is a bar area separate from the food service area, a dance area larger than 100 square feet, or other public areas, additional parking will be required as necessary."