Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Use Permit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant agrees to cut seating to 50 as Planning Board flags sprinkler and alarm requirements for sushi restaurant
Summary
A proposed sushi restaurant at 214 East Parkdale Avenue will reduce seating to 50 or fewer and submit revised plans after planning staff and the deputy building inspector cited requirements for a fire sprinkler and automatic fire alarm if occupancy exceeds 50.
The Planning Board reviewed an application April 21 for a new sushi restaurant at 214 East Parkdale Avenue and asked the applicant to submit revised seating plans and supplemental traffic and fire-protection documentation ahead of a public hearing.
Michael Stein, civil engineer with Hudson Engineering, said the applicant seeks a special-use permit and a shared-parking reduction for a change of use at a property currently occupied by a bakery. Stein told the board the site has proximate on-street spaces and a nearby municipal parking garage with 117 public spaces; he said aerial observations showed the garage is often underused.
Staff read a memo from the deputy building inspector dated April 3 that states: if occupant load exceeds 50 the conversion to an A-2 assembly use requires a fire-sprinkler system under town law section 100-13, and a complete automatic fire alarm system is required under town law section 100-14(d) with NFPA 72 central-station connection and related detection and notification devices. The applicant indicated they will revise plans to show seating at 50 or under to avoid triggering the sprinkler requirement and will provide the revised plan to the building inspector for review prior to any public hearing. "We could update that to, to correct it," Michael Stein said, referring to the seating count on the plan.
Planning staff also asked the applicant to supply a traffic-generation memo using Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) guidance for a roughly 2,000-square-foot restaurant so the board can confirm nearby parking will not be overburdened. Staff said it expected revised materials and asked for them by the end of the week so building-department review can be completed before the next meeting; if materials arrive on time staff will recommend scheduling a public hearing for the May 7 meeting.
The board emphasized the fire-marshal and building-inspector reviews are determinative for required systems. The board and applicant agreed to circulate revised plans and to coordinate with staff on public-noticing requirements.
Next steps: applicant to resubmit revised seating plans and a traffic-generation memo, building department review, and planning staff to transmit public-hearing notice if materials are submitted by Friday.
