HomeMy WebLinkAbout09.06.22 BZA Agenda Packet1 | Page
City of South Bend
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
AGENDA
Tuesday, September 6, 2022 - 4:00 p.m.
County-City Building
Fourth-Floor Council Chambers
www.tinyurl.com/sbbza
PUBLIC HEARING:
1.Location: 4007 KIRBY CT BZA#0116-22
Owner: JOHN C & SHARON K ENGSTROM
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) to allow a fence to be erected so the finished side of the
fence faces the interior of the lot
Zoning: S1 Suburban Neighborhood 1
2.Location: 4316 Michigan BZA#0120-22
Owner: The BarClay Corporation
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the required 200' lineal spacing from a public park to
162' and from the maximum allowable 35' height to 50' for a billboard
Zoning: C Commercial Request to Withdraw
3.Location: 1432 DUBAIL AVE BZA#0126-22
Owner: CHAD MICHAEL WARNOCK
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the 5' minimum side yard setback to 0'
Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1
4.Location: 1943 HUEY ST BZA#0127-22
Owner: ERIN REAL ESTATE INC Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the 3' maximum fence height in an established front
yard to 6'
Zoning: S1 Suburban Neighborhood 1
5.Location: 1133 MILTON ST BZA#0128-22
Owner: ERIC FRICKSON
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the 5' minimum side setback to 2' 6"
Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1
6.Location: 720 PARK AVE BZA#0129-22
Owner: JAN KRZYSZTOF SIKORSKI & MONICA M SIKORSKI
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the 5’ minimum side yard setback to 2’
Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1
City of South Bend BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
2 | Page
7.Location: 5910 DYLAN BZA#0132-22
Owner: WAGGONERS DAIRY FARM INC % CHESTER W WAGGONER
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) To allow off-street loading in the corner yard
Zoning: I Industrial
8.Location: 316 N OLIVE ST BZA#0123-22
Owner: AMANCIO RODRIGUEZ
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) from the 60% minimum transparency to the existing
transparency; and 2) to allow parking in the established front and corner yards
Special Exception: Vehicle Service, Minor
Zoning: NC Neighborhood Center
9.Location: 1702 WESTERN AVE BZA#0130-22
Owner: ANDREW J HOFFMAN & MICHAEL J & JOHN T
Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) to allow parking in the established front and corner yard; 2)
from the 5' minimum parking area screening to none; and 3) from 1 streetscape tree for every
30' to none
Special Exception: Retail Sales
Zoning: UF Urban Neighborhood Flex
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING:
1.Findings of Fact – August 1, 20222. Minutesa. August 1, 2022
b.August 5, 2022 Executive Session3.Other Business4. 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 3
Staff Report – BZA#0116-22 September 6, 2022
Property Information
Location: 4007 KIRBY CT
Owner: JOHN C & SHARON K ENGSTROM
Project Summary
Erected a fence with the finished side facing the interior of the lot.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) to allow a fence to be erected so the finished side of the fence faces the interior of
the lot
Site Location
Staff Recommendation
Based on the information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Board approve the variance as presented.
Staff Report – BZA#0116-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0116-22 September 6, 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
Granting the variance should not impact the public health, safety, or general welfare of the
community. Orienting the fence with the support structure facing out may pose security
concerns for the property owner, but since this is not the street facing side, it should not
impact the public.
(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
Orienting the fence with the support structures facing the neighbor may impact their property
values. However, constructing it with the finished side out also requires permission from the
neighbor. If the neighbor is unwilling to provide the permission, the assume the
consequence.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
Strict application would require the fence to be located 2' - 3' off the property line so as to
not encroach on the neighbors property when installing the fence. This creates awkward
strips of land between properties that may be difficult to maintain.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The petition is not requesting a variance for the portion of the fence that faces the street,
only the side where access is limited.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The hardship in placing a fence with the finished side out on the side and rear of the
property is the inability to get access from the neighbor. This is not a a hardship caused by
the current or former owner.
Analysis: The standards for the orientation of the fence are designed to protect the safety of
the property owner and the property value of the adjacent neighbor. However, the ability to
install a fence in this manner requires either permission from the neighbor or the fence to be
installed 2' - 3' off the adjacent property. The latter may result in areas difficult to maintain in the
future.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information available 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 3
Staff Report – BZA#0126-22 September 6, 2022
Property Information
Location: 1432 DUBAIL AVE
Owner: CHAD MICHAEL WARNOCK
Project Summary
Allow the construction of a garage.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) from the 5' minimum side yard setback to 0'
Site Location
Staff Recommendation
Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board approve the variance, subject to all active violations be rectified and all outstanding fines be paid.
Staff Report – BZA#0126-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0126-22 September 6, 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 approval of the variance should not be injurious to the public health, safety or general
welfare of the community, the neighborhood developed with a pattern of garages at or near
the setback.
(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 use and value of the area adjacent to the property should not be affected in a
substantially adverse manner. The neighborhood developed with a pattern of detached
garages being installed at or near the property line. This is not out of character for the
existing neighborhood.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
Due to the original placement of the house, a strict adherence to the side setback would
force the garage into an impractical location making maneuverability of the cars or trailers
difficult and dangerous.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The neighborhood developed with a pattern of detached garages being installed at or near
the property line. The physical constraints of the site make a 0' setback necessary.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The owner began to install the garage without a permit. In order to continue the
construction, a variance will be needed.
Analysis: Provided the owner can rectify the active building violations, building the garage at
the setback should not adversely impact the surrounding properties or the general welfare of the
community. The surrounding neighborhood developed with a pattern of detached garages being
installed at or near the property lines. Approving the variance would be in line with the
established neighborhood development.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board approve the variance, subject to all active violations be rectified and all
outstanding fines be paid.
Analysis & Recommendation
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3
Staff Report – BZA#0127-22 September 6, 2022
Property Information
Location: 1943 HUEY ST
Owner: ERIN REAL ESTATE INC, Ramona Cruz
Project Summary
To allow a 6' privacy fence around the home and back yard (adjacent lot).
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) from the 3' maximum fence height in an established front yard to 6'
Site Location
Staff Recommendation
Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board approve the variance as requested, subject to a 25' setback from Elmer St.
Staff Report – BZA#0127-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0127-22 September 6, 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
With proper setbacks, the proposed variance should not be injurious to the public health,
safety, morals and general welfare of the community.
(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
Like building setbacks, a proper setback of a fence (or limiting the height along Elmer St.), is
designed to maintain an open line of sight along a street frontage. Allowing a solid structure,
such as a privacy fence, that interrupts or blocks the established rear yard along Elmer St.
street can negatively impact the use and value of adjacent properties. It can also reduce the
comfort and safety of pedestrians using the sidewalk. With adequate setbacks established,
the proposed variance would allow use of the lot without causing the negative effects
previously described.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
The strict application of the ordinance would not allow for a fence over 4’ tall being installed
anywhere on this lot. There are no practical difficulties that prevent the fence from being
installed at the 4’ maximum height (if 50% open) or with a 25’ minimum setback as
recommended by the staff.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The variance requested is not the minimum necessary in order to allow for use of the
property. The staff suggests the privacy fence be setback a minimum of 25' from Elmer St.
in order to align with the required 25' minimum (front/rear) building setback for the property.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The current owner installed the fence without a building permit at an height that is not
allowed per the ordinance and oriented with the unfinished side facing the street. Approving
this variance would correct a hardship that was caused by the current owner of the property.
Analysis: While this particular property became a through lot when they purchased the
additional lot, that is not the pattern of development for the block or neighborhood. Approving a
privacy fence in the established front yard with a 25' setback from Elmer St. would allow the
property owner adequate use of the lot while meeting the intent of the Ordinance.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board approve the variance, subject to a 25' setback from Elmer St.
Analysis & Recommendation
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3
Staff Report – BZA#0128-22 September 6, 2022
Property Information
Location: 1133 MILTON ST
Owner: ERIC FRICKSON
Project Summary
To allow a garage/utility storage building.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) from the 5' minimum side setback to 2' 6"
Site Location
Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board deny the variance, as presented.
Staff Report – BZA#0128-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0128-22 September 6, 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 neighborhood has developed with a pattern of detached garages being installed at or
near the property line. If the garage was being installed in a similar manner as others in the
neighborhood, it would not affect the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the
community.
(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 use and value of the area adjacent to the property chould be affected in a adverse
manner. While it is common for garages to be constructed near the property line, there
added space is designed to ensure proper air, light, and fire protection.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
There are no practical difficulties that prevent the garage from being located in a code
compliant location.The garage is not located in line with the driveway, so there is nothing to
prevent it from being installed in the proper location.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The variance granted is not the minimum necessary since there is no practical difficulty.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The owner installed the garage without a building permit in an area that is not allowed per
the ordinance. Due to this, approving this variance would correct a hardship that was
caused by the current owner of the property.
Analysis: While there is a pattern of garages located on shared drives in the neighborhood,
which puts the garages at or near the setback, that is not the situation for this particular storage
building. There is no practical reason it cannot meet the side setback on the west.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board deny the variance, as presented.
Analysis & Recommendation
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3
Staff Report – BZA#0129-22 September 6, 2022
Property Information
Location: 720 PARK AVE
Owner: JAN KRZYSZTOF SIKORSKI & MONICA M SIKORSKI
Project Summary
To allow for the moving and relocation of an existing barn/garage.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) from the 5’ minimum side yard setback to 2’
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#0129-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0129-22 September 6, 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
Because the existing garage is being relocated it should not affect the general welfare of the
community. Allowing the setback variance will preserve the historical development pattern in
the 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 variance requested is for the structure that currently exists on site and would be
relocated so, this should not adversely affect the adjacent property.
(3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical
difficulties in the use of the property
Due to the original placement of the house, garage, and driveway a strict adherence to the
side setback would force the garage into an impractical location making maneuverability of
the cars difficult and dangerous.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The neighborhood developed with a pattern of structures being installed at or near the
property line. The physical constraints of the property, such as elevation chages and
driveway location, make a 2' setback necessary.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The driveway location has been located along the eastern property line since the home was
built. The current location and orientation of the garage make it difficult to access with a
modern car.
Analysis: The surrounding neighborhood developed with a pattern of detached garages being
installed at or near the property lines. Approving the variance would be in line with the
established neighborhood development.
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#0132-22 September 6, 2022
2022
Property Information
Location: 5910 DYLAN
Owner: WAGGONERS DAIRY FARM INC % CHESTER W WAGGONER, GLC Portage
Prairie V
Project Summary
To allow loading on the north and south sides of the building. The loading on the north is in the
corner yard.
Requested Action
Variance(s): 1) To allow off-street loading in the corner yard
Site Location
Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board
approve the variance, subject to installation of a Type 3 Buffer between the loading areas and the street.
Staff Report – BZA#0132-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0132-22 September 6, 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
The approval of the variance should not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals or
general welfare of the community. Only a small portion of the loading area will be between
the building and 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
The use and value of the area adjacent should not be affected in an adverse manner. The
petition site is located internally of an exclusively industrial area that produce similar traffic
patterns.
(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 practical difficulties because the property
has multiple street frontages. The industrial park serves users with high loading
requirements, which create challenges with site development.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The proposed loading area was located as far east as possible to avoid conflict with the
street and still allow for additional expansions. The portion located between the building and
the street is limited.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
The hardship is self created, however, the overall design of the industrial park was laid out
to prohibit access to Mayflower Rd. This created the need for an internal streets system and
the road dead ends in the industrial park. The only properties affected by this are other
industrial sites utilizing the access in the same manner.
Analysis: The overall design of the industrial park was laid out to prohibit access to Mayflower
Rd. This created the need for an internal streets system and the road dead ends in the industrial
park. The only properties affected by this are other industrial sites utilizing the access in the
same manner. The property has 3 frontages and limiting the site to one access would not allow
for an industrial use to use the site. The approval of the variance should not be injurious to the
public health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community. The surrounding properties
were all developed with two access drives along the same frontage.
Analysis & Recommendation
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
Staff Report – BZA#0132-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 4
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff
recommends the Board approve the variance, subject to installation of a Type 3 Buffer between the
loading areas and the street.
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 4
Staff Report – BZA#0123-22 September 6, 2022
Property Information
Location: 316 N OLIVE ST
Owner: AMANCIO RODRIGUEZ
Project Summary
Apply for a Special Exception use to allow for automotive repair
Requested Action
Special Exception: Vehicle Service, Minor
Variance(s): 1) from the 60% minimum transparency to the existing transparency
2) to allow parking in the established front and corner yards
Site Location
Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, Staff recommends the Board send
the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. The Staff recommends the Board approve the variances and presented.
Staff Report – BZA#0123-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0123-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 4
A Special Exception 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;
Provided the proper landscaping and screening are provided, the proposed use should not
be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, or general welfare of the community. The
site development standards in the Ordinance are established to limit potentially negative
impacts on the surrounding properties.
(2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or
property values therein;
The building was constructed in the 1960s to accommodate a gas station which could have
a more negative impact than vehicle repair, the approval of the Special Exception should not
injure or adversely affect the use of adjacent area.
(3) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it islocated and the land uses authorized therein;
The original development of this property was for a gas station. The NC Neighborhood
Center District allows vehicle repair as a Special Exception in order to evaluate the
appropriateness in specific areas. At this location, the reactivation of the vacant building to
its original use is consistent with the character of the district and surrounding area.
(4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The proposed use is consistent with City Plan (2006) Objective LU 2: Stimulate the
rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the property 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 Variances should not be injurious to the public health, safety and general
welfare of the community. These variances allow for the building to be used for its original
intent. To help mitigate any potential impact on the general community, proper parking area
screening and site landscaping should be upheld.
(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 use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance should not
be affected in a substantially adverse manner. The site has existed in this layout since the
1960s. While parking in the established front/corner yard is not preferred, the proper parking
Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
Staff Report – BZA#0123-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 4
area screening and site landscaping should reduce any negative impact on the surrounding
properties use and value.
(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 Zoning Ordinance would require the building to be demolished and
relocated in order to allow access and parking in a different configuration. The addition of
landscaping, however, could easily be accomplished.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The variance for parking location is the minimum necessary to operate the intended use in a
reasonable manner. Though parking is not required, providing some off-street parking would
be practical for the business. There is no practical difficulty for the requested landscaping
variances, so it is not the minimum necessary.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
This site has been in this configuration since the 1960s. The Zoning regulations at the time
did not prohibit parking in the front yard. Variance #1 is not correcting a hardship caused by
the current owner.
Analysis: The original intent of the building was for a gas station, though the Neighborhood
Center Zoning District outlines pedestrian orientated development, the use of Vehicle Service,
Minor is an allowed Special Exception in the district for such instances. Because the proposed
use should have less of an impact than the original use it is within the character of the district
and surrounding area.
The current building would have to be moved to another location on the building in order to
accommodate the onsite parking needs in a code compliant location. It is not practical to ask for
this to be done. The staff encourages the property owner to utilize available grant funds to
improve the transparency for the building.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, Staff
recommends the Board send the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable
recommendation. The Staff recommends the Board approve the variances and presented.
Analysis & Recommendation
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 4
Staff Report – BZA#0130-22
«DATE_APC_HEARINGFormatted»
Property Information
Location: 1702 WESTERN AVE
Owner: ANDREW J HOFFMAN & MICHAEL J & JOHN T
Project Summary
To allow an A&M Wireless, Inc (Boost Mobile Cellular Store) retail store in the existing building.
Requested Action
Special Exception: Retail Sales
Variance(s): 1) to allow parking in the established front and corner yard
2) from the 5' minimum parking area screening to none
3) from 1 streetscape tree for every 30' to none
Site Location
Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, Staff recommends the Board send
the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. The staff recommends the Board approve Variance #1 to allow parking in the established front yard, and deny variances #2 and #3 for landscaping.
September 6, 2022
Staff Report – BZA#0130-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4
Proposed Site Plan
Staff Report – BZA#0130-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 4
A Special Exception 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;
The proposed use is appropriate for the location and should not be injurious to the public
health, safety, or general welfare of the community.
(2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or
property values therein;
The building has been used for commercial purposes for decades, allowing retail sales at
this location should not adversely impact the use or value of the adjacent properties.
Reinvesting in the existing building should improve the site.
(3) The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is
located and the land uses authorized therein;
The site is located along a commercial corridor with a mix of commercial and residential
uses. The proposed use is consistent with the character of the UF Urban Flex District and
the Western Avenue Corridor.
(4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The proposed use is consistent with City Plan (2006) Objective ED 2: Retain existing
businesses and recruit new ones to the city. Allowing commercial retail use on this site will
help recruit a less intense business to the city in an appropriately located
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 Variance #1 should not be injurious to the public health, safety and general
welfare of the community. This variance allows for the building to be used for its original
intent. To help mitigate any potential impact on the general community, proper parking area
screening and site landscaping should be upheld.
(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 use and value of the area adjacent to the property included in the variance should not
be affected in a substantially adverse manner. The site has existed in this layout for almost
50 years. While parking in the established front/corner yard is not preferred, the proper
Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception
Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s)
Staff Report – BZA#0130-22 September 6, 2022
SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 4
parking area screening and site landscaping should reduce any negative impact on the
surrounding properties use and value.
(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 Zoning Ordinance would require the building to be demolished and
relocated in order to allow access and parking in a different configuration. The addition of
landscaping, however, could easily be accomplished.
(4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary
The variance for parking location is the minimum necessary to operate the intended use in a
reasonable manner. Though parking is not required, providing some off-street parking would
be practical for the business. There is no practical difficulty for the requested landscaping
variances, so it is not the minimum necessary.
(5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of
the property
This site has been in this configuration for almost 50 years. The Zoning regulations at the
time did not prohibit parking in the front yard. Variance #1 is not correcting a hardship
caused by the current owner. There are remedies that would allow the petitioner to install
the proper landscaping.
Analysis: The site is located along a major commercial corridor. A retail use at this location
should not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood.
The site contains no practical difficulties to warrant the variance for landscapingHowever the
current layout of the parking area, if brought into conformance would hinder the usability and
reactivation of the building.
Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, Staff
recommends the Board send the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable
recommendation. The staff recommends the Board approve Variance #1 to allow parking in the
established front yard, and deny variances #2 and #3 for landscaping
Analysis & Recommendation