Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Parking topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board grants parking variance for Birdies & Brews but imposes occupancy, signage and administrative conditions

Fraser Zoning Board of Appeals · August 7, 2026
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

After neighbor testimony about parking impacts, Fraser's board approved a parking-space variance for Birdies & Brews at 34860 Utica Road, allowing 23 spaces where 34 are required but conditioning approval on a 100-person occupancy limit, signage and required administrative approvals; the parking motion passed 4–2.

The Fraser Zoning Board of Appeals granted a parking variance to Birdies & Brews permitting 23 parking spaces where 34 would normally be required, but the approval was conditioned on administrative actions and operational controls intended to limit overflow.

The motion requires the building official (and likely the fire marshal) to administratively reduce the building's maximum occupancy to 100 people, directs the applicant to provide signage and a vehicular circulation plan acceptable to the city engineer, and requires any other necessary administrative approvals and compliance with the zoning code. City planner Dan warned the board the lack of on-site parking "may negatively impact neighboring properties or create unsafe conditions," but said those impacts could be mitigated through scheduling, signage and enforcement.

Neighbors and adjacent business owners told the board they feared overflow parking would displace customers. "I just have parking concerns," said Joseph Khaliba, the owner of the arcade next door at 34830 Utica Road, reiterating concerns he had submitted at a prior meeting. A business owner (statement read into the record) warned that continued parking conflicts could hurt her pet-resort business and potentially force closure.

The parking variance motion passed on roll call 4–2. Members recorded as opposing the motion were Menendez and Farina; Member Stasic was absent. The board and planner emphasized that the approved variance alone does not authorize use: the applicant still must secure any required administrative approvals and a special land use approval from the Planning Commission before operating the amusement/recreation use.