Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Large Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board grants preliminary approval for Woodward–Maple mixed‑use project with parking concessions, variances
Summary
The board gave preliminary approval to a large mixed‑use building at 34952 Woodward and 690 E. Maple, accepting a reduced parking supply (422 proposed vs. 507 required) and supporting variances for a mezzanine parking level and a 3‑ft height exception in the MU5 zone; approval included conditions on parcels, materials, traffic controls and final parking plans.
The Birmingham Planning Board on May 13 voted unanimously to grant preliminary site‑plan approval for a proposed mixed‑use building at 34952 Woodward and 690 East Maple, subject to conditions including parcel consolidation, final site materials and compliance with traffic consultant recommendations.
Planning staff told the board the revised plan reduced the building's footprint in the MU5 portion, eliminated a previously proposed sixth floor on that portion and lowered total units from 217 to 203 while changing unit size mix. "At the end of the day, they're required to provide 507 parking spaces. They're proposing 422," planning director Nicholas Dup said, summarizing the parking deficit and the applicant's position that compact and tandem spaces help close the gap.
Applicant representatives said the project would still provide significant public parking in the Triangle District: "We still see this as the one opportunity to get significant public parking in the Triangle District from a private development," Victor Soki of Soki Architecture said.
The board heard that the proposal relies on a shared‑parking analysis and would dedicate roughly 173 spaces to the public. The applicant also requested two variances: one for a mezzanine parking level that code counts as a story, and a 3‑ft height variance in the MU5 section caused by site grade changes and a rooftop pool/plaza assembly.
Conditions attached to approval require the applicant to combine the two parcels before applying for construction permits, meet story and height maximums or obtain the necessary variances from the Board of Zoning Appeals, finalize a shared‑parking analysis and place the analysis on the record, submit lighting, material and photometric plans at final site plan, comply with the city's traffic consultant (including a prohibition on left turns from the site's exiting onto Maple) and satisfy all city department requests.
The board took a roll‑call vote and recorded unanimous approval. Members commended the applicant for responsiveness to prior comments and said the reduced parking demand and public‑parking commitments make the project acceptable at the preliminary stage. The planning board noted the variances will proceed to the Board of Zoning Appeals for final determination.
