Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.07.24 BZA Agenda Packet 1 | Page City of South Bend BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA Monday, October 7, 2024 - 4:00 p.m. County-City Building Fourth-Floor Council Chambers www.tinyurl.com/sbbza PUBLIC HEARING: 1.Location: 4444 W WESTERN AVE BZA#0289-24 Owner: SBW INVESTMENT LLC Requested Action: Variance(s): 1)From the maximum wall signage area on the north facade of 223.8 sq ft to 339 sq ft and from the maximum wall signage area on the west facade of 310 sq ft to 339 sq ft Zoning: S1 Urban Neighborhood 2 Withdrawal Requested BZA#0291-24 Owner: JOHN W & NANCY T LUCEY Requested Action: Variance(s): 1)From the minimumn 5’ rear yard setback for a carriage house to 1.7’ ft 2)From the minimun 5’ side yard setback for a carriage house to 1.65’ 3)From the maximum height of 18' to a height of 25' Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 3.Location: 559 RIVER AVE BZA#0292-24 Owner: ROBERT EDWARD MONTGOMERY Requested Action: Variance(s): 1)From the minimum 5’ side yard setback to 0’ for a garage addition Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 4.Location: 2205 CORBY BLVD BZA#0293-24 Owner: TAMMY PROPERTIES LLC Requested Action: Variance(s): 1)From the maximum height of 18’ to 22’ for an accessory structure Zoning: S1 Suburban Neighborhood 1 2.Location: 307 E POKAGON ST City of South Bend BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 2 | Page 5.Location: 1705 SOUTH BEND AVE BZA#0294-24 Owner: BRENNANS WALK HOLDINGS LLC Requested Action: Variance(s): 1)From the maximum height of a NC zoning district to 55’ to 66’2)From the maximum stories in a NC zoning district of 4 stories to 5 stories Zoning: NC Neighborhood Center BZA#0289-24 BZA#0295-24 6.Location: 809 WALNUT Owner: FRANCISCO JAVIER BARECENAS RODRIGUEZ Requested Action: Special Exception: Dwelling, Two Unit Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 7.Location: 812 LASALLE AVE Owner: KERRI KRAMER Requested Action: Special Exception: a Restaurant use Zoning: UF Urban Neighborhood Flex 8.Location: 623 OLIVE ST BZA#0285-24 Owner: LUIS CASTILLO AND FABIOLA GARCIA Requested Action: Special Exception: a Restaurant use Zoning: UF Urban Neighborhood Flex ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING: 1.Findings of Fact - July 1, 2024, August 5, 2024 and September 3, 20242. Minutes- July 1, 2024, August 5, 2024 and September 3, 20243.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 3 Staff Report – BZA#0291-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 307 POKAGON ST Owner: LUCEY JOHN W & NANCY T Project Summary The project consists of removal of the existing roof of a carriage house and the addition of a second floor and a two story addition to the south and east of the building. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the minimum 5' rear yard setback for a carriage house to 1.7' 2) From the minimum 5' side yard setback for a carriage house to 1.65' 3) From the maximum height of 18' to a height of 25' 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#0291-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0291-24 October 7, 2024 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 proposed variances do not match the built from of the surrounding area, which may impact the general welfare of the community. The existing legal non-conforming garage matches the scale and location of the surrounding area. Expanding the footprint and height of the structure within the minimum required setbacks would not meet the intent of the ordinance. (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 adjacent properties may be negatively impacted by the variances. Expanding the footprint and increasing the height of the building within the minimum required setbacks would not match the built form of the surrounding area and would not meet the intent of the ordinance. (3)The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property A strict application of the ordinance would not result in practical difficulties in the use of the property. With ample space in the rear yard, a carriage house could be built meeting the required setbacks. Further, with a 5' setback from the alley, the carriage house could be built to a height of 26' by right. (4)The variance granted is the minimum necessary The requested variances are not the minimum necessary. A zoning compliant carriage house could be built on the property. (5)The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property The variance corrects a hardship caused by the current owner, who is requesting the expansion of a legal non-conforming building. A code compliant carriage house could be built by right on the property with a height of 26'. Analysis: Expanding the footprint and height of a legal non-conforming structure within the minimum required setbacks would not meet the intent of the ordinance. The ample rear yard space could be utilized to build a carriage house meeting the required setbacks and the extensive nature of the proposed construction would essentially constitute a new building. With a 5' setback from the alley, the carriage house could be built to a height of 26' by right. Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board deny the variances as presented. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s) SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 4 Staff Report – BZA#0292-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 559 RIVER AVE Owner: MONTGOMERY ROBERT EDWARD Project Summary Demolish existing garage and rebuild in its current location. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the minimum 5' side yard setback to 0' for a garage addition 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#0292-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0292-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 4 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0292-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 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 should not be injurious to the general welfare of the community. The garage matches the built form of the surrounding area, where many accessory structures are located near or on the property line, including the garage of the adjacent property. (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 adjacent properties should not be affected in an adverse manner. The garage will match the built form of the surrounding area, will have the same footprint as the existing structure, and is sensitively designed in its height and drainage to limit impact on the neighboring property. (3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property The garage location and design responds to the layout of the existing house, the unique design requirements of a home in a historic overlay district, the built form of the surrounding area, and the fact that the parcel is a corner lot without alley access. Requiring the garage to be shifted from its current location would necessitate a reconfiguration of the existing house, covering multiple windows and reorienting an exterior door. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary The variance granted is the minimum necessary. The garage will be in the same location as the existing structure, matching the built form of the surrounding neighborhood in location and design. (5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property The variance responds to the existing layout of the house and the character of the surrounding area. Analysis: The garage location and design responds to the layout of the existing house, the unique design requirements of a home in a historic overlay district, the nature of the built form of the surrounding area, and the fact that the parcel is a corner lot without alley access. Requiring the garage to be shifted from its current location would necessitate a reconfiguration of the existing house, covering multiple windows and reorienting an exterior door. 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 3 Staff Report – BZA#0293-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 2205 CORBY BLVD Owner: TAMMY PROPERTIES LLC Project Summary Increase garage roof height to 22'. Requested Action Variance(s): 1)From the maximum height of 18' to 22' for an accessory structure 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#0293-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0293-24 October 7, 2024 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 may be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community because it would be inconsistent with the built form of the area and not meet the intent of the ordinance. (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 could be affected in an adverse manner if the variance was granted. Approving an accessory structure of that height would be inconsistent with the general scale of accessory structures in the area and contrary to the intent of the ordinance. (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 terms of this Chapter would not result in practical difficulties in the use of the property. The garage roof could have been modified in a way that conforms to the maximum height for accessory structures established in the Ordinance. (4)The variance granted is the minimum necessary Since there is no practical difficulty to overcome, the variance requested is not the minimum necessary. An aesthetic preference is not a hardship. (5)The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property There is no hardship on the property. The roof was modified without the appropriate approval and permits from the building department. Had the applicant applied for building permits, they would have been made aware of the applicable regulations. Analysis: There are no practical difficulties or unique characteristics that support the requested variance. The petitioner increased the height of the garage roof without first obtaining a building permit. Nothing prevents the roof from being constructed in conformance with the zoning ordinance. 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 7 Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 1705 SOUTH BEND AVE Owner: Brennans Walk Holdings, LLC Project Summary The site is planned to be developed as a mixed-use building with a small commercial tenant on the ground floor and 3 floors of condominium units above. The proposed variance would allow for a small gathering space, kitchenette, accessible restrooms, and storage on the rooftop. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the maximum height in an NC zoning district of 55' to 66' 2) From the maximum stories in an NC zoning district of 4 stories to 5 stories Site Location Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board approve the variances as presented. Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 7 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 7 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 7 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 5 of 7 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 6 of 7 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 variances should not be injurious to the general welfare of the community. With a limited footprint, the small rooftop amenity space will not be visible from the street. The space will be contextually appropriate, as the property lies adjacent to a highly trafficked thoroughfare and is surrounded on all sides by medium-to-high density housing/commercial spaces. (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 adjacent properties should not be adversely affected. The small rooftop amenity space will not be visible from the street and will be minimally visible from the rear of the property, limiting the impact on adjacent properties. (3)The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property This parcel is located adjacent to a major intersection of S.R. 23 and Angela Boulevard at the edge of the Notre Dame campus. The area supports a higher density project, but is limited to the NC Neighborhood Center zoning height of 4 stories and 55' that is targeted at nodal buildings in a more traditional neighborhood environment. Further, rooftop decks and elevator/stair towers are permitted in the zoning ordinance, but a strict application of the ordinance would not allow for this small rooftop amenity space that is not visible from the street. (4)The variance granted is the minimum necessary The variances granted are the minimum necessary. With a limited footprint, the additional height of the small rooftop space will not have an impact on the perceived massing of the building from the street and will be contextually appropriate. (5)The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner ofthe property Adjacent to a major intersection of South Bend Avenue and Angela Boulevard at the edge of the campus of Notre Dame, this area supports a higher density project, but is limited to the NC Neighborhood Center zoning height of 4 stories and 55' that is targeted at nodal buildings in a more traditional neighborhood environment. The variances would allow for a small rooftop amenity space that is not visible from the street, is contextually appropriate and is not inconsistent with the intent of the Ordinance. Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s) Staff Report – BZA#0294-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 7 of 7 Analysis: The variances will allow for a small rooftop amenity space that will not be visible from the street. The proposed space is contextually appropriate as the property lies adjacent to a wide and highly trafficked thoroughfare and is surrounded on all sides by medium-to-high density housing and commercial spaces. Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board approve the variances as presented. Analysis & Recommendation SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 4 Staff Report – BZA#0289-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 809 WALNUT Owner: RODRIGUEZ FRANCISCO JAVIER BARCENAS Project Summary Request a Special Exception to allow for the use of a duplex on a U1 zoned lot. Requested Action Special Exception: to allow for a Dwelling, Two Unit use Site Location Staff Recommendation Based on information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Board send the Special Exception to the Common Council with an unfavorable recommendation. Staff Report – BZA#0289-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0289-24 October 7, 2024 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; Approval of the use may be injurious to the health, safety, moral sand general welfare of the community. The one unit dwelling was converted without proper approval to a two unit dwelling and substantial work was done to the exterior and interior of the building without permits or approval by the relevant departments. (2)The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; The proposed use may injure or adversely impact the use and value of adjacent properties as the one unit dwelling was converted without proper approval to a two unit dwelling. The porch was demolished, exterior stone was removed, windows and roof were replaced, and a second door was added without appropriate permits or review. (3)The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located and the land uses authorized therein; A two unit dwelling could be contextually appropriate given the mixed use nature of the surrounding neighborhood and the range of proximate zoning districts including NC Neighborhood Center, UF Urban Neighborhood Flex, and a stretch of U2 Urban Neighborhood 2 parcels along Sample Street to the south. However, preliminary review is necessary to ensure that a converted two unit dwelling will be consistent with the built form of the surrounding neighborhood, and this property has been converted without initial staff review or permits. (4)The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. A well converted two unit dwelling is consistent with the City Plan, South Bend Comprehensive Plan (2006) Objective H1.1: Encourage residential developments tocontain a mix of housing types, densities, price ranges, and amenities. In its current state, the converted two unit dwelling does not meet Objective H 2: Maintain South Bend's housing stock in good condition. Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception Staff Report – BZA#0289-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 4 of 4 Analysis: This one unit dwelling was converted without proper approval to a two unit dwelling and substantial work was done to the exterior and interior of the building without permits or approval by the relevant departments. While a duplex can be contextually appropriate on a U1 zoned parcel, it must be done carefully to retain the look and character of a one-unit dwelling that matches the built form of the surrounding neighborhood. This remodel, done without permits, has significantly altered the design of the house, including the removal of the front porch and stone siding, reconfiguration of the windows, and the addition of a second front door oriented to the street. Staff Recommendation: Based on information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Plan Commission send the Special Exception to the Common Council with an unfavorable recommendation. Analysis & Recommendation SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3 Staff Report – BZA#0295-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 812 LASALLE AVE Owner: KRAMER KERRI A Project Summary Special exception for a restaurant use Requested Action Special Exception: a Restaurant use Site Location Staff Recommendation Based on the information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Plan Commission send the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Staff Report – BZA#0295-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0295-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 3 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 should not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare as any proposed restaurant will meet all applicable building and fire safety codes. (2) The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; The proposed use should not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values. The building was designed and has historically been utilized as retail/service space and the introduction of a small restaurant will activate the building and enhance the neighborhood by offering a new local amenity. (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 parcel is located on busy LaSalle Avenue, two blocks west of The South Bend Clinic, and across the street from the St. Joseph High School football field. The proposed use as a small scale restaurant is consistent with the surrounding traditional neighborhood development pattern and will serve to enhance the area. (4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with City Plan (2006), Objective LU2.2: Pursue a mix of land uses along major corridors and other locations identified on the Future Land Use Map. While not located within the Northeast Neighborhood Plan boundaries, the proposed restaurant use is immediately adjacent to it and compatible with the plan. Analysis: The building was designed and has historically been utilized as retail/service space. Introducing a restaurant will activate the building and enhance the neighborhood by offering a new local amenity. Staff Recommendation: Based on the information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Plan Commission send the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3 Staff Report – BZA#0285-24 October 7, 2024 Property Information Location: 623 OLIVE ST Owner: LUIS CASTILLO AND FABIOLA GARCIA Project Summary The project is that the products sold are for the community since they are all healthy and that all the people who want to obtain them have access at this area. Requested Action Special Exception: a Restaurant use Site Location Staff Recommendation Based on information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Plan Commission send the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Staff Report – BZA#0285-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0285-24 October 7, 2024 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 3 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 should not be injurious to the public health, safety, comfort, community moral standards, convenience or general welfare. The neighborhood scale restaurant space primarily serving healthy shakes and smoothies will aim to serve local patrons with quality health products. (2)The proposed use will not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values therein; The proposed use should not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values. The building was designed and has historically been utilized as a corner retail/service space. The introduction of a neighborhood oriented restaurant space will enhance the surrounding area by providing a new local amenity. (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 parcel is located at a prominent intersection in a compact neighborhood, four blocks south of the Western Avenue corridor. The proposed use as a small scale restaurant space is consistent with the surrounding traditional neighborhood development pattern and will serve to enhance the area. (4)The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with City Plan (2006), Objective LU2.2: Pursue a mix of land uses along major corridors and other locations identified on the Future Land Use Map. The parcel fronts a small commercial node that serves the community in a traditional neighborhood development pattern. Analysis: The building was designed and has historically been utilized as a corner retail/service space. The neighborhood scale restaurant space, primarily serving healthy shakes and smoothies, will aim to serve local patrons with quality health products and offer a new local amenity. Staff Recommendation: Based on information available prior to the public hearing, the Staff recommends the Plan Commission send the Special Exception to the Common Council with a favorable recommendation. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception