HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-BZA-1991-08-05 BZA APPEAL #2051 - AUGUST 5, 1991
CHAIRMAN PECK: Could we move on to our next case, please.
SECY. ECKSTROM: The next appeal is number 2051, 318-320 College
Avenue. It is the appeal of Jason Fane for an area variance for
deficient rear yard and off-street parking under Section 30.25,
Columns 4 and 5 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the rear building
(the Honey Butter Building) at 318-320 College Avenue to be used for
an assembly use. This building shares the property with other
buildings, and is located in a B-2B (Business) Use District in which
the proposed use is permitted; however, under Section 30.57 the
appellant must first obtain an area variance from the listed
deficiencies before a building permit or Certificate of Occupancy
can be issued.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Good evening. If you'd begin by stating your name
and where you live, please.
MR. FANS: My name is Jason Fane. I live at 133 North Quarry Street
in the City of Ithaca.
CHAIRMAN PECK: And if you'd give us a summary of your appeal,
please.
MR. FANS: Right. I'm going to try not to duplicate what's been in
the submission because that was several pages, and I'm presuming
that that's been read. If that's not correct, let me know and I can
go over that material.
CHAIRMAN PECK: No, a summary is fine, I think. We just need to
hear it. We just need it on the record. It's part of the record
that we make our judgments on.
MR. FANS: I purchased the land involved here in 1986, and I'm
mentioning that because the reason for this appeal has to do with,
in part, because of changes in law since that . . This is not a
situation where you say, well the applicant should have realized
this is what he was getting into. There was a change in the zoning
law, which is why I'm here for the parking variance. And then there
was also a change in the State Building Code, which . . . They wanted
to impose additional code requirements on certain uses, and the way
they did that they designated those uses C5, instead of C2, so that
the same uses that we could have gone without a variance two years
ago after I bought the property, when the State made their change in
the Building Code to put in a new tenant with that use, it's no
longer a C2 use, it's a C5 use. So, some of the C5 uses. . . I think
it was about a year or two ago that this change was made. Rick
Eckstrom may know or my architect, Mr. Sharma, may be able to tell
you just when that happened. The problem that this property has
that requires the area variance - we're not dealing with any uses
that are not 100% permitted by zoning - part of the property abuts
the rear property line, and there's no way of providing a rear yard
because it just isn't there. This is not the way I built the
property; it was there. I think the property was built about 1920;
it's an old concrete building, and it abuts the parking lot of a
Page - 1
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
nearby motel, the Collegetown Motor Lodge. So, about half of the
rear lot is non-existent; for the other half of the property, there
is a rear lot. I'm not sure if it's exactly 15 feet, I think it's
about 14 feet something, but I have the land behind it and there's
plenty of access there for fire engines. With respect to parking,
the practical difficulty is that with most of the C5 uses, there
would be several parking spaces required - I can't tell you just how
many because it depends on which of the C5 uses, and then after you
know which use, it depends on the particular design that the
business operator would have. Sometimes it depends on how many
seats he's got, or how much space he devotes to this part of his
business, how much to that part of his business, which there's
really no way for me to predict. So, I can't even determine how
many parking spaces would be required, but if it's more than two,
there's no possible place on the lot to put them. So, that's the
practical difficulty with respect to the parking. The property is
currently approved for C2 use. The practical difficulty in using it
as a C2 use is that there's one building, which we're not applying
for here, but it's the 318-320 building. The practical difficulty
with using that building for a C2 use is that the building is about
50 feet back on the lot. We have a survey. I don't know whether it
was submitted, but we brought one along. And the C2 tenants,
basically stores, like to have a show window right along the
sidewalk. They don't feel that the typical retail customer wants to
walk 50 feet to look into the show window, and as a result, although
we have diligently and extensively marketed this property; I
probably spent over $10, 000 just on advertising of the space. We
have :prepared about a 12-page brochure to try to tempt people to
come into town, which I brought along, called "Doing Business in
Ithaca Can Give You A Better Life. " We've had great success with
this because we've got Dano's Restaurant with this brochure, several
others. And it goes through various reasons why someone might like
to live in Ithaca instead of wherever they're now living. Reasons
that you're all familiar with, that a lot of people elsewhere may
not know. We've done these things. I've got a full-time salesman
working for me, John Yengo, who will tell in detail some of the
things that he's done. And we have been unable, in all this time,
to get C2 people interested. We have gotten several serious
inquiries from C5 uses, and I've said "John, tell them 'sign the
lease, put a contingency in that we'll go to the BZA, and when it's
approved, then you can open your business and if it's not approved,
we'll give you all your money back; you don't have to pay any money
until then, but make a commitment"' And then the answer that we get
is that "it's your job to get the space ready to market; we're
tenants, our job is to be in this business or that business. You're
the landlord, you make this problem go away. " So, that's why I'm
here. And I have with me (unintelligible) to give more technical
parts of this presentation, my architect, Mr. Sharma, who can
discuss the technical issues better than I can, and Mr. Yengo who
can tell you - and he's got evidence - of just what he's done to try
to market this property. I have to tell you that this is a real
problem. We have tried diligently to rent this space. We're not
the only ones with difficulty in the area. There's another store
about a half block away at 205 Dryden Road that I think has been
Page - 2
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
vacant since 1982, and part of the decision you have to come to
grips with - do you want to see these stores rented or do you want
them vacant forever? Because, I don't know what else we can do.
Jagat, would you like to (unintelligible) ?
CHAIRMAN PECK: Well, I don't know how many technical questions . . .
Please sit down and identify yourself for the record, please, and
where you live.
MR. SHARMA: My name is Jagat Sharma. I'm an architect with office
at 312 East Seneca Street.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Undoubtedly, Mr. Fane, you heard the last case.
MR. FANE: This is different because they were seeking a variance
for use. All the uses I'm talking about are loot in compliance.
CHAIRMAN PECK: True.
MR. TOMLAN: I don't know that it is any different. . .
CHAIRMAN PECK: Questions from members of the Board?
MR. TOMLAN: in theory.
MR. VINEBERG: Well, let's hear the full presentation.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Well, I . . Did you have a presentation?
MR. TOMLAN: The question is whether in fact a presentation is
necessary given the previous position of the Board in the lack of a
specific proposal. Do you want to continue to hear the rest of the
presentation in light of that?
(Unintelligible)
MR. TOMLAN: Okay, fine. It's your turn.
MR. VINEBERG: You have to hear what they have to say. I mean there
could be something relative that we haven't thought of.
MR. TOMLAN: If you think so, fine.
MR. STRAUSS: I'm not sure that we have to hear the rest of it. I
mean. The only reason to hear the rest of it is if we think that
this is indeed an area variance issue or not, not a use issue.
Because if it is a use issue, then it is clearly the same principle
as the previous case. We don't want to deal with a blanket change.
MR. TOMLAN: Judy, what do you think?
MS. ROSSITER: Well, I would like to have the people making the
presentation have an opportunity to address that specific issue. If
they would address themselves to how this might
Page - 3
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
MR. TOMLAN: Barry, new members of the Board have a right to learn
about these things.
MS. ROSSITER: Well, I don't
MR. STRAUSS: Whether they are new or not, is not an issue
(unintelligible) in any case.
MS. ROSSITER: I'm asking a specific question here. I think Jack
raised it and I, for one, am not totally convinced at this point by
the answer that we've gotten (unintelligible) If those making the
presentation would like to address that question in more detail, I
would be very happy to hear what they have to say about it.
MR. VINEBERG: This is an area variance that's being asked for.
It's not a use variance. It's a different case. We should hear the
case.
MR. FAKE: A C5 use is legal in this location. No variance is
required except for these area issues.
MR. TOMLAN: My point was, there's no specific proposal in front of
US. This is essentially a blanket kind of area variance. Almost
anything will get thrown in there.
MR. SHARMA: May I say something?
CHAIRMAN PECK: You certainly may.
MR. SHARMA: Okay.
CHAIRMAN PECK: If you can shed some light on this issue, I'd be
happy to hear it.
MR. TOMLAN: It really is much more like (unintelligible) but that's
an area variance as well.
MR. SHARMA: Well, supposing I come. . . I have a client that wants to
build up a building and no tenant right now lined up, but the
building on which. . . but the lot on which the building will be
erected has some area deficiencies, and if I come to the Board as a
developer with a client or owner and I need to get those
deficiencies removed by a zoning variance, what will the Board say,
because I don't have a tenant yet? I can do a spec building,
commercial building, office building which will have area
deficiencies, so I think the Zoning Ordinance does not reflect that
you have to have a specific tenant. You know you have to have
expressive use for the building, and this is not for a use variance.
This C2 or C5 are commercial uses for which the area is zoned for.
We are looking at the building which is grandfathered C2 . The owner
cannot rent it for years and years and years. Now, there is a
possibility of renting it by changing from a C21 retail use, to C5,
some kind of public assembly, and there are many buildings in this
Page - 4
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
town that everybody knows that cannot be rented, and when it comes
to changing from one use to another use, I'm not talking about a use
variance, but just from classification point of view. You have two
issues that come into picture: one is the Code, and one is the
zoning. The Code comes in in many buildings in this town because
they are wood-framed; they cannot be corrected unless they go to the
State, or handicapped use or anything else. The other ones are
zoning. This is a building which does not come under wood frame
construction; it can easily be converted into a C5. It can easily
be rented and put into the market, and only it needs is a zoning
variance for area deficiencies, for which we have practical
difficulties. They are pre-existing. They cannot. . There is no
practical way of correcting those deficiencies. And I think the
Planning Board making a recommendation that you have to have a
specific tenant and specific case before the Zoning Board is not
always correct because you can build a spec building without having
a tenant and get zoning approval prior to building the building.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Well, yes, but certainly you have to have approval
for the amount of parking that you have at the building, and all
those other things have to meet the zoning code, as well.
MR. SHARMA: Yes, we have all . .
CHAIRMAN PECK: So, the question is, if you put a use - not a use
variance - but a different use into this building that requires a
lot more parking, you've only got two parking spaces in the front,
then that becomes a zoning issue. Is that not correct? Am I
_missing something here?
MR. VINEBERG: That's a subtlety that would have to be discussed.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Yes. It's not so subtle since we've jammed parking
down the throat of everybody that's been before this Board for the
four years I've been sitting here.
MR. VINEBERG: Your point is that without a particular tenant in
mind, we cannot
CHAIRMAN PECK: Well, no. No, that's not . . . I see their point of
view very clearly. I see what they're saying, but
MR. VINEBERG: We don't know if we're giving them a hundred spaces
CHAIRMAN PECK: That's exactly right. We're giving them assembly
use. Now, what does that mean?
MR. FANS: The likely use is - we don't have a tenant - but the. . .
You have to keep in mind the neighborhood that it is. Only certain
assembly uses, that as a practical matter, are likely to occur.
We're not interested in any of the noisy uses; there's a motel next
door.
Page- 5
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
CHAIRMAN PECK: Yes, I know that. But you understand that your not
being interested in it doesn't mean that we can necessarily take
that as a matter of faith, as a group of citizens in this community.
MR. FAKE: We've agreed with the motel that we are not going to put
in noisy uses, that is they have a loud band or they have loud
amplified music, but the kinds of inquiries that we get. . . We get
inquiries from a health club, which is now a C5. We get inquiries
from people who would like to do a restaurant. We get inquiries
from people who would like to do a bar, and we get . . . Then there
was a change in the State Code that if you have, I think it's either
one or more or two or more billiard tables, it's not a C2, it's a
C5, where prior to a certain date, you were able to have these
tables in there. John can tell you more about just who we've got
the inquiries from because he's spoken with many people over the
years. I also have a letter here from a neighbor in support of
this. I don't know if this is a proper time to bring this up.
CHAIRMAN PECK: I think we have it. Yes, we have it.
MR. FANS: The surrounding area has many C5 uses. I understand that
a variance was given by this Board to a property directly across the
street for a restaurant; I think it's called Pizza Shop or Mr.
Pizza, or something like that, which was to me seemed like a very
identical variance, and it's one of the reasons that I'm down here.
With your permission, I would like to have Mr. Yengo tell you about
some of the .things he's done to rent the space.
CHAIRMAN PECK: He certainly may. I'm not sure that we need more
convincing, or that we don't believe you. It's not a matter of lack
of believing what you've done.
MR. FANE: Well, I'm trying to impress (unintelligible) with the
practical difficulty of renting it as a C2.
MR. YENGO: John Yengo. I live at 1147 Danby Road, and I'm a
leasing representative for Jason Fane. This isn't the time, really,
to talk about governmental issues, however
CHAIRMAN PECK: That's correct.
MR. YENGO: What is a Cl? What is a C2 and on and on right up to
C5.4? A fast food carryout facility with 19 seats or less used to
be a C2 . Today, it's being enforced with a fast food carryout
facility with one table and one chair happens to be a C5. 1 - 300
seats or less. These are the kinds of things that cause problems in
renting, and that's my job is to rent space. Part of what Jason's
said - there is a yoga center or karate center that wanted to use
the 318-320. We've not signed a contingent lease, contingent upon
getting approval, because this is a C5 facility, and all it is is a
karate class. A dance hall, an opera. There's a lot of uses around
town that are overlooked, but they are C5, public assembly,
facilities. A pinball parlor, without a pool table, is a C2.
Apparently, with a pool table, whatever makes that public assembly,
Page - 6
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
I don't know, becomes a C5. We're just trying to broaden by making
this application for area variance; we're trying to broaden our
possibility of renting an empty structure. We've spent a lot of
money (unintelligible)
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay, let me ask
MR. YENGO: These are
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay. I don't think that's the issue before us. Is
it?
MR. VINEBERG: Well, it's a combination
CHAIRMAN PECK: The issue before us is, what are you asking for?
What are you asking us to grant you?
MR. YENGO: Permission to rent to C5 people. I'd like to
CHAIRMAN PECK: But, you said that you already could.
MR. FANS: Well, I can't. That's the problem. Some of these same
uses that we couldn't rent it to before the State . . . The State
wanted to impose additional code requirements, and we're prepared to
meet whatever the code requirements are.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay. But. Yes, that's a matter of timing. I
mean, that happens all the time. There's nothing we can do about
that.
MR. FANS: Yes, but I'm saying. . I'm not asking you to change the
code. But uses that two years ago we could have rented to, with
this code they said this use is not a C2, it's a C5. And suddenly,
even though we're prepared to put in whatever code requirements
there are, some of these things are very expensive. Now, it becomes
illegal for us for zoning reasons. Well, that's why we're at this
Board. If it was a code issue, and we couldn't do it, we'd see the
Code Board.
MR. VINEBERG: I think there is an analogy to the case of the pizza
parlor. Now, their situation is that they want to change . . .
They're forced to call it a change of use because of the changing of
the law. This building was never a multiple occupancy, or what's
the - public assembly use. The uses it had are always little
storefront-type uses, so they're locked into that in terms of the
parking requirements in this neighborhood. The same is true with
that liquor store. They couldn't change from a liquor store to a
restaurant because of the parking requirements in the exact same
neighborhood. Now, they came to us with a specific request. They
wanted to become a restaurant requiring so many parking spaces.
They presented the practical difficulties for achieving those
parking spaces, and on that basis we made a decision. I think
you're right in that here's a case where - very similar situation, a
building that exists in the same zone - it's never been public
Page - 7
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
assembly; they want to have that option but they have no specific
public assembly business in mind, so we do not know how many parking
spaces they would need, and I think that is the complexity here is
that maybe there is a problem of ramming it across the board. I
think there's also this question of . . . I don't think we can say you
can have a C5 use in general and not know what the C5 use is. In
other words, you're here because of parking.
MR. FAKE: Can you approve (unintelligible)
MR. VINEBERG: We can discuss them and essentially approve.
MR. FANS: There's one other point I want to ask. If I were also
going to build apartments on top of the building, then I would not
have a parking requirement for the main floor commercial, but that
would put additional density in the area, and I have to say right
now, I'm not convinced there's a need for more apartments in
Collegetown. I don't know whether you should speak with various
landlords difficulty filling the space that they've got. It's my
reading of the zoning law, if I were to put up more square footage
of apartments than square footage of the retail space in the
building, all the parking requirement goes away for the retail
space, and I should say that since in the last few years, I've built
over 130 apartments in that neighborhood, mostly I think they're all
within 500 feet of this building. If they were one contiguous
building.
MR. VINEBERG: Let me . . You know, the real problem, Mike, is. . .
Okay, it's hard to make a decision now knowing how many spaces would
be required. I think you have to see that's a valid point. In
fact, depending on the type of public assembly you propose, this
rear yard deficiency could be a problem. You might not always be
the owner of the adjacent property. That building is buried in a
very unusual way on that site. Fire exits could become a problem
depending on what you're suggesting the building be used for.
MR. FAKE: That actually is not a problem because a fire exit
easement can be, and I think was required by the Building Department
for this particular property. This particular property, for part of
the rear lot we have, I think, like 14 feet of rear yard and half of
the rear yard we don't have any, it's the parking lot of the motel.
I rather doubt that they'd be able to comply with everything to
build right up adjoining this building if they wanted to.
MR. VINEBERG: No, but it could access by fire engines. It could
cause a lot of questions that might be best sent to the Fire
Department for some advice. If we knew what the use was.
MS. ROSSITER: Can I. . . I am just going to suggest that in view
of. . . I think part of the argument here was that it was difficult to
attract tenants who didn't want to wait two months or more to get an
answer as to whether . . You know, that they didn't want to get
locked into that kind of contingency. In view of that, I would
offer a motion to continue this matter to our next date as we did in
Page - 8
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
the previous case, and I think that under those circumstances, that
should give these gentlemen a very short period of time, and that
perhaps one of their potential tenants would not mind being on the
contingency end of things for a couple weeks to come back to the
Board with a specific proposal to determine whether or not the use
would be allowed.
MR. YENGO: I went to the Building Department. . .
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay. Could I hold you for a minute, please. We
need to change the tape. Okay. Now are you making a motion?
MS. ROSSITER: I make the motion to continue this to the next date
which would give them a much shorter time frame in which to line up
a tenant and come in with a specific proposal as we indicated in the
last case, because I'm not convinced that there's significant
difference between this and the last circumstance the Board required
(unintelligible) .
MR. TOMLAN: Second.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Is there
further discussion?
MR. SHARMA: You haven't closed the public hearing yet.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay. Yes. Hold on. Is there any discussion?
It's kind of Roberts Rules. It's what I know about Roberts Rules is
what it is. We certainly won't cut you off.
MR. TOMLAN: I'm trying to think about though, he has a point
insofar as the hearing having to hear from both sides once you've
begun
MS. ROSSITER: That's why I'll temporarily recall my motion to allow
those procedures to . . . if the seconder agrees.
MR. TOMLAN: I agree.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Yes, sure.
MS. ROSSITER: So, we'll proceed on.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay.
MR. FAKE: I really wish that you could approve certain specific C5
uses. I don't think you really care, you know, whether the guy's
going to paint the inside green or red, or whether he's going to
have Mr. A standing behind the counter or Mr. B teaching this class,
or whatever it is.
CHAIRMAN PECK: That's correct.
Page - 9
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
MR. FAKE: The likely uses in that area - restaurant, bar, and
health club or a game room with one or more billiard tables. There
may be some other C5 use, but I think as a practical matter, I don't
see them happening. I can give you a long list of other C5 uses,
but I wouldn't even waste our time trying to get them. So, those
are the four that we're talking about. These are the kinds of
things you see throughout Collegetown. The parking, in a sense, is
not really an issue because the Collegetown Business District serves
the people who are there - most of them walk. Most of the cars that
are there are not necessarily from people doing things in
Collegetown; a lot of them are from commuters who are parking there
because they are doing something on campus, like going to a football
game or what have you, which is really unrelated to anything we do
or don't do in Collegetown itself.
CHAIRMAN PECK: I'm not sure I completely agree with that, but
that's neither here nor there. You know, as I look down the fact
sheet, I mean what I see as the deficiency is the parking deficiency
is what I see that sticks out. That's something that we would
create when we did it - when we granted this.
MR. TOMLAN: I suggest we hear from anybody else one way or the
other on the issue at hand.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay. Indeed, Mr. Sharma?
MR. SHARMA: I have a question for the Zoning Board. Is the zoning
variance granted to a tenant or to the building?
MR. TOMLAN: Neither, to the property.
MR. SHARMA: To the property?
CHAIRMAN PECK: It's granted to the property in question.
MR. SHARMA: This property we're asking to be allowed to be used as
a C5 use.
MR. VINEBERG: C5 sounds like one thing, but it's not, it's many
things with many different parking requirements. It's the parking
requirement that we can rule on.
MR. SHARMA: I'm not speaking for Mr. Fane, here, but if I say that
if he said assembly of 20 people that will require
MR. FANE: It depends what the 20 people are doing.
MR. SHARMA: Yes, but whatever the 20 people are doing
MR. FANS: I mean, if they're in a bar it's one requirement, if it's
a restaurant it's another requirement, and if it's in a billiard
parlor it's a third requirement. So, I don't even know that we can
even determine how many parking spaces
Page - 10
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
MR. STRAUSS: You're making our case for us, Mr. Fane.
MR. YENGO: He's trying to get you to listen from a salesman's point
of view. Pretend you're a customer, and I
MR. STRAUSS: I thought the barking was over this evening. You
know, we are listening to what you're saying.
MR. YENGO: I have a customer. Now, I have an empty store on the
Ithaca Commons. And the customer says I'd like to go in here and do
such and such.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Yes.
MR. YENGO: I can't tell them for sure whether they can or not.
We're asking you how can we use this particular building as a C5
use. Can you give us some uses that would be approved?
CHAIRMAN PECK: I don't know that we can.
MR. SHARMA: Can you give us a variance with A, B, C or 8, 10, or 15
parking spaces?
CHAIRMAN PECK: We never have.
MR. STRAUSS: We never have.
CHAIRMAN PECK: We never have since I've been here.
MR. VINEBERG: (unintelligible)
CHAIRMAN PECK: No. Well no. Now wait a minute, now. Wait a
minute. You guys are looking at us all wrong. We're six people
gathered from the community here. We don't make legislation. All
we try and do is enforce it, and what the legislation says to us is
in the case of an area variance, you look at the practical
difficulties. Okay? That's all we have to go on in the case of an
area variance. Now, you're telling me that this isn't a use
variance, but whenever we judge on a case, we always judge on
something that's in front of us, that's a picture or a drawing, or
something that says this is what we want to use this for. Can we do
it? And in this case, we haven't got that.
MR. YENGO: Mr. Peck, we started out talking about an area variance.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Yes.
MR. YENGO: We pointed out all the practical difficulties of the
area variance.
CHAIRMAN PECK: I agree. Okay?
MR. YENGO: And one of the members of your Board moved for a
dismissal because
Page - 11
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
CHAIRMAN PECK: No. No. We moved for a continuance til next month.
MR. YENGO: That was at the end of it.
MR. SHARMA: Unintelligible.
MR. YENGO: Now, we started our conversation on an area variance
basis showing you the practical difficulties. We didn't change our
conversation. You changed our conversation.
MR. SHARMA: Whether we need 3 car spaces or 5 or 50, we don't have
it.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Well, we can . . That's right. That's right.
MR. SHARMA: And the practical difficulty will be the same for 3
cars or 30 cars.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay.
MR. SHARMA: And we are asking that . . . We have practical
difficulty. We cannot provide the rear yard. We cannot provide
parking spaces. We have a possibility of renting the space. We do
not have a code problem with this building because it's a concrete
building. It can be converted into a (unintelligible)
.CHAIRMAN PECK: Code wouldn't be our problem, anyway.
MR. SHARMA: And the City (unintelligible) see the filling of these
places. This is the Board who can make the direction today, at this
point.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Thank you. Is there anyone else who'd like to speak
in favor of this appeal? No one. Is there anyone who'd like to
speak in opposition? No one. Okay. The case is ours. Now.
MR. TOMLAN: Motion?
SECY. ECKSTROM: Can I just add one thing?
CHAIRMAN PECK: Rick? Sure. Let's have some discussion.
SECY. ECKSTROM: Well, we've structured the worksheet around the
worst case scenario, what would be the largest parking deficiency
there, which essentially would be a bar. That's where you get a lot
of standing people; the Ordinance requires parking spaces based on
the square footage.
CHAIRMAN PECK: And what's that? What number is that?
SECY. ECKSTROM: Well, this is our best guess of the net area, 5600
square feet requires 113 parking spaces. Now, in fact, it probably
will never be developed to that extent because you need some space
Page - 12
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
to operate the building. But, I don't know why . . . Well, it's the
Board's discretion, but it seems that some sort of cap on a parking
requirement may be able to be . . . You might be able to come up with
something that
MR. STRAUSS: What would be the best case scenario in terms of the
number of parking spaces?
SECY. ECKSTROM: Health club, probably. And I know there have been
a lot of inquiries from health club operators in Collegetown, and
the biggest problem they have is parking. We came up
CHAIRMAN PECK: You mean meeting the Zoning Ordinance or finding
places for people to put their cars.
SECY. ECKSTROM: Well, I'm not sure which one it is. Meeting the
Zoning Ordinance in parking. In that case, we've structured it
around the number of people that might be in the facility. The
parking requirement's based on the number of people, which is really
the old way of looking at it. If you have one parking space per 5
people, and the health club requires quite a bit of space per
person. So, I don't know what the amount of parking would be for
that, but if you are using 5, 000 square feet, it probably would come
down to a parking space per 250 square feet, something like that.
So, that's 24
CHAIRMAN PECK: per thousand, or 20 parking spaces.
MR. TOMLAN: That's still a considerable difference between 20
parking spaces and 120 parking spaces.
MR. VINEBERG: I think too, I mean
MR. TOMLAN: In that it's my neighborhood.
MR. VINEBERG: I think it's also . . . These different uses require a
certain number of spaces, but if a particular use were presented to
us, we would make some personal consideration whether we think in
fact those people are in the neighborhood, or as opposed to the uses
where we think those people are not in the neighborhood.
MR. STRAUSS: Precisely. In the case of the pizza restaurant across
the street. We were very specific about what kind of restaurant it
was and who would be likely to be going there and whether they would
be coming in cars or on foot, and so on and so forth.
MR. VINEBERG: So, you know, I think we're being fair in saying that
we . . . that maybe by doing what we did with this other case, and
saying that for a month now we're here to listen to a particular
tenant who wants to come in and make a proposal. That might
encourage a tenant to make a proposal for what they would like to
put in that building. Certainly, we have required that from
everyone else in this district who wanted an exception from the
parking requirement.
Page - 13
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
MR. TOMLAN: That a motion?
MS. ROSSITER: I will renew my motion at this time. I make the
motion to continue this to the next date which would give them a
much shorter time frame in which to line up a tenant and come in
with a specific proposal as we indicated in the last case, because
I'm not convinced that there's significant difference between this
and the last circumstance the Board required (unintelligible) .
MR. TOMLAN: I'll Secy. Eckstrom-second it.
CHAIRMAN PECK: The motion is for a continuance until next month?
MR. TOMLAN: Right.
MR. VINEBERG: Is there any other discussion? I mean it seems like
a . . . .
CHAIRMAN PECK: I don't know any other way out of it. I can see the
appellant's point of view, but I don't know . . . We've never passed
on anything that hasn't been in front of us.
MS. ROSSITER: Excuse me. One of the other issues that I recall
being raised during the presentation, and you know, I understand
this that the potential tenants are saying to the landlord this is
your problem, go solve it. Would it be fair to say that in the
event these particular gentlemen came back with a specific proposal,
that we would certainly give it very careful consideration. It
would not be necessary or certain denial that they came on behalf of
the tenant as opposed to the tenant.
CHAIRMAN PECK: No. That's not involved.
MS. ROSSITER: So, that's essentially, you know, it's part of this
that we're looking for a specific use, not necessarily to
inconvenience the potential tenants.
CHAIRMAN PECK: Okay. Further discussion from members of the Board?
A vote Yes is for continuance, and
MR. STRAUSS: Written vote or a voice vote?
MR. TOMLAN: You ought to have it on the record.
CHAIRMAN PECK: We'd better do it on the record.
MR. TOMLAN: Or, I request it on the record.
CHAIRMAN PECK: The case is 2051.
SECY. ECKSTROM: 5 affirmative votes.
CHAIRMAN PECK: So, there's a continuance until the next meeting.
Page - 14
BZA MINUTES - AUGUST 5, 1991
From the audience: As an architect (unintelligible) Zoning
Ordinance, may I ask a question of the Board?
CHAIRMAN PECK: I'd rather not now.
MR. SHARMA: Not on this case.
CHAIRMAN PECK: No. Well, I'd rather not. I'd rather just meet.
Finish up our agenda for tonight.
I certify that the foregoing was transcribed from a tape to
the best of my ability from the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting
on August 5, 1991 regarding Appeal No. 2051.
J
Carol Shipe, Record' Secretary
Page - 15