17-75 Special Exception for 806 Howard St.

Home Browse Search

Carolyn Henry From: gia haigh <giaandjamey @gmail.com> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 7:51 PM To: Carolyn Henry Subject: ZZ Opposition to 806 Howard/Pandora expansion and change of use Ms. Henry, We write in opposition to the requests for variance made by the owners of the former Pandora building, located at 808 Howard.We would very much appreciate if you forwarded this letter to the Area Board of Zoning Appeals. We own two properties adjacent to the former Pandora building:a single-family,owner-occupied residence at 925 N. Notre Dame Ave, and (through the Sasman LLC)a parcel of property directly to the east of the building, on the corner of ND Ave and Howard.We purchased our home at 925 N. Notre Dame 8 years ago and we purchased the corner lot about a year ago, in order to fix up the lots and adjacent sidewalks and curbs and to ensure that it would someday be occupied by a nice single-family,owner-occupied home in the character of the neighborhood. We are happy that the investment fund has purchased the building and will fix it up commensurate it with its nice offices in Boston, Chicago, and Eddy St. However,as the owner of two adjacent properties, we wanted to register our strong objections to the proposed variances,with objections broken down by the special exception approval standards: 1. "The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health,safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare." a. The owner's petition says that on-street parking is sufficient for the 31-car variance,and that on-street parking will "calm"traffic along Howard.With 7 children of our own,and numerous other children living on ND Ave, who all use Kelly Park(located across St. Peter from the Pandora building), we disagree.We believe that more parked cars will reduce parking available for Kelly Park and will reduce visibility of children crossing the street to use the Park and to visit friends' houses in the neighborhood.The comfort and convenience of the neighbors will be harmed by additional cars parking in front of houses, making visitors have to park away from our houses.The parking situation is particularly significant as half the parking along ND Ave was recently lost due to bike lanes.The addition of the top level residential unit for an out-of-town Notre Dame donor will mean far more parking on game and event weekends,when neighborhood parking is already particularly scarce. b. The owner's petition says the added residential use is compatible with surrounding land uses. It is not. Some residential use is compatible with the neighborhood, and some is not. For example, student housing and apartments in the neighborhood have been actively opposed by NENC, ND, and neighbors for years.Apartment/condo residences for Notre Dame donors like this owner have been limited to the Eddy St corridor and the area east of the Notre Dame campus.There is"Office"of"Office/Residential" use near this building. 2. "The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein." a. The owner's petition says that property values will not be adversely affected because the owner will improve the exterior appearance of the property.We disagree that fixing up the appearance of a property justifies zoning variances, as that would justify zoning variances throughout our neighborhood to the point where the exceptions trump the rules.The point is that the requested new"use" (residential) is inextricably tied to increasing the height of the property by about 18 feet,which will adversely affect property values.Our view, and the view of neighbors (from everything we've heard), is that as bad as the building looks currently,status quo is much preferable to the proposed use. 1