Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-13-17 Zoning and Annexation �SOUTgg�� O d H �L U C W PEACE �,e 1865 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK KAREEMAH FOWLER,CITY CLERK ZONING&ANNEXATION NOVEMBER 13, 2017 3:31 P.M. Committee Members Present: Oliver Davis, Gavin Ferlic, Jo M. Broden Committee Members Absent: John Voorde Other Council Present: Karen White, Dr. David Varner, Tim Scott Other Council Absent: Regina Williams-Preston, Randy Kelly Others Present: Kareemah Fowler, Bianca Tirado, Graham Sparks, Bob Palmer Presenters: Angela Smith, Ayoka Paek, Chris Chockley, Michael Divita Agenda: Bill No. 72-17-Zoning Text Amendment pertaining to Common Variances Bill No. 73-17-Zoning Text Amendment pertaining to Engineering Standard Bill No. 74-17-Zoning Text Amendment pertaining to Pyramiding Uses Bill No. 17-70- Special Exception at 3419 W. Washington Zoning Ordinance Update Briefing- Mike Divita, Dept. of Community Investment Committee Chair Oliver Davis called to order the Zoning and Annexation Committee meeting at 3:31 p.m. He introduced members of the Committee and proceeded to give the floor to the presenters. Bill No. 72-17-Bill No. 72-17- Zonin�Text Amendment pertaining Common Variances Amendmentpertainingto Common Variances Angela Smith, Deputy Director of the Area Plan Commission with offices on the 11th floor of the County-City Building, stated, We have a series of three (3)text amendments in front of you all today. This bill deals with the ones we have talked about in the past that require common variances. These are some of the items we see most often through the Area Board of Zoning Appeals. The text amendment includes changing how we average the block base for a setback. Right now, at least sixty percent(60%) of the block has to be occupied and if the home was granted approval through the variance process it can't be included in the average setback. We are 455 County-City Building•227 W.Jefferson Boulevard•South Bend,Indiana 46601 Phone 574-235-9221 •Fax 574-235-9173•TDD 574-235-5567•www.SouthBendIN.gov JENNIFER M.COFFMAN BIANCA TIRADO JOSEPH MOLNAR CHIEF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF DEPUTY/DIRECTOR OF POLICY ORDINANCE VIOLATION CLERK OPERATIONS seeing repeated applications for that. The second provision deals with landscaping in the right- of-way. We often have petitioners seek to not put in any landscaping when there is ample tree lawn to put in landscaping. This would allow them to do that and it would count as permanent landscaping. The minimum parking requirement in Mixed-Use Districts has accounted for forty- two percent(42%) of our variance requests over the last few years. We are attempting to make Mixed-Use Districts similar to the Central Business Districts. They won't be required to have parking but if they provide it, it would have to meet the standards. The last provision deals with outdoor seating. There are several districts that have a limit of ten percent(10%) of the gross floor area. This comes to you from the Area Plan Commission(APC)with a favorable recommendation. Committee Chair Davis opened the floor to questions from the Committee and Councilmembers. Councilmember Tim Scott asked, How much was the City involved in this process? Ms. Smith replied, This was a joint effort between the Building Department, APC and the Department of Community Investment. Councilmember Dr. David Varner asked, The proposal to allow landscaping in adjacent public right of ways, if it is approved, will that affect our need to use that right of way? Ms. Smith replied, If it is a type of tree that the Arborist approves and the Board of Public Works is aware of it,there would not be a negative effect. Committeemember Jo M. Broden asked, Was there any consideration of having a substitute location for parking or landscaping? Ms. Smith replied, We do have a lot of alternative landscape options. However,putting landscaping some place offsite begins to become very complex. We did look into it,though. This whole landscape section will probably need another refreshing because between parking and landscaping, those two (2) sections are the most petitioned for variances. Committee Chair Davis then opened the floor to members of the public wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. Michael Divita, Principal Planner with the Department of Community Investment with offices on the 14th floor of the County-City Building, stated, As Angela mentioned, we worked very closely with APC and the Building Department. This is all an attempt to reduce the unnecessary variances that hinder development. These changes will allow buildings to be built that better match the neighborhood context. As for parking, sometimes the lots aren't big enough for both the parking and the building. Usually business neighbors share parking. Sue Kessim, 4022 Kennedy Drive, stated, My concern with this is the Board of Public Works has allowed business to go all the way to the street with their dining and that doesn't leave a five (5) foot access way for ADA compliance. I don't like that has been ignored. To me,that is unacceptable. If you want a place where people walk we have to be intentional about making that possible. 2 With no other members of the public wishing to speak, Committee Chair Davis then turned the floor back to the petitioner for a rebuttal. Ms. Smith replied, The ordinance for outdoor seating actually requires they not interfere with the sidewalk right of ways. So that is in the ordinance but it sounds like it might be an enforcement issue. Committee Chair Davis then turned the floor back to the Committee for further comment or main motion. Committeemember Broden made a motion to send Bill No. 17-72 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Committeemember Gavin Ferlic seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of three (3) ayes. Committeemember Ferlic then made a motion to hear together Bill No. 73-17 and 74-14 for purposes of presentation and public hearing. Committeemember Broden seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of three (3) ayes. Bill No. 73-17- Zoning Text Amendment pertaining to Engineering Standard Bill No. 74-17-Zoning Text Amendment pertaining to Pyramiding Uses Ms. Smith stated, The first ordinance deals with things related to engineering. This was in conjunction with the Building Department,the Department of Community Investment,the Area Plan Commission and the Engineering Department. The first provision deals with the clear sight triangle. One (1) change exempts the Central Business District. We allow buildings to go all the way to a zero (0) foot setback and the required site triangle needs to be counter-intuitive. We have wide sidewalks in downtown and there really isn't an issue. It would also reduce the twenty-five (25) foot clear sight area at the intersections to ten(10) feet. We recently learned from the Indiana Department of Transportation(INDOT)that this is the standard they use in urban areas. Because of reduced road speeds and wider walkways,this makes sense. We also discovered that many of our private streets and alleys are wider than what we are currently putting in throughout the Smart Streets efforts. It seems silly to have people over-pave their areas. Right now we require five (5)waiting spaces for cars behind the drive through, whether it is a restaurant or bank. The five (5) spaces is way more than most people need. We did add provisions to make sure it cannot interfere with any other parking or pedestrian ways. She continued, The other ordinance addresses why we have such explicitly defined uses in South Bend. There are so many specific zonings and sometimes people have to down-zone in order to do something with their property. We want to preserve districts and make sure owners aren't having to change back and forth. This is taking a closer look at, and aligning, the allowed uses as the zones change. It doesn't include the residential uses and doesn't include the Central Business District Committee Chair Davis then opened the floor to questions from the Committee and Councilmembers. 3 Councilmember Dr. Varner asked, So you won't allow an adaptive reuse unless they receive a variance? Ms. Smith replied, I would have to go back and look at the ordinance to see where all the multi- families are allowed. Councilmember Dr. Varner followed up, It seems to me we don't want to be closing any opportunities. Committee Chair Davis then opened the floor to members of the public wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. Councilmember Regina Williams-Preston arrived at the meeting at 4:02 p.m. Mr. Divita stated, These amendments are to reduce the unnecessary variances that hinder development. The Engineering Department did vet all the amendments that dealt with the engineering standards and they are on board with them all. With no other members of the public wishing to speak, Committee Chair Davis turned the floor back to the Committee for further comment or main motions. Commiteemember Ferlic made a motion to send Bill No. 73-17 and 74-17 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Committeemember Broden seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of three (3) ayes. Bill No 17-70- Special Exception at 3419 W. Washington Ayoka Paek, Zoning and Business Services Administrator with the Building Department with offices located at 125 S. Lafayette Boulevard, stated, This special exception petition for a Community Center in an SF-2—Single-Family Two (2)-Family District comes to you with a favorable recommendation from the Area Board of Zoning Appeals (ABZA). The ABZA also approved some parking and landscaping variances as part of the petition. The building as it exists now is a legally non-conforming building and proposed changes require a professional use to be applied for before permits can be issued.No one spoke in remonstrance at the ABZA. Chris Chockley, Jones Petrie Rafinski with offices located at 325 S. Lafayette Boulevard, stated, We are representing Venues Parks &Arts on this project. We have been working with them on renovating and building onto this existing facility. We are looking at about 14,000 square feet of building renovations with 11,000 square feet of additions to the building. The additions include expanding the gym to the north and also bringing more programmable and office space to the east. We want to emphasize the front of this building. We are working on material selection right now. Committee Chair Davis opened the floor to questions from the Committee and Councilmembers. Councilmember Karen White asked, Could you go a bit more in depth in terms of the programming of the Community Center? 4 Mr. Chockley replied, I can't speak to the actual programs that will happen but the program space will add flexibility to the programming. They will be open to the public. We are also expanding the exercise. We are also adding a bike repair area. Committee Chair Davis asked, How many people does the gym seating hold? Mr. Chockley replied, Right now it holds between one hundred and fifty(150)to three hundred (300)people. Committee Chair Davis then opened the floor to members of the public wishing to speak in favor of or in opposition to the legislation. There were none. He then turned the floor back to the Committee for further comment or main motions. Committeemember Ferlic made a motion to send Bill No. 17-70 to the full Council with a favorable recommendation. Committeemember Broden seconded this motion which carried unanimously by a voice vote of three (3) ayes. Zoning Ordinance Update Briefing- Mike Divita,Dept. of Communty- Investment Mr. Divita stated, You may recall the announcement that APC,the Building Department and the Department of Community Investment would be bringing six (6)packages of the quick fixes. The first three (3) were the ones you just saw. The fourth set will address the standards for Mixed-Use Districts. In the packet is the proposed language for that. Committee Chair Davis opened the floor to questions from Committee and Councilmembers. There were none. With no other business, Committee Chair Davis adjourned the Zoning and Annexation Committee meeting at 4:09 p.m. Re ub itted, ver av' , C mm ttee air