Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA March 25, 2025 MINUTES OF THE JEFFERSONVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS March 25, 2025 Call to Order Board President Mike McCutcheon calls to order the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting. It is Tuesday, March 25, 2025, it is 6:30 pm in the City Council Chambers, Jeffersonville City Hall, 500 Quartermaster Ct., Jeffersonville, Indiana. The meeting was held in person and streamed live on the City's website and City's Facebook page. Roll Call Board President Mike McCutcheon and board members Duard Avery, Kelli Jones, David Stinson, and Dennis Hill were present in the City Council Chambers. Also present were Planning & Zoning Attorney Les Merkley, Planning and Zoning Director Chad Reischl and Secretary Shane Shaughnessy, and Planner Shelby Walsh. (Secretary's Note: All plat maps, public letters, photos, etc. presented before the Plan Commission on this date can be found in the office of Planning & Zoning.) Approval of Minutes Approval of the minutes from February 25, 2025. Mr. Hill made a motion to approve the March 25, 2025 minutes, seconded by Mr. Stenson. Roll Call vote. Motion passed 5-0. Approval of Findings of Fact Approval of the Findings of Fact from February 25, 2025. Mr. Stenson made a motion to approve the March 25, 2025 findings of fact, seconded by Ms. Jones. Roll Call vote. Motion passed 5-0. Approval of the Docket Motion to approve the agenda made by Mr. Stenson, seconded by Ms. Jones. Roll call vote. Motion passed 5-0. Oath Les Merkley administered the oath. When you speak, please state your name and acknowledge you took the oath. Old Business None New Business BZA-25-08 Development Standards Variance Jamison Wright filed a Development Standards Variance for the property located at 2307 Elk Pointe Boulevard. The applicant requests variances from the standards for minimum rear yard setback. The property is zoned R1 (Single Family Residential — Large Lot). The docket number 4 is BZA-25-08. 4 Jamison Wright of 217 Riverwood Drive stated he took the oath and said he's building a single family home on the lot. He said that he has laid out the house as best as possible for the shape of the lot but that the house would be about 6 feet into the rear setback. Chad Reischl said that the lot is unusually shaped and that the rear neighbor has provided a letter in support of the variance and that the neighbor had also sold some property to Mr. Wright which decreased the amount of the requested variance. He said that the neighbor had requested some arbor vitae to be planted along the rear of the property for privacy. Open public comment No comment Closed public comment Ms. Jones asked if Mr. Wright was agreeable to the condition that he plant the arbor vitae along the rear of the property as was requested by the neighbor to which Mr. Wright responded that he would do that. Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: The variance of the development standards will 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 strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in a practical difficulty. This situation shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application with the condition that arbor vitae be planted along the rear of the property. So ordered this 25th day of March, 2025. BZA-25-09 Development Standards Variance Ashley Wallis filed a Development Standards Variance for the property located at 3414 E. 10th Street. The applicant requests variances from the standards for parking distribution and maximum parking requirements. The property is zoned C2 (Commercial — Large Scale). The docket number is BZA-25-09. Ashley Wallis with Bayer Becker and Ken Colliander with Chase Bank stated they took the oath. Ms. Wallis said they are proposing a new Chase Bank on the property and due to the property being a corner lot, they are proposing more than 80% of the proposed parking be in the front yard and that the total number of parking spaces be above the maximum allowable number required. Mr. Reischl stated that Staff prefers the parking to be located to the side or rear but in this case, forcing the parking to the side or rear would likely mean that the building's drive thru lanes would face 10th Street instead of the front façade and that the variances were reasonable to make the development happen. 2 Open public comment No comment Closed public comment Ms. Jones stated she was familiar with the site and asked the applicants what they were doing with the streams that go across the site. Ms. Wallis stated that this was one lot of a larger development and that one possible way to manage the stormwater would be to put it into a detention basin. Ms. Jones said that they would need to get Federal and local approvals to do that work and asked if they should put a condition on the approval that they go through the proper permitting channels. Mr. Reischl said that is a topographically-challenged site and that they would have to do some grading to make this happen. Mr. Avery said they had approved sites nearby that would also have to go through a similar process. Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: t The variance of the development standards will 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. 3 The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in a practical difficulty. This situation shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application with Ms. Jones abstaining from voting for all three findings. So ordered this 25th day of March, 2025. BZA-25-10 Special Exception Jessica Carrier filed a Special Exception for the property located at 1527 Nole Drive. The applicant requests to establish a Home Occupation #2 on the property. The property is zoned R1 (Single Family Residential — Large Lot). The docket number is BZA-25-10. Jessica Carrier of 1517 Nole Drive and Nathan Ehringer, the owner of the property, stated they took the oath. Ms. Carrier stated she is a licensed massage therapist and she would like to use the property to generate additional income on her days off by seeing clients. She said she split the front living room and put in a door to separate it from the rest of the house. Mr. Reischl stated that Staff is generally in support of home occupations as long as they meet the standards. When an occupation generates traffic to the house, it becomes a Home Occupation #2 which requires the Special Exception. Staff feels that as long as the standards are followed, this would not be a huge issue. Open public comment Peggy Carmichael, a neighbor of the applicant, stated the applicant is a wonderful lady and she approves of the request. Closed public comment 3 Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: 1. The special exception will not be injurious to the public health, safety, moral, and general welfare of the community; and 2. The requirements and development standards for the requested use prescribed by this Ordinance will be met; and 3. Granting the special exception will not subvert the general purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and will not permanently injure other property and uses in the same district; and 4. The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district therein, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, and the Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application. So ordered this 25th of March, 2025. BZA-25-11 Special Exception Danielle Bowen filed a Special Exception for the property located at 2010 Cherry Hill Court. The applicant requests to establish an Accessory Dwelling Unit on the property. The property is zoned R1 (Single Family Residential — Large Lot). The docket number is BZA-25-11. Danielle and Terry Bowen of 2010 Cherry Hill Court stated they took the oath. Ms. Bowen said they wanted to attach an accessory dwelling unit to their existing pool house to make room for her mother so she can take care of her as she ages. Mr. Reischl stated that Staff typically doesn't have issues with the establishment of accessory dwelling units in residential areas. He said the proposal is considerably larger than the standards and would contain more than one bedroom. He said that ADUs are typically much smaller and would need a number of variances to be approved as proposed which would follow this docket item. He said that one of the standards for Special Exceptions is that all other development standards be met which would not be the case as they are asking for a variance from some of those standards. He stated that Staff had received a large number of letters from the neighborhood in opposition to the proposal and those letters had been sent to the Plan Commission. Open public comment Marty Chalfant of 2304 St. Andrews Way stated he took the oath and said he was in opposition to the proposal as the ADU would essentially be a second house on the lot and adding impervious surface would exacerbate issues with flooding in the area. He said that the proposal would not meet the intents of the R1 zoning district, that granting the Special Exception would set precedent for future ADU requests, and that housing values would be negatively impacted by the proposal. He said there are no manufactured homes in the neighborhood and that allowing one would go against the UDO and Comprehensive Plan. Bill Burns of 2014 St. Andrews Road stated he took the oath and said that he was opposed to the proposal as the structure is too large to complement a single family home. He said that ADUs should be secondary in scale and function and that a structure of this size would be out of character with the area and zoning district. He said it would create problems with parking, 4 privacy, and would alter the overall aesthetics of the surroundings. Additionally, there is also parking issues on the lot because of the presence of an RV and numerous other vehicles. Closed public comment Ms. Bowen stated that many of the comments were from people not on her street, that it would not be a manufactured home, that the ADU wouldn't have three bedrooms. She said that the layout she had provided Staff was a standard model but was not the model she was planning on buying. She said her backyard was fully fenced in and the ADU would not be visible. She said that all of the water in the area drains to her property and that adding the ADU wouldn't cause drainage issues for others. She said that they do not have an RV as was previously mentioned. She said that her backyard was quite large and that the ADU would be only a small part of it. She said that she wants the ADU to be a home for her mother and that she was not going to rent it out. She said that the ADU would be at least 10 feet from the fences that surround the property and that it wouldn't affect the neighbors negatively. Mr. Bowen stated that the neighbor behind them built a barn that was four times the size of the ADU and there were no complaints about it or flooding issues. He said they had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars fixing his house due to flooding issues and that adding the ADU would help control those issues. Ms. Jones asked how many bedrooms would be in the ADU which Ms. Bowen stated that at the bottom of the diagram that was provided, there was text stating that it was an optional layout and that it was subject to change and said that they were only proposing two bedrooms. Ms. Jones asked about parking and that the aerial on Apple Maps showed an RV, a boat, and numerous vehicles on the lot and in front of the home. The applicants stated those photos are very old and are not what is currently there. Ms. Jones said she has some concerns with granting the ADU because of the potential for a future owner of the property to rent it out and exacerbate the parking issues. Mr. Bowen said their driveway is very short but they were considering bringing the driveway into the backyard as part of building the ADU. He said he had gotten rid of his RV, boat, and cars to help please the neighbors. Mr. Avery said that because they are at the end of a cul-de-sac it's not unusual to see cars parked out front and that they essentially have a double lot with a lot of room in the backyard. Mr. Stenson asked what the ADU would look like to which Ms. Bowen said it would look similar with the same color and same roof. Mr. Stenson said he had concerns with the size as it would be essentially adding another home to the lot. Ms. Jones said she doesn't have issues with the ADU, but did have issues with the variances being requested which is the next item on the docket. Mr. Hill asked if the facade of the ADU would be identical to the facade of the house which the applicants confirmed. Ms. Bowen said it would be the same color, the same siding, with the brick facade at the bottom, and the same roof. Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: 1. The special exception will not be injurious to the public health, safety, moral, and general welfare of the community; and 2. The requirements and development standards for the requested use prescribed by this Ordinance will be met; and 5 3. Granting the special exception will not subvert the general purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and will not permanently injure other property and uses in the same district; and 4. The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district therein, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, and the Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application with Mr. Stenson in opposition to all four findings. So ordered this 25th of March, 2025. BZA-25-12 Development Standards Variance Danielle Bowen filed a Development Standards Variance for the property located at 2010 Cherry Hill Court The applicant requests variances from the standards for Accessory Dwelling Units. The property is zoned R1 (Single Family Residential — Large Lot). The docket number is BZA-25-12. Danielle and Terry Bowen of 2010 Cherry Hill Court stated they took the oath. Mr. McCutcheon said they were seeking variances for the size of the proposed structure, the number of bedrooms, that it was a manufactured home being used as an ADU, and for the facade treatment. Ms. Bowen said that they didn't have anything to add as these variances had been discussed during the previous docket item. Mr. Reischl stated that these are a lot of variances being requested and that Staff wasn't in support of granting all of these variances but that it is up to the BZA to decide. Open public comment Karen Ellmers of 2304 St. Andrews Road said she took the oath and said that she was in opposition to granting so many variances for this proposal. She said she didn't want to set a precedent for everyone in the neighborhood to be able to add such large units. Bill Burns of 2014 St. Andrews Road stated he took the oath and said he was opposed to all of the variances that were being requested and that his previous statement stands in this case as well. Marty Chalfant of 2304 St. Andrews Way stated he took the oath and said the imperious surface would cause more problems with flooding in the area. He said there is no practical difficulty and is self-imposed as the applicant can follow the UDO standards and said what is being proposed is no where close to the standards and would set a bad precedent. Closed public comment Ms. Bowen said that she chose this particular ADU model because of its setup and its cost. She said the one they chose was a smaller option that was not 1100 square feet but one that is only 24'x36'. Mr. McCutcheon said that this Board does not address the flooding issue. He said the presentation was somewhat confusing as what was provided shows three bedrooms and he wasn't sure if the existing pool house was included in the overall square footage. She said she was told that she could put it as an extension of the pool house in order to not go over the maximum number of accessory structures. Ms. Jones said that what they provided showed the 1100 square feet and called the ADU a manufactured home. Ms. Bowen said that its not a manufactured home, but a modular one. Ms. 6 Jones said that although the variance was being proposed as 1100 square feet with 3 bedrooms clad in siding, that doesn't match the testimony of the applicants. She suggests that the applicants talk with Mr. Reischl to clarify what is being proposed and come back to the Board. The applicants said they were not builders and that this was the first time they were trying to do something like this. Ms. Jones asked Mr. Reischl what the best way to go forward would be. Mr. Reischl said that if the applicants have more or additional information, they could present that at the next meeting. Mr. Merkley said he was concerned about setting precedent with these variances and that he was unaware of any such significant variances being passed for ADUs since he's been with the City. Mr. Merkley asked if this ADU would be reviewed by the Drainage Board which Mr. Reischl said that it probably wouldn't as accessory structures aren't usually reviewed. The applicants requested to table the matter to the next meeting. Ms. Jones made a motion to accept tabling the matter, seconded by Mr. Stinson. Roll call vote. Motion passed 5-0. BZA-25-13 Development Standards Variance David Virgin filed a Development Standards Variance for the property located at 4104 Patricia Drive. The applicant requests variances from the standards for maximum accessory structure size. The property is zoned R1 (Single Family Residential — Large Lot). The docket number is BZA-25-13. David Virgin of 4104 Patricia Drive stated he took the oath and said that he is wanting to build a pole barn that would be 2800 square feet and that he has three acres of property. He said his neighbors have similarly sized pole barns. Mr. Reischl said this neighborhood has very large lots and there are a number of large pole barns and garages in the area. He said that as long as the neighbors are ok with the proposal that it shouldn't be a huge issue. Open public comment No comment Closed public comment Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: 1 The variance of the development standards will 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. 3 The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in a practical difficulty. This situation shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application. So ordered this 25'h of March, 2025. BZA-25-14 Special Exception 7 David and Kymberli Quinn filed a Special Exception for the property located at 423 W. Maple Street. The applicant requests to establish a Short-Term Rental on the property. The property is zoned CN (Commercial— Neighborhood). The docket number is BZA-25-14. Kymberli Quinn stated they took the oath and said she owns the property. She said she bought the home to use part time and would like to use it a couple of times a month as a short-term rental to help pay it off. She said they limited stays to just 4 adults. Mr. Reischl said this is similar to a case that was on last month's docket and that Staff did not have issues. Open public comment No comment Closed public comment Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: 1. The special exception will not be injurious to the public health, safety, moral, and general welfare of the community; and 2. The requirements and development standards for the requested use prescribed by this Ordinance will be met; and 3. Granting the special exception will not subvert the general purposes of the Zoning Ordinance and will not permanently injure other property and uses in the same district; and 4. The proposed use will be consistent with the character of the district therein, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance, and the Jeffersonville Comprehensive Plan. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application. So ordered this 25th of March, 2025 BZA-25-15 Development Standards Variance Luke Etheridge filed a Development Standards Variance for the property located at 505 Allison Lane. The applicant requests variances from the standards for minimum front yard setbacks. The property is zoned R1 (Single Family Residential — Small Lot). The docket number is BZA- 25-15. John McCoy, with JLM Engineering, stated he took the oath and said that he is on behalf of the applicants. He said that they are proposing to build a home on the lot and is requesting a 40 foot front yard setback in order to create a small backyard for the house. Mr. Reischl said that when a new home goes into a new subdivision, the front yard setback can be determined by the zone district, the setback of adjacent homes, or from the plat's build line. The build line on the plat is 50 feet which is what was chosen to meet what is already built in the area. However, these setback are significantly larger than most of what is in Jeffersonville and said that the proposed structure's facade articulation will help lessen the impact of the structure if it's 10 feet closer to the road. Open public comment 8 No comment Closed public comment Move to findings The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: t The variance of the development standards will 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. 3 The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in a practical difficulty. This situation shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application. So ordered this 25th of March, 2025. BZA-25-16 Development Standards Variance The Koetter Group filed a Development Standards Variance for the property located at 4081 Town Center Boulevard Town Center Boulevard. The applicant requests variances from the standards for minimum side yard setbacks and maximum impervious lot coverage. The property is zoned PD (Planned Development). The docket number is BZA-25-16. Tom Jones, with Koetter, stated he took the oath and said they are building a new 50,000 square foot store for Dick's Sporting Goods as a continuation of the Town Center South development. He said that they are trying to maximize the property and are going to have more impervious area that what is allowed and that because of differences in property owners, a setback variance is needed to connect the proposed Dick's to a future building. Mr. Reischl said that the setback variance isn't something that Staff has an issue with and that other buildings in this development are similarly structured. He said that Staff does feel that the 96% impervious lot coverage was excessive though perhaps not out of character with the rest of the development. He said a few more tree islands or less parking spaces could help mitigate the large amount of impervious surface and that the BZA could determine if that is necessary. Open public comment No comment Closed public comment Ms. Jones asked if the greenspace that is behind the lot was included in the impervious surface calculation. Mr. Jones said that area was part of a stream that was moved for this development. Mr. Reischl said that property is not part of the lot as was not a part of the impervious calculation. Ms. Jones said that if you combined the parcels, the project wouldn't be so significantly over the standards. Mr. Reischl said the overall development is likely not over the impervious surface requirements. Ms. Jones also said she would like to make the condition that the developer pay the landscape fee-in-lieu prior to getting permits. Move to findings 9 The Board of Zoning Appeals of the City of Jeffersonville, having heard the application for variance described above, and all opposition from parties claiming to be adversely affected thereby, does now enter the following findings: The variance of the development standards will 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. 3 The strict application of the terms of the Zoning Ordinance will result in a practical difficulty. This situation shall not be self-imposed, nor be based on a perceived reduction of or restriction of economic gain. Based on the findings described above, the Board does now approve this application with the condition that the landscape fee-in-lieu is paid. So ordered this 25th of March, 2025. Report from Director's and Staff Mr. Reischl introduced Ms. Walsh to the BZA as it was her first meeting with the Board. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Board of Zoning Appeals, the meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm. "IALL-L Mc-Ad Mike McCutcheon, Chair Shane Shaughn ssy, Secretary 10