Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Parking Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing examiner recommends denial after neighbors object to unpermitted parking lot at Harrison Brooks Center
Summary
A petition to rezone a 0.38-acre vacant parcel at 420 W. 40th Street to allow an on-site parking lot for the Harrison Brooks Center drew opposition from neighbors who said the lot was paved without permits; staff and the hearing examiner recommended denial.
The hearing examiner recommended denial of a rezoning and associated variances requested to legalize an existing paved parking lot at 420 West 40th Street, a parcel proposed to serve the adjacent Harrison Brooks Center.
Architect Lester Carver, representing property owner Edith Glover, said the lot would provide 15 additional spaces to serve the senior/community center at 4002 Cornelius Avenue and described site work that would include a retention pond, fencing adjustments and lighted parking. Carver said the parcel abuts two alleys and existing C3 zoning at nearby corners.
Neighbors, led by Bailey Stroup, opposed the petition. Stroup said the lot was paved “overnight” in fall 2024 without public notice and that the community prefers green space or other uses rather than an asphalt slab. Stroup submitted a signed petition of more than 60 signatures and said the lot primarily serves a neighboring Airbnb and the community center, which she said has been underused in recent years.
Staff planner Steph Cummins and other city staff recommended denial. Staff cited an active violation (VIL204005571) noting the owner failed to obtain required land-alteration and drainage permits, and said the site is zoned D5 and aligns with the comprehensive plan’s “traditional neighborhood” designation. Staff said approval would require companion variances and could open the parcel to future C3 uses that would encroach on the residential neighborhood. Staff also reported that, per parking calculations, current and proposed parking needs for the community center could be met without the new lot.
The petitioner’s representative said the lot pavement was a misunderstanding tied to separate state-level design approvals; he said a stop-work order was issued and that required landscaping, striping and lighting were not completed. The petitioner argued concrete (not asphalt) reduces heat-island concerns and said the parking supports an ongoing senior program, including van transport.
After hearing testimony from both sides, the examiner concluded the introduced surface parking lot and requested C3 rezoning were inconsistent with the residential context and staff findings and recommended denial. The case will be considered by the Metropolitan Development Commission on April 2.
