MARS — Borough officials will go back to the drawing board after residents and business owners took issue with a proposed alcohol zoning change which included parking provisions.

The borough presented the zoning change in response to last May’s vote to permit the production and sale of alcohol. Despite overwhelming approval from voters, zoning ordinances still prohibited it.

On Monday, a public hearing on the proposed zoning changes was held. The proposal would have broken the borough’s commercial district in half, with the southern portion from Clark Street south being zoned for alcohol sales. The portion north of Clark Street, which is more residential, would be zoned for conditional use, with permits issued on a case-by-case basis.

The proposal also contained parking provisions, as officials said establishments that would sell alcohol would bring an influx of traffic into the area. The number of spots a business is required to have is based on the square footage of the building as well as the type of business being operated.

Council members discussed creating additional spots in lots around the business district, and allowing businesses to use those spots toward the total number of spots required by zoning ordinances.

A focus was the municipal lot that faces Grand Avenue as well as property leased near the railroad tracks, which the borough maintains and would upgrade. The proposal would have allowed the borough to recoup expenses from that maintenance, but exactly how that would have been accomplished was unclear.

Several business owners attended the hearing and voiced their displeasure with the parking provisions. They said permitting businesses to use public parking toward their required spot amount was unfair to businesses already in existence. Some also questioned how provisions would be enforced, as the borough does not have policies or procedures to keep vehicles from occupying a space for longer periods.

Fritz Baehr, a borough planning commission member, said the parking provisions would serve as a means to allow new businesses to meet zoning requirements. He said a change of use for a business always requires a review of zoning issues, and permitting establishments that produce and sell alcohol in the borough was the catalyst for that. He added the proposal was done in the interest of attracting new businesses.

“We really do want businesses to come in here and thrive and be successful,” he said.

Council members decided the parking issue is separate from the zoning change.

“Obviously there are varied viewpoints on the parking,” said G. Michael Fleming, council president. “Regardless of whether we chose to make that part of it or not, I think that we’re obligated ... in a timely manner ... to approve the location (of the zoning change).”

Council took no action and instead asked Baehr and planning commission members to remove the parking issue from the proposal. Another public hearing on the zoning change will be held at 6 p.m. April 2 before the council meeting.

In the interim, council will continue to explore parking concerns. Baehr said he will begin tracking the number of open spots in the downtown area to get a baseline for potential issues. Fleming also mentioned possibly revisiting zoning requirements with businesses before a change of use, which is currently the only time such issues are addressed.

“This is all part of the growing pains of our town if we want to revitalize it,” said councilwoman Julie Schultheis.