Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-06-20 BZA Agenda Packet 1 | P a g e City of South Bend BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS AGENDA Monday, July 6, 2020 - 4:00 p.m. County-City Building Fourth-Floor Council Chambers PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Location: 211 EDDY ST BZA#0015-20 Owner: EDDY PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT LLC (The South Bend Clinic) Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) From the maximum 1 sign per building with a maximum of 40 sq.ft. to 3 signs on the north elevation totaling 512 sq.ft., 1 sign on the east totaling 73 sq.ft.; 1 sign on the south elevation totaling 64 sq.ft., and 1 sign on the east elevation totaling 63 sq.ft. Zoning: NC Neighborhood Center 2. Location: 1223 THOMAS ST and 1227 THOMAS ST BZA#0009-20 Owner: MARLENE STEVENS Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) To allow an accessory use without a primary structure Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 3. Location: 125 S. ESTHER BZA#0017-20 Owner: JUSTIN K HANIG AND ERIN LINDER Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) From the 3' maximum fence height in an established corner yard to a 6' on the west property line Zoning: S1 Suburban Neighborhood 1 4. Location: 743 Portage Ave BZA#0018-20 Owner: CARLOS A CENTELLAS CAMACHO AND ALLISON MAE BEYER Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) From the 3' maximum fence height in an established front and corner yard to a 4' Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 5. Location: 821 CUSHING AND 901 PORTAGE BZA#0019-20 Owner: NEAR NORTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD INC Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) From the 48' maximum width of an apartment house to 54' Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 6. Location: 1017 DEMAUDE AVE BZA#0020-20 Owner: NEAR NORTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD, INC Requested Action: Special Use: a 2 unit dwelling in a U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 District Zoning: U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 City of South Bend BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS 2 | P a g e 7. Location: 802 S. LAFAYETTE BLVD BZA#0021-20 Owner: DEPARTMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT CITY OF SOUTH BEND Requested Action: Variance(s): 1) From the required Type 3 Landscape Buffer to none on the north and east Zoning: I Industrial ITEMS NOT REQUIRING A PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Findings of Fact 2. Minutes 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#0015-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: 211 EDDY ST Owner: EDDY PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT LLC (The South Bend Clinic) Project Summary To allow new signs for the South Bend Clinic facility. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the maximum 1 sign per building with a maximum of 40 sq.ft. to 3 signs on the north elevation totaling 512 sq.ft., 1 sign on the east totaling 73 sq.ft.; 1 sign on the south elevation totaling 64 sq.ft., and 1 sign on the east elevation totaling 63 sq.ft. Site Location Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board approve the variances, subject to a maximum of 2 signs totaling 380 sq.ft. on the northern elevation. Staff Report – BZA#0015-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 4 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0015-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 4 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0015-20 July 6, 2020 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 proposed signs will not be injurious to the public health and safety 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 Because of the relative size of the signs in relation to the size of the building, the use and value of adjacent properties should not be 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 Northeast Neighborhood Zoning Overlay would only allow a small 40 square foot sign for this entire building. The size of the building and the need to identify the additional tenant (Riley Children's Hospital) create a practical difficulty in complying with the strict terms of the Ordinance. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary With the exception of Sign F (the electronic message center) on the north elevation, the proposed signs are the minimum necessary to update the existing signs and appropriately identify the addition of Riley Children's Hospital to the facility. (5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property The Northeast Neighborhood Zoning Overlay was not in place at the time the building was constructed and did not contemplate multiple tenants within one building or a building of this size and nature. Analysis: Allowing The South Bend Clinic to replace their existing signs and add a sign identifying Riley Children's Hospital will ensure proper identification of the facility while meeting the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board approve the variances, subject to a maximum of 2 signs totaling 380 sq.ft. on the northern elevation. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s) SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3 Staff Report – BZA#0009-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: 1223 THOMAS ST and 1227 THOMAS ST Owner: MARLENE STEVENS Project Summary To allow a privacy fence on a property without a primary structure. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) To allow an accessory use without a primary structure Site Location Staff Recommendation Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board deny the variance as requested. Staff Report – BZA#0009-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0009-20 July 6, 2020 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 Approval of the variances could be injurious to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community. The addition of the fence directly perpendicular to the alley could lead to visual issues entering or exiting they alley and has been put in place to screen a use not allowed in this district. (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 would be affected in an adverse manner due to the fence being placed to screen junk and debris that violates the property maintenance ordinance of the City. Allowing a privacy fence to secure a lot that does not contain a primary structure promotes uses of the property in a manner not consistent with the zoning ordinance and other City ordinances. (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 the Zoning Ordinance would not result in practical difficulties in the use of the property, the property could still be used without a privacy fence. The petitioner presented no justification for the requested variance. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary The petitioner is not asking for the minimum necessary, the request is for a 6' privacy fence on a lot without any type of other structure. (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 that supports the granting of a variance. Analysis: Allowing a privacy fence on a property that does not contain a primary structure encourages use of the property in a manner that violates the Zoning Ordinance and other ordinances within the City. Staff Recommendation: Based on the information provided prior to the public hearing, the staff recommends the Board deny the variance as requested. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s) SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3 Staff Report – BZA#0017-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: 125 S. ESTHER Owner: JUSTIN K HANIG AND ERIN LINDER Project Summary 6' wood privacy fence along north and west sides of property with 4' (70% open) aluminum fence on east and south sides of property. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the 3' maximum fence height in an established corner yard to a 6' on the west property line 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#0017-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0017-20 July 6, 2020 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 While out of character with the area, approval of this variance would not be injurious to the public health or safety 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 proposed fence is out of character with the area, which could have an impact on the value of surrounding properties. Houses in this neighborhood are setback a considerable distance with the expectation that fences will not be placed past the houses footprint. No other houses in the immediate vicinity have fences in front of the house footprint. The property to the west of the subject property will be impacted in an adverse way if the variance is granted by placing a solid structure along their property line. (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 property can still be secured with a shorter fence that does not prohibit security or privacy of the property. Aesthetic preference is not a practical difficulty. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary The variance asked for is not the minimum necessary. As part of this project, the petitioner is using a code compliant fence along the corner lot line, which could be used in this portion of the property as well. (5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property There is not hardship on the property. The vegetation located on the west end of the property would have been planted by the former or current owner of the property. Analysis: There are no practical difficulties for the petitioner which would necessitate a 6' fence in this location. The proposed fence is out of character for the area and not consistent with the intent of the ordinances. A 4' aluminum 70% opening fence already installed on the east and the south could be extended the 13' requested to satisfy the desired goals of the petitioner. 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#0018-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: 743 Portage Ave Owner: CARLOS A CENTELLAS CAMACHO AND ALLISON MAE BEYER Project Summary Installing a new fence. It will go around the entire perimeter of the large property and extend out from the sides of the house to the neighbor's fence on one side and to the perimeter fence on the other. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the 3' maximum fence height in an established front and corner yard to a 4' 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 Engineering approval of the clear sight area. Staff Report – BZA#0018-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0018-20 July 6, 2020 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 sight distancing at the intersection of Portage and Scott Street, the proposed fence should not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The added 1' of height will help secure the property safely which should increase the safety and public health of both the residents and 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 proposed fence is consistent with the character of the area and should not adversely affect the use or value of adjacent properties. (3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property Due to the triangular shape of the property, the newly constructed house had to be sited a significant distance from the intersection of the Portage and Scott Streets. Strict application would allow a very small area that can be secured with a taller fence. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary The variance requested is the minimum necessary to provide the security and safety the petitioners seek while maintaining the character of the area. While the proposed fence does not meet the 70% open requirement for a 4' fence, it is still mostly open with a still that is greater than 50% open. (5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property The triangular shape of the property was established by the direction of the public right-of- ways. This was not caused by any former or current owner. Analysis: The triangular shape of the property creates a practical difficult for the property. The requested variance provides security to the property in a reasonable manner consistent with 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 as requested, subject to Engineering approval of the clear sight area. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Variance(s) SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3 Staff Report – BZA#0019-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: Owner: 821 CUSHING and 901 PORTAGE AVE NEAR NORTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD, INC Project Summary Proposed new construction of a four-unit rental property, as part of neighborhood development, to remain owned and managed by the NNN. The two properties, prior to demolition, contained two single family homes. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the 48' maximum width of an apartment house to 54' 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#0019-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0019-20 July 6, 2020 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 A various to increase the maximum width of an apartment house should have no impact on 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 proposed apartment house has been designed with the intent to blend in with current neighborhood context. The lot is located adjacent to Portage avenue, a neighborhood corridor street, which will allow for the larger structure. Because this is a residential use, the proposed apartment house should not adversely affect the use or value of the adjacent properties. (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 a building that does not respond to the context of buildings and uses along Portage Avenue. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary The proposed design for the apartment has four units in the building. The design has taken care to provide needed space for these units while keeping the building to the minimum width necessary. (5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property The maximum width of an apartment house is a new standard within the ordinance. The previous ordinance would not have limited the size of the building. The lot location and configuration was not created by the previous or current 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 multi-unit dwelling adjacent to a major corridor in the City. 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#0020-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: 1017 DEMAUDE AVE Owner: Near Northwest Neighborhood, Inc Project Summary Proposed new construction of a duplex, as part of neighborhood development, to remain owned and managed by the NNN. Requested Action Special Exception: a 2 unit dwelling in a U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 District 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 as presented. Staff Report – BZA#0020-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0020-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 of 3 The petitioner is seeking a Special Use to allow: A 2 unit dwelling in a U1 Urban Neighborhood 1 District 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 Special Exception will not be injurious to the public health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community. The scale of the proposed duplex is comparable to a single family home and will be used for residential use. Reactivating a vacant lot will provide more residents to the neighborhood which will increase safety and the 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; Adding a duplex on a currently vacant lot adjacent to parcels zoned NC Neighborhood Center should not injure or adversely affect the use of the adjacent area or property values. The addition of the duplex will further the work being done in the neighborhood to provide more residential opportunities. New construction that fits the scale of the current residential properties should strengthen nearby property values. (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 current context of the neighborhood provides a mix of single family homes, duplexes and small commercial properties along Portage Ave. This duplex will be consistent with the character of the district and neighborhood in both uses and style of construction. (4) The proposed use is compatible with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan recommends "Encourage residential developments to contain a mix of housing types, densities, price ranges, and amenities. (Policy H1.1) This proposed duplex is in line with the recommendation from the Comprehensive Plan by helping establish a mix of housing types. Analysis: The proposed construction of a duplex will further complement the wide range of development occurring currently in the NNN, as well as providing more diverse housing types for residents. 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 as presented. Analysis & Recommendation Criteria for Decision Making: Special Exception SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 1 of 3 Staff Report – BZA#0021-20 July 6, 2020 Property Information Location: 802 S. LAFAYETTE BLVD Owner: DEPARTMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT CITY OF SOUTH BEND Project Summary Site Development for the placement of an unmanned precast concrete communication shelter to house MetroNet's Fiber Optic Network Gear to provide GigE Internet services throughout South Bend. Requested Action Variance(s): 1) From the required Type 3 Landscape Buffer to none on the north and east 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#0021-20 July 6, 2020 SOUTH BEND BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 of 3 Proposed Site Plan Staff Report – BZA#0021-20 July 6, 2020 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 Approval of the 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 The property is surrounded on three sides by properties zoned I Industrial, with the other side zoned C Commercial. None of the properties should be adversely affected by a lack of buffering, because the site is located in an area that is primarily industrial in nature. (3) The strict application of the terms of this Chapter would result in practical difficulties in the use of the property Overhead utility lines are located on the north, along the vacated Franklin Street, and along the vacated alley to the east. These utilities, as well as the small lot size, create a practical difficulty in complying with the evergreen buffer required. (4) The variance granted is the minimum necessary The petitioner is requesting a variance from the required buffering on two sides of the property. The other side, where there are not utilities and space for installation, will comply with the ordinance. (5) The variance does not correct a hardship cause by a former or current owner of the property The utilities were installed when the site was bordered on two sides by public right-of-way. The installation of the utility lines and vacation of the street were not caused by the current owner of the property. Analysis: The property is located in a primarily industrial area. The overhead power lines limit the ability to install trees, and the use of the adjacent properties is not such that the screening is necessary. 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)