Case Date:

10/25/2022

After reading about the variance denied to the property owner, Randy Lloyd, I couldn’t help but think about the current use of the site at or about 113 E Kirkwood. This property sits in an overlay that does not permit surface parking. I can’t find any use in the UDO where parking is allowed when not attached to a structure, and I specifically remember a number of discussions regarding this issue. In particular the Methodist Church’s desire to convert the footprint of the old post office to surface parking. I believe that had to turn it into green space. I also have concerns that this lot is 100% impervious. 20.4.20 I just don’t see how this use satisfies the spirit of the Comprehensive Plan, the existing UDO, or is consistent w previous use determinations. Further, the owner expanded the parking from what was there pre-demolition of the 4th street garage without any public review. Finally, I doubt this parcel meets the requirements of 18.12.10. How would BFD access or service a car fire on this parcel? It’s too narrow to get truck in there and difficult to service from the alley. This use may have been over looked during the demolition and reconstruction of the 4th street garage, even though parking was not really needed downtown during the pandemic, however, it’s time for enforcement against this parcel and other nonconforming uses.

Case Date:

11/20/2023

Tenants dug up street sign post on SW corner of lot by street/alley and are now using it (along with another they swiped from somewhere) in the north yard as a support for party lights.