Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee seeks language fix to Article 44 parking exemption for change of business use
Summary
Committee members agreed to authorize staff to reinstate language clarifying that a change between permitted business uses that does not increase the building footprint will not trigger additional off-street parking requirements.
Get email alerts on the Zoning Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee Chair said the committee will seek to amend Article 44’s proposed zoning language to explicitly exempt changes between permitted business uses that do not increase a building’s footprint from additional off-street parking requirements.
"Section 4.2 0.3 0.5 in commercial districts, the change of use from a permitted business use to another permitted business use that does not increase the square footage of the building shall not be required to provide additional off-grid parking," the committee chair read into the record as the intended language.
The chair said he had previously told a resident the parking rule was in the zoning regulation, but then learned from Elizabeth Hughes that it was not and that an earlier version of the article had included the footprint language. He asked for the committee’s approval to "authorize me to confer with Elizabeth and make sure we have the right language," and members indicated agreement.
Committee members debated whether the exemption should reference the square footage of the unit, the business, or the building. One member suggested the parking standard applies to particular units: if two separate units are occupied by different businesses, parking must be evaluated by unit; if a single business occupies both units, the situation differs. The chair said he will confirm the correct wording with Elizabeth Hughes and circulate the revised text by email.
The chair and other members stressed the intent is to avoid requiring additional parking when a permitted business use changes but the building footprint does not increase. They also asked staff to withhold final votes on any warn article 44 support until the revised language is circulated to the planning committee.
No formal numeric vote on the amended wording was recorded in the transcript; members indicated assent and asked staff to confirm the final wording.

