Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves parking and setback variances for mixed-use site on East Virginia Street with fence condition

5876707 · April 17, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Evansville Board of Zoning Appeals approved variances April 17 allowing a liquor store and full-service bar at 6136 East Virginia Street to proceed with fewer parking spaces and with improvements into the thoroughfare setback, conditioned on a decorative fence along the east property line.

The Evansville Board of Zoning Appeals on April 17 approved variances allowing construction of a mixed-use commercial building with a liquor store and full-service bar at 6136 East Virginia Street, granting relief from the required number of parking spaces and permitting improvements within the 60-foot thoroughfare setback, subject to a condition that the developer install a black, wrought-iron–style fence along the east property line.

The board voted 6-0 to approve variance VAR-2025-016 after extended testimony from the petitioner’s consultant and the property owner, and discussion among board members about parking demand, potential impacts to the adjacent parcel and the effect of future road widening.

The board’s approval includes a condition requested by an adjacent property owner and incorporated into the motion: the petitioner will install a decorative, black fence (described in the motion as a ‘‘wrought-iron style’’) along the shared property line to reduce cross-parking and discourage customers from using the neighbor’s lot.

Why it matters: The variances change how the 6,000-plus–square-foot development may be used and how parking is allocated on a busy corridor. Board members said the variance will remain tied to the use (liquor store and bar); a change in use would require the owner to return for review.

Petitioner testimony and parking analysis Scott Beetle of Cash Wagner and Associates, representing the petitioner, presented transaction data from existing stores owned by the applicant to justify the parking reduction. Beetle described an analysis that converted monthly transaction counts into an estimate of customers on site during peak hour, concluding that a typical liquor-store peak would result in ‘‘3 to 7 customers in the store at a time’’ and, when adding employees, ‘‘a maximum, at any point in time, [of] 5 to 9 parking spaces’’ for similar stores.

The project as proposed attributes the majority of on-site spaces to the bar; the petitioner said that, by that allocation, the liquor store portion would have approximately 23 spaces available and the overall site would function with 58 spaces rather than the 91 spaces the code otherwise requires.

Owner Cam (Komalish) Patel described the bar as serving primarily ‘‘finger food’’ and not as a full sit-down restaurant. Patel confirmed the two businesses will be physically separate, with separate entrances and no internal access between the liquor store and the bar.

Board concerns and conditions Board members and staff discussed the thoroughfare setback implications if Virginia Street were to be widened in the future. Staff and the petitioner noted that if the road were later widened, right-of-way acquisition or improvements would be addressed through site review and at the petitioner’s cost.

Several board members supported the neighboring property owner’s request for a fence. The motion that carried required the petitioner to construct a non-gated, black, four-foot fence in a ‘‘wrought-iron style’’ (later clarified in the motion to allow a black aluminum fence that replicates the wrought-iron appearance) along the east property line to reduce unintended parking on the adjacent parcel. The motion also tied the parking variance to the current use; staff clarified that the variance applies to the use, and a change of use would require additional review.

Vote and next steps The board voted 6-0 to approve VAR-2025-016 with the fence condition and understanding that the variance is tied to the present use. Site review will follow to confirm the final number and layout of parking spaces and to verify compliance with the condition.

The board recorded no remonstrators present who spoke at the hearing, though members acknowledged a written letter from the adjacent property owner entered into the record.