|
|
| Author |
Message |
popcorn
|
|
Landlord stuff
| 
May 3 20:10 UTC 1995 |
Just to keep y'all posted, we're in for some problems with the location
where Grex lives, affectionately known as "The Dungeon". When the city did
an inspection of the building where the Dungeon is, they found that the
electrical work for the room was done without a permit, and they complained
that Grex is a business in a building that is zoned residential.
Taking care of the electrical permit should be fairly straightforward.
The zoning looks likely to be more of a problem, as one of the two owners
of the building would rather see Grex leave than work for a zoning
variance. I'm pretty sketchy on the details, but I'm told zoning variances
normally cost about $80 and aren't too hard to get, especially in a case
like Grex's, where we don't have any customers coming to the location, nor
parking or noise problems. I'm not too clear on why the owner feels this
way, and she's hard to reach to ask her about it. I'm trying to reach her
to ask. The other building owner says he would rather see Grex able to
stay. I'd like to see this location work out, both because it's a nice
location, and because Grex *really* doesn't want to move again. I'll be
talking to a lawyer on Tuesday, and will post further updates here.
|
| 129 responses total. |
steve
|
|
response 1 of 129:
|
May 3 20:42 UTC 1995 |
The important thing to remember is that even under the worst possible
of circumstances, Grex wouldn't have to leave until either late July or
August, and later than that if we show a case that its difficult for us
to move.
The variance will be applied for. I was told this by Nick,
yesterday. The city will then send out letters about this to
all people who live within a 300 foot range of any corner of the
property; the actual zoning meeting would be about June 17th or so
from what I remember.
As far as the variance goes, Grex "looks comercial" to the zoning
people. Since Grex isn't owned by any one person, has business
phone, etc. they think this is a commercial entity. However, we
aren't, and I think we can make a good case to this effect, and get
around the City. I recently talked to an old family friend who was
something on an activist during the 60's over various zoning issues,
and when I explained the situation to her, she thought that this
would go through without much of a problem. Time will tell of course,
and nothing is definate when dealing with the city.
I've already started looking for other space for Grex; I have
to start returning phone calls already on this.
|
nephi
|
|
response 2 of 129:
|
May 4 05:53 UTC 1995 |
This is ridiculous. How long have we been giving them rent money?
|
popcorn
|
|
response 3 of 129:
|
May 4 13:43 UTC 1995 |
about 19 months
|
nephi
|
|
response 4 of 129:
|
May 4 13:59 UTC 1995 |
Okay. We've given these people $475, and we have actually used the
property for less than 3 months. So, if the wonderful landlord has
her way, she can get rid of us and have an effective rent of $158.33
per month.
I think I know who's getting the better end of the bargain.
|
steve
|
|
response 5 of 129:
|
May 4 22:50 UTC 1995 |
heh. Well, the other person in the partnership doesn't feel
that way.
Right now I want to see the variance filed for. This is the
single most important thing right now; with that, we can make the
case for our being there.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 6 of 129:
|
May 5 03:35 UTC 1995 |
Is a non-profit coproation "commercial" ??
|
rcurl
|
|
response 7 of 129:
|
May 5 07:31 UTC 1995 |
Yes. A non-profit can conduct all sorts of businesses, just so long
as no person received "profit" (though it can employ and pay people).
|
srw
|
|
response 8 of 129:
|
May 8 06:37 UTC 1995 |
The city's point of view is that it is not "residential use", unless
someone who lives there is operating it. This was explained to me by
the man in the city's building department who enforces these things.
He was quite reasonable, but has no leeway to make value judgments.
A zoning "use" variance is needed. Whether it will be easy to get or not
remains to be seen.
|
chelsea
|
|
response 9 of 129:
|
May 8 12:25 UTC 1995 |
I'd be quite surprised if come July we didn't get a letter from
the landlord giving us notice our lease won't be renewed. That
is allowed by contract. I'd hate to see a lot of effort put into
trying to stay where we aren't wanted - that's an unworkable
situation no matter how cheap our rent.
In my most humble opinion: 99% of our efforts at this point should
be toward finding a new location.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 10 of 129:
|
May 8 13:19 UTC 1995 |
Ja, I agree. It's just sad to think of losing our current location
after all the work we put into it.
|
ajax
|
|
response 11 of 129:
|
May 8 13:54 UTC 1995 |
Can we take the drywall when we move? :)
|
steve
|
|
response 12 of 129:
|
May 9 00:44 UTC 1995 |
I have to disagree with Valerie and Mary. 50% of our landlord
has no problem with us being there; the other 50% is freaking out
about the cost, I think, involved with everything.
If we can get the variance, Nick said he will sign the extension
on the lease. He is the authority for signing tennants, and we're
a tennant. If we can stay there, we should. If have have to move
then so be it, and I've already started asking around. I have to
meet with a business on State St to talk about space.
But that doesn't mean we should give up automatically. Far
from it.
|
tsty
|
|
response 13 of 129:
|
May 9 06:16 UTC 1995 |
yes, please, let's not "give up" with such apparant rapidity. A
variance is just the right ticket for us.
|
srw
|
|
response 14 of 129:
|
May 9 08:01 UTC 1995 |
I agree with Steve about this. If we can legally stay, we should.
I also think we need to be working on alternatives, because I am not
convinced that we'll be able to stay.
|
popcorn
|
|
response 15 of 129:
|
May 9 12:56 UTC 1995 |
Right. But we need to look for our best option from this point forward,
rather than saying that we put a ton of work into the room and therefore
we'll spend a ton of energy working to stay there. If the landlords are
going to keep creating hassles for us, it might be better for us to cut
our losses, move to a new location, and not have to spend the ton of energy
to stay. To me, the question at this point is what will work best for
Grex in the future, not how we can best stay in a location that may cost us
endless Grexer-hours that could be spent toward something more productive,
such as moving to the Sun 4.
|
lilmo
|
|
response 16 of 129:
|
May 9 23:00 UTC 1995 |
Fortunately, popcorn, that does not appear to be a problem. if, as steve
says, the landlord who counts is willing to work with us, then the other
should be mollified when the cost of the variance does not prove to be
exorbitant. Whoever deals w/ the landlords might also consider
REMINDING said freak-out abvout the months of rent paid w/o occupation,
and the improvements installed by Grexxers.
|
ajax
|
|
response 17 of 129:
|
May 10 14:30 UTC 1995 |
I wonder if the landlords would be willing to pay some amount of
compensation if Grex has to leave. We'd certainly be out some time
and money. Though legally, it doesn't seem clear who's at fault
about forgetting about zoning. (Or does it?)
|
davel
|
|
response 18 of 129:
|
May 10 17:15 UTC 1995 |
I'm pretty sure that the landlord is responsible for not renting the space for
uses contrary to the zoning. If we'd hidden what we were planning to do, we'd
surely have some responsibility, but ...
|
tsty
|
|
response 19 of 129:
|
May 10 17:50 UTC 1995 |
One really good argument for us is that the zoning & cert of occupancy
people have known of a computer club being in that very space
for YEARS now, and Grex is either the 2nd or 3rd "tenant." That property
gets inspected by the city every two years. Computer clubs have
been approved up till now, why pick on us?
|
steve
|
|
response 20 of 129:
|
May 10 22:17 UTC 1995 |
It's something to ask, but I think I know the reason why. When
M-Net originally lived there, they were in a house owned by a person
who lived there and did not rent it out.
It seems to hang on the fact that rental units are considered
something different than 'privately' owned houses.
|
selena
|
|
response 21 of 129:
|
May 11 02:03 UTC 1995 |
Laws- weird how they wind up working, sometimes..
|
srw
|
|
response 22 of 129:
|
May 11 06:59 UTC 1995 |
Also I know from experience that it rarely matters whether a problem has
been overlooked in the past. This argument doesn't wash in general.
|
sidhe
|
|
response 23 of 129:
|
May 11 21:37 UTC 1995 |
On the other hand, if the priginal situation wasn't overlooked,
but actually "complied", then you could use the precent in your
favor, I believe.
<The top line should be Original..>
|
popcorn
|
|
response 24 of 129:
|
Jun 21 20:09 UTC 1995 |
I've just come from the zoning board of appeals meeting.
They approved Grex's request for a zoning variance -- we can stay at
our current location!!!!!
|