Chick‑fil‑A site wins Monroe County approvals for parking, setback and landscaping variances with easement condition
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The Monroe County BZA approved six variances enabling a Chick‑fil‑A and associated parking layout, including front‑yard and right‑of‑way setback reductions and light‑trespass exceptions, contingent on a recorded 14‑foot landscape easement on the north side. Staff recommended mixed approvals and denials; the board approved the package 4–0.
The Monroe County Board of Zoning Appeals granted a package of variances that clear the way for a Chick‑fil‑A restaurant and an associated county parcel parking area, including relief from parking‑setback rules, a limited reduction in the parking setback from the right of way, a light‑trespass exception, and buffer/landscape adjustments — subject to a recorded north‑side landscape easement.
Don Cowden Enterprises (county parcel owner) and Chick‑fil‑A representatives presented a site plan that spans both city and county parcels. The county portion will be used primarily for parking and drive‑through stacking to support a 5,218‑square‑foot restaurant proposed on the city parcels; petitioners said they need roughly 67 parking stalls across the consolidated site to support dine‑in, a playground, curbside pickup and multiple service channels.
Planning staff recommended denial for the impervious‑cover variance and for a full parking‑interior landscaping standard, saying a redesign could bring the lot closer to those requirements. Staff recommended approval of the front‑yard and parking setbacks and the light‑trespass variance, and recommended conditional approval of buffer‑yard relief if the petitioner recorded a landscape easement to secure a 14‑foot permanent planting area on the neighbor's side of the property.
Brent Evanston, senior development manager for Chick‑fil‑A, described how multiple service channels (dine‑in, drive‑through, curbside pickup, third‑party delivery and team‑member parking) drive the parking demand, and HR Green's engineer told the board the team had added landscape area and agreed to underground stormwater detention. The petitioner offered to reduce 2 parking stalls (to 65) if necessary, which slightly improves the site's pervious percentage but does not meet all landscaping/parking‑interior thresholds.
No public opposition was recorded at the hearing. The board approved VAR‑25‑66 A–F with the condition that the petitioner provide staff a written commitment or recorded easement for the north‑side landscape area. Commissioners who supported the application cited safety and the value of off‑site parking that reduces on‑street parking near residential areas. Several board members asked the petitioner to minimize light trespass on nearby homes consistent with operations and safety.
Petitioners will proceed with drainage‑board review for underground detention and must satisfy additional conditions from county departments during site‑plan review.