Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Owner seeks parking variance for downtown Broadway apartments; board tables request
Summary
At a June 30 meeting, applicant John Kirk asked the Board of Zoning Appeals to waive a requirement for two off‑street parking spaces per apartment for five units planned at 52–54 South Broadway; the board tabled the request and encouraged the applicants to secure written parking agreements with neighbors or the city.
John Kirk, who identified himself as a 25% owner of the building at 52–54 South Broadway, asked the Board of Zoning Appeals on June 30 for a parking variance to allow five apartments upstairs without the ordinance-required two off-street spaces per unit.
Kirk told the board the upstairs conversion would create five apartments — four two-bedroom units and one one-bedroom — and that the project currently provides zero off-street parking. He said the building had housed apartments in the past but that the property was not occupied when the current owners acquired it about a year and a half ago.
Board members explained that any prior variance or grandfathered parking conditions typically terminate when ownership changes. Members urged Kirk and his partners to explore alternatives to a full variance, including written agreements with neighboring businesses for overflow parking, approaching the city about using the municipal lot across the street, or negotiating with the nearby newspaper office and the owner of Dreams to Reality to secure spaces.
The board noted practical concerns: downtown curb spaces are often time-limited (two-hour parking), enforcement is inconsistent, and tenant parking could displace customers if no off-street solution is secured. The board advised the applicants to talk with adjacent businesses and the city and return with written commitments if possible.
Rather than vote on the variance, Board member Joe Molineaux moved to table the request; the motion was seconded by Board member Mike Sablisk and the board voted to table the item. No remonstrators spoke at the meeting. The applicants were told they could return with a parking plan or agreements if needed.
The board did not set a deadline for resubmission. The item will return to a future meeting if the applicants pursue written parking arrangements or otherwise amend their application.
