Long Beach zoning board denies front-yard parking variance at 155 West Market Street

The City of Long Beach Zoning Board of Appeals on Tuesday denied a variance request that would have allowed off-street parking in the front yard at 155 West Market Street. Why it matters: The vote preserves the city's existing front-yard parking rules and leaves an unresolved court case over the property's prior driveway work to the city court. The applicant, listed in the application as Isaac Lapidus of 115 Ocean Avenue, sought relief from Section 9-113.2(g) of the Long Beach zoning code to formalize two side-by-side parking spaces in the front yard. The board heard extended discussion about how the work was carried out during the COVID-19 pandemic, whether the applicant had followed building-department guidance, and whether a zoning decision should wait for the outcome of a related city-court matter. Deputy Corporation Counsel Joseph Lupo told the board the enforcement office could represent to city court that the zoning board was holding its decision pending the court's outcome, or the board could vote now. The applicant's representative said the owner had consulted the building department at the time and that some paperwork had been filed there; the representative also said the owner had lived on the property during COVID and installed fencing and paving to create a safe play area for children before converting part of the front yard to pavers for parking. After a motion to deny introduced by Commissioner Michelle Alvarado and seconded by Commissioner Lease, the board voted to deny the application. Commissioners Markowitz, Lease, Brooks, Alvarado and Chairman Morelli all voted to deny; two commissioners were recorded as absent for the meeting. Chairman Morelli announced, "Denied." The denial preserves the code requirements listed on the application (front-yard and side-yard provisions and Section 9-113.2(g) on off-street parking). Board members and counsel also debated whether a zoning grant would moot the city-court case. Counsel explained that a grant of the variance would not erase the fact that a violation occurred and that court fines or enforcement could still be considered by the city court; conversely, in counsel's experience, some city courts view a later-granted variance as a mitigating factor when resolving violations. Discussion points included whether the owner had sought and received building-department guidance before the work; whether the variance would remove the need for remediation in court; and whether the board should hold its decision until the city court rule was finalized. The board ultimately voted now and denied the variance. What happens next: The applicant remains in a separate enforcement process in city court over the work done on the property. Deputy Corporation Counsel Joseph Lupo indicated the city could represent to the court that the zoning board's determination was pending or, as counsel said, take other steps the prosecutor deems appropriate in court. Clarifying details: The application cited Section 9-113.2(g) (off-street parking) of the City of Long Beach zoning code. The applicant's representative said the proposed space would meet the size standard for an off-street space (about 20 by 10 feet) but that the requested change would place parking in the front yard, which the code ordinarily prohibits. The record shows the property previously had a single long driveway and the owner altered the front yard to allow two cars to park side-by-side; the owner is separately answering enforcement charges in city court.