The City of Morgantown Board of Zoning Appeals voted to deny a variance request that would have reduced off‑street parking requirements for a proposed group residential recovery residence at 201 Wakeman Street.
The board’s vote follows more than an hour of public comment describing repeated parking, traffic and safety problems around the house and the surrounding South Park historic neighborhood.
The proposed West Virginia Silver Living facility sought a certificate of occupancy for a group residential use with seven residents and one on‑site employee; city code requires three off‑street parking spaces for that use. The applicant, Dan Bacali, director of operations for West Virginia Silver Living, told the board the organization wanted “a nice place where people can recover” and asked for flexibility on parking because the building’s lot is constrained.
Residents opposed the variance at the hearing. “The lack of required off‑street parking has already been an ongoing problem,” said Justin Logik, a Waitman Street resident, describing multiple instances he said involved moving trucks blocking sidewalks and cars parked against traffic. Other neighbors described damage to curbs and gardens and said on‑site parking and guest parking issued by the city have not prevented frequent obstructions.
Board members debated whether physical constraints on the lot constitute a hardship that justifies a variance and whether granting relief would harm public safety or adjacent property rights. After discussing amended findings of fact that cited increased congestion and public safety concerns, the board voted to deny the variance; written notification will be mailed by planning staff and the decision is subject to a 30‑day appeal to the Circuit Court of Monongalia County.
No new building permits or occupancy certificate will be issued for the property while the appeal period runs. The board noted that if the applicant seeks to increase resident capacity in the future, that change would require a separate review or a new variance request.
Planning staff filed the application and the standard conditions attached to variances remained unchanged; staff recommended no modifications but presented the board with correspondence and prior site materials that were entered as part of the record.
Residents asked the applicant and staff to consider alternative off‑site parking arrangements before any new use is approved; board members said they will expect any future application to include clearer evidence of how required parking and operational logistics would be provided.