Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Site Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers update Flower Hill board on Lemani Restaurant site plan and valet-parking agreement
Summary
Representatives for Lemani Restaurant LLC told the Flower Hill Board of Trustees they have revised a valet-parking plan and are negotiating a written parking agreement with an adjacent property owner; the pavilion will not be used in winter and an amended site plan and updated BCA application will be filed within about a month.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Site Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Andrea Kirdle, representing Lemani Restaurant LLC, updated the Village of Flower Hill Board of Trustees on the restaurant's pending site-plan review and efforts to formalize off-site parking arrangements. The presentation was made during the board's public-hearing portion and followed earlier testimony at an August hearing.
Kirdle said the applicant has prepared an updated valet-parking plan that shows a cut-through to access additional rear parking stalls and that the restaurants’ pavilion — currently unused during winter — will start limited spring use. She said the parties have reached agreement on most commercial terms and are finalizing a written license or lease with the neighbor who has been informally allowing rear‑lot parking; Marvin Natis represents that adjacent property owner.
Board members asked about hours of operation, potential loss of parking stalls from the proposed cut-through, and whether additional zoning variances would be triggered. Kirdle said the plan may reduce a small number of stalls but the rear arrangement still leaves roughly 20–21 spaces available, which she described as "more than sufficient" for anticipated demand. She also told the board the applicant will file an amended site plan and an updated BCA application to reflect the corrected number of seats and the revised valet plan in the coming month.
Trustees emphasized the importance of a written agreement covering the off‑site parking and reminded the applicant not to use the pavilion until the appropriate permits are in place. The board did not take a vote on the site plan at the meeting; the applicant will return with revised documents for regulatory review.
The board's next step is for staff and trustees to confirm whether the cut‑through triggers additional variances and to place the amended application on a future agenda once the written parking agreement and updated filing are submitted.

