HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.03.22 BZA Agenda Packet
1 | Page
City of South Bend
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
AGENDA
Monday, January 3, 2022 - 4:00 p.m.
County-City Building
Fourth-Floor Council Chambers
www.tinyurl.com/sbbza
ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS:
1. Election of Officers
PUBLIC HEARING:
1. Location: 2046 SOUTH BEND AVE BZA#0093-21
Owner: DEV H12 LLC
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) From the 5' minimum front sign setback to 0'; and 2) From
the 15' maximum sign height to 19'
Zoning: C Commercial
2. Location: 6432 CHESTNUT (CURRENT) 6427, 6431, 6434, AND 6436 CHESTNUT LANE
(PROPOSED) BZA#0095-22
Owner: SOUTHFIELD VILLAGE INC
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the maximum 48' duplex width to 95'
Zoning: S2 Suburban Neighborhood 2
3. Location: 1165 Franklin Street BZA#0096-22
Owner: CATALYST TWO LLC
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the 6' maximum height for a solid fence in the
established front yard to 10'; and 2) to allow accessory structures in the established front yard
(dumpster enclosure and tanks)
Special Exception: Heavy Industrial
Zoning: I Industrial
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING:
1. Findings of Fact – December 6, 2021 2. Minutes – December 6, 2021 3. Other Business 4. Adjournment
NOTICE FOR HEARING AND SIGN IMPAIRED PERSONS Auxiliary Aid or other services may be available upon request at no charge. Please give reasonable advance request when possible.
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 4
Staff Report – BZA#0093-21 January 3, 2022
Property Information
Location: 2046 SOUTH BEND AVE
Owner: DEV H12 LLC
Project Summary
Legalize a sign installed.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) From the 5' minimum front sign setback to 0'
2) From the 15' maximum sign height to 19'
Site Location
Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board
deny the variances as presented.
Staff Report – BZA#0093-21 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0093-21 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 4
State statutes and the Zoning Ordinance require that certain standards must be met before a
variance can be approved. The standards and their justifications are as follows:
(1) The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community
Approval of the variance could be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community. Granting the variance would give an undue advantage to the
property owner which could negatively impact the use of the adjacent properties as well as
setting a precedence for the surrounding area. The site already has restricted visibility due
to the road curve. Further restricting the view will cause cars to have to pull into the
pedestrian area in order to safely exit the site.
(2) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will
not be affected in a substantially adverse manner
Granting the variance would give an undue advantage to the property owner which could
negatively impact the use of the adjacent properties, as well as setting a precedence for the
surrounding area. Other signs in the area are legal non-conforming and will need to be
adapted in the future. They are also predominately pole style signs that allow for adequate
clearance and clear sight area.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
Strict application of the ordinance would not result in practical difficulties in the use of the
property. The use of the property is not related to the size or location of the sign. The sign
was granted a permit in a code compliant location and later changed by the petitioner.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The practical difficulties on the site are self created, so the variance is not the minimum
necessary. The petitioner should not be granted a variance for the sign location due to poor
site planning on their part.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The variance requested is based on the desire of the petitioner, not a practical difficult of the
site. The petitioner made a concious decision to move the sign location and constructed the
sign at a taller height, against prior approved plans for a code compliant sign. The variance
requested is to avoid the cost of relocating the sign and to maintain the height above what is
allowed by code.
Analysis: The petitioner had received permit approval for the construction of a code compliant
sign in a code compliant location. The petitioner intentionally built the sign at a larger height and
in a location that places the sign right against the right-of-way.
Analysis & Recommendation
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
Staff Report – BZA#0093-21 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 4
Granting the variance would give an undue advantage to the property owner, which could
negatively impact the use of the adjacent properties. It would also set a precedence which
would promote the practice of permitting something compliant with the ordinance, but installing
something different than what is appropriate.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board deny the variances as presented.
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3
Staff Report – BZA#0095-22 January 3, 2022
Property Information
Location: 6432 CHESTNUT (CURRENT) 6427, 6431, 6434, AND 6436 CHESTNUT LANE
(PROPOSED)
Owner: SOUTHFIELD VILLAGE INC
Project Summary
Southfield Village, is constructing two additional duplexes on the Southfield Village campus. The
proposed duplexes are side-by-side units this they exceed the maximum 48 foot width in the S2
district.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) from the maximum 48' duplex width to 95'
Site Location
Staff Recommendation
Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board
approve the variance as presented.
Staff Report – BZA#0095-22 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0095-22 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 3
State statutes and the Zoning Ordinance require that certain standards must be met before a
variance can be approved. The standards and their justifications are as follows:
(1) The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community
The variance to increase the maximum width of a duplex should have no impact on the
public health, safety, or general welfare of the community. The proposed duplexes are
similar, in style and scale, to other duplexes on the block and neighborhood.
(2) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will
not be affected in a substantially adverse manner
The proposed duplexes have been designed with the intent to blend in with the current
neighborhood context. The proposed variance allows the site to develop consistently with
the existing built environment.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
Strict application of the ordinance would result in the construction of buildings that are out of
character for the area. The development was originally designed as a PUD. While the PUD
did not specify a maximum building width, the variance proposed is consistent with the other
buildings in the development. The variance allows for the structures to meet the minimum
transparency requirements, especially without the presence of an alley.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The variance is the minimum necessary to allow the building to be designed in a way that is
both consistent with the intent of the ordinance and remains in character with the design and
use of the surrounding neighborhood.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The area was developed under a PUD. The PUD District was not included in the updated
zoning ordinance. Each district was assigned to the district which included the uses and
standards most similar to the PUD. This change was not caused by the property owner.
Analysis: The proposed variance is consistent with the character of the area and the intent of
the ordinance. Approving the variance will allow for the construction of a two-unit dwelling
consistent in scale with the surrounding neighborhood. This is a suburban location with larger
homes and a mix of housing types originally developed under a PUD. This particular area was
designed for wide, front-loaded duplexes.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board approve the variance as presented.
Analysis & Recommendation
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 4
Staff Report – BZA#0096-22 January 3, 2022
Property Information
Location: 1165 Franklin Street
Owner: CATALYST TWO LLC
Project Summary
The Notre Dame Turbomachinery Laboratory seeks to install (1) a new, aboveground storage tank
with capacity of 5,000 gallons for Jet A aviation fuel and (2) two Airgas CO2 storage tanks. Placing
these tanks will require modifications to the currently existing fencing and dumpster enclosure.
Requested Action
Special Exception: Heavy Industrial
Variance(s): 1) from the 6' maximum height for a solid fence in the established front yard to 10'
2) to allow accessory structures in the established front yard (dumpster enclosure and tanks)
Site Location
Staff Recommendation
Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board send the petition to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. The staff
recommends approval of the variances as presented.
Staff Report – BZA#0096-22 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0096-22 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 4
A Special Use may only be granted upon making a written determination, based upon the
evidence presented at a public hearing, that:
(1) The proposed use will not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort,
community moral standards, convenience or general welfare;
With proper buffering, the proposed use should not be injurious to the public health, safety,
comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare.
(2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or
property values therein;
The site is currently being used for heavy industrial purposes, and is well established in the
neighborhood. The minimal expansion of the footprint of the site to allow for additional fuel
and gas tanks should not adversely affect the use of the adjacent areas, provided it is
properly screened. The variance for the 10' fence will allow for the additional screening
consistent with the existing development.
(3) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it islocated and the land uses authorized therein;
The proposed use of heavy industry is consistent with the character of the district in which it
is located. The site has a been in operation for several years. Allowing the Special
Exception will allow for the building to be used in its intended manner.
(4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The petition is consistent with City Plan (2006) (Objective ED2) Retain existing businesses
and recruit new ones to the city. Allowing heavy industry use on this site will help retain a
business in the city.
State statutes and the Zoning Ordinance require that certain standards must be met before a
variance can be approved. The standards and their justifications are as follows:
(1) The approval will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the community
Approval of the variance should not affect the public health, safety, and general welfare of
the community. The use of the 10' fence is not out of character with the industrial area as
Franklin Street is used as an Industrial alley with the surrounding businesses having loading
areas off the street.
(2) The use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance will
not be affected in a substantially adverse manner
Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
Staff Report – BZA#0096-22 January 3, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 4
Because site is located in an industrial area and the variance is to allow for the relocation
and extension of an existing fence, the use and value of the adjacent properties should not
be adversely affected.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
Strict application of the ordinance would not allow for the installation of a new tank that
would support the expansion of an existing building. The placement of the tank is heavily
regulated by the safety code and the ability to refuel the tankers.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The proposed layout has been designed so as to require the minimum variance necessary
and to have the least amount of impact on adjacent property owners while still expanding
the existing use.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The variance does not correct a hardship caused by a former or current owner. The design
of Ignition Park was developed under previous development standards that allowed the
buildings to be placed with the rear of the building facing Franklin Street. This has created a
style of development that has resulted in Franklin functioning more like an alley than a
street.
Analysis: The proposed Special Exception to allow for the expansion of a heavy industry use is
consistent with the character of the district in which it is located. The site has been in operation
for several years.
The Special Exception will allow for the expansion of the current use and improve current
operations, allowing the operations to remain in South Bend. The proposed variances will
provide the appropriate space for the new tanks within the constraints of a limited site. The
increased fence height is necessary for screening and security. While Franklin Street is
technically the front, it serves as an industrial alley with the true front of the building facing west.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board send the petition to the Common Council with a favorable
recommendation. The staff recommends approval of the variances as presented.
Analysis & Recommendation