Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council OKs Old Naples Building'outdoor dining and associated off-site parking despite neighborhood concerns
Summary
After lengthy debate, the council approved a conditional-use permit allowing off-site parking and a 2,315-sq-ft outdoor dining plan (15 tables/76 chairs) for the Old Naples Building, contingent on a recorded parking agreement, lighting, signage, hours, and forfeiture rules tied to demolition. Votes were 5'to'2 on both items.
In a protracted hearing covering historic preservation, parking, safety and longstanding litigation, the Naples City Council approved two companion petitions for the Old Naples Building: (11c) a conditional-use permit to allow seven off-site parking spaces (within 600 feet) and validation of a parking needs analysis, and (11d) an outdoor-dining authorization for 2,315 square feet on private property (15 tables, 76 chairs).
Applicant representatives framed the request as an opportunity to revitalize a historic structure and restore economic activity to the 3rd Street South area. Architect testimony emphasized the building's historic fabric and the applicant's intent to follow a special magistrate's prior guidance to reduce outdoor dining area. Parking consultant Norm Trebilcock said an empirical peak-season study showed an observed peak demand that left seven spaces available in an off-site lot at 375 Broad Avenue South; he proposed lighting, signage, striping and lease/recording remedies to ensure the spaces remain available for the restaurant.
Council and staff reviewed a lengthy set of recommended conditions: recording a written parking agreement (required by code) before commencement of outdoor dining; defined hours for the off-site lot; lighting and signage improvements; an obligation that the off-site parking not become a nuisance to adjacent residences; and a technical forfeiture formula that would reduce parking credits if building square footage is demolished. Planning staff recommended approval with eight conditions; PAB had earlier recommended denial (4-3) citing insufficient parking.
Opponents and several councilmembers raised concerns about convenience and pedestrian access to the off-site lot, the alley route patrons would use, and whether the empirical parking study accounted for evening events at the adjacent art gallery. Vice Mayor Hutchison and Mayor Heitman voted against both items; the resolutions passed 5'to'2.
The council included a scrivener's edit to remove confusing carryover language linking the outdoor-dining permit to the building remaining "in the same condition" used in older litigation documents; the council inserted conditions requiring the recorded parking agreement and tied the outdoor-dining permit to the approved conditional use. Applicant counsel indicated that, if approvals become final, they would coordinate dismissal of pending appeals.
Council instructed staff to record the parking agreement as required by code and to verify the lighting, signage and unobstructed nature of the off-site lot before the outdoor dining commences.
