Loading...
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